Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Benjiboi (talk | contribs) at 18:03, 1 February 2009 (+wp). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

LGBTQ+ studies Redirect‑class

This redirect is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Misplaced Pages. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies Redirect This redirect does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.

comment

I disagree and think an entry should be open. There are urban dictionary defintion dates that supercede Dan's definition. This isn't just HIS word. It's A WORD and has been used in slang for awhile compared to the dates of submissions.

Example.

A position that gay men love Ohh, I heard Neil wanted to ride Bob Saddleback..Ouch!

Jul 29, 2003

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=saddleback

This word can be used many different ways and has many possibilities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.61.220.122 (talk) 21:19, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Deletion arguments go here Noble Spear (talk) 21:21, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

If enough citations can be found to make a successful comparison to the notability of "Santorum" and "Pegging" as coined by Dan Savage, then an argument can be made that this should definitely not be deleted. But it seems like it will take some more evidence of notability than what's been presented so far. Are there more articles in mainstream press which mention "Saddlebacking" in reference to "Santorum" discussions, etc? Thanks. Teledildonix314 04:06, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh, actually, i've easily found some more press here -- http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2009/01/22/yes_we_can_saddelbacking_make

So if it does actually appear to be mentioned in Reliable Sources such as The Economist then i would assume it's quite notable and should definitely not be deleted. Teledildonix314 04:09, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Existed without a name

This practice has gone on for years without a proper name. At my (small private) college, I met multiple people who had saddlebacked in order to maintain a reputation. You can read more about this odd phenomenon here Gary Seven (talk) 17:22, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

A google search reveals that usage is picking up at a fast pace. Leave it as is.

1. http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Story?id=6428003
2. http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/21606.php

This is about the word as a neologism not the sexual act per se, -- Banjeboi 17:43, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

suggestions

Get rid of the list of seven, these should be summarized as the finalists definitions focussed on ____ with the winner by a far margin being ______. Also Savage's history of successful neologisms should be placed higher and connection why the focus on Saddleback church regarding the Obama choice. With Santorum there was some measures of impact or rankings, does Google or someone track these? That may help. -- Banjeboi 17:41, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

• Redirect-Class LGBTQ+ studies pages
• WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies articles