Talk:Spanish profanity/Archive 1

• In Mexico "pinche" does exist as an adjective, it is used like that, and it does mean "fucking" or "damn":

"Pinche Juan, tienes suerte" -> "Damn Jack, you're so lucky!"

"Esos pinches chamacos me rompieron la ventana" -> Those damn kids broke my window.

"Tu pinche carro no sirve" -> Your fucking car doesn't work.

That means there's no mistake, as Mexico is in latin america.

• Pendejo is also used like you say it isn't. So it's not bogus as you say it is.

• About saying M instead of mierda, it does happen, at least in Mexico. It's common for teenage girls to say it so they don't sound as vulgar. Making up silly arguments like the ones you used doesn't make it more true. vim 20:51, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Could you make sure to translate Spanish comments into English for us poor Spanish speakers, please? I'm interested in the opinions nof those with a better knowledge of the language, but I can't understand what you're saying! Centrepull (talk) 11:11, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

While in military training, I asked a fellow officer, who was from Puerto Rico, what 'cabrón' meant. She told me it means goat, but that it didn't translate well. She said "The guy, whose wife sleeps with someone else, and gets pregnant? He's a cabrón." THEN it made sense: it was an old European folk custom to brand a "cuckold" with a pair of horns, as a symbol of his shame.--

One thing I think people are forgetting is that all these are relative terms that have disputed meaning depending on the area, and sometimes the person. I think it would be best to capture one of the broadest meanings, and I have always heard cabrón being a motherf****r.

παίδεια*

15:57, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Never mind.

παίδεια*

01:05, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Cabrón is the male augmentative of Cabra (goat), but it has a different meaning. The Real Academia Española says the most common use is for a 'person, animal or thing that bothers or does negative things'. ("Dicho de una persona, de un animal o de una cosa: Que hace malas pasadas o resulta molesto"). Mariano(t/c) 14:54, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Some of the translations into American 2006 might be "jerk, asshole, scumbag" or in a postive (albeit machista) sense "tough guy, lover boy, skirt chaser." Interlingua 01:03, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Vidkun is right: in Spain and many other Latin American countries, like Puerto Rico or Colombia, the "main" meaning of the word is cuckold, but, as an extension of its meaning, it's also a pejorative, as the person has no reasons to actually believe your wife is sleeping with someone else, but he wishes simply to insult you. The "horn" sign, made with a hand (closing the fist and extending the index and little finger) indicates that the person thinks you're a cuckold, exactly like in Italy (or, again, that he simply wishes to insult you). The expressión "estar cabreado", specially in Spain, also means to be disgusted, that is literally "being like a goat", or better yet, "feeling like a cuckold". In México and neighboring countries, "cabrón" means "motherfucker" (or, better yet, bad tempered) and the meaning of cuckold is practically absent as the word has derived simply into an insult (in English, also, when a person calls you motherfucker is not thinking that you actually sleep with your mother). Interlingua is right in his first meaning (jerk, etc.) but not in the second. I've traveled across Latin America as a native speaker and never ever have found a person that believes that a "cabrón" is a loverboy, although in Cuba it can mean that you're experienced and cunning. Of course, as in the word "fuck", it can also, by opposition, express admiration, as in the English expression "fucking unbelievable", where the word "fucking" actually remarks how unusual the thing is. It is just like the word "motherfucker", which can (in certain circumstances) express your admiration for someone, like when a rapper addresses you like that. Marianocekowski is also right in that the term means "annoying", but the second meaning in RAE is "men betrayed by his wife" while in México means "bad tempered". RAE also gives the meaning of "being annoyed", specially in Cuba, and also the Cuban idea of "having experience or cunning": http://buscon.rae.es/draeI/SrvltObtenerHtml?LEMA=cabr%C3%B3n&SUPIND=0&CAREXT=10000&NEDIC=No --Ciroa (talk) 07:48, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

I'd like to see some order, so I alphabetized the article: I was also wondering about reinserting this paragraph:

Chingar

Chingada is a profane term in the Spanish language. It is the feminine form of the past participle of the verb chingar, roughly equivalent to the English word fuck or rape. It also means 'hard work' or 'advantage'.

The words roots are tied to the legend of

Quotes of two Mexican authors, Carlos Fuentes and Octavio Paz, are found here:

Imprecación, propósito, saludo, proyecto de vida, filiación, recuerdo, voz de los desesperados, liberación de los pobres, orden de los poderosos, invitación a la riña y al trabajo, epígrafe del amor, signo del nacimiento, amenaza y burla, verbo testigo, compañero de la fiesta y de la borrachera, espada del valor, trono de la fuerza, colmillo de la marrullería, blasón de la raza, salvavidas de los límites, resumen de la historia: santo y seña de México: tu palabra. —

La muerte de Artemio Cruz

)

("Curse, goal, greeting, plan for life, affiliation, memory, voice of the desperate, liberation of the poor, order of the powerful, invitation to fight and to work, love's epigraph, birth's mark, threat and gibe, watchword, companion in celebration and inebriation, sword of bravery, throne of strength, sharp fang of cajolery, badge of the race, lifeguard of the limits, summary of history: saint and symbol of Mexico: your word.")

Es una voz mágica. Basta un cambio de tono, una inflexión apenas para que su sentido varíe. Hay tantos matices como entonaciones: tantos significados como sentimientos. —

El laberinto de la soledad

)

("It is a magic word. A change of tone, a mere inflection is enough for its meaning to shift. It has as many nuances as intonations: as many meanings as feelings.")

Thus, the use of chingar and its significance to Mexico can reëmphasize the intro's claim of historical significance of palabrotas

Alphabetization doesn't seam to be the answer to order. Chingar is a word you will only hear in Mexico, and I'm not sure it deserves neither the first place nor such an extensive section. I can't give you sources that would prove you that follar, even though it is mostly used in Spain, is the most international of all those expressions, since there's no reliable bibliography about such things. I suggest we take the matter to

Wikipedia:WikiProject Latin America countries, but you would still lack information of Spain (no WikiProject). the Real Academia Española, the official institution that regulates the Spanish language, has an online dictionary with etymology and localisms, but fails to point when a word is no longer used in certain places, or at all.Mariano(t/c

) 15:04, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Caray, carramba… to my non-native ear there seem to be a continuity of words of various strengths beginning with ca-. Is this coincidence, are they related to one another? Are they related to cagar? Is this analogous to words like "heck" and "darn" or "drat" in English? -- Jmabel | Talk 19:00, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

This is a funny one. caray is a shorter form of caramba which is a polite euphenism for carajo (although not many people recognize this anymore). Carajo in its original meaning simply means "penis" although it has a variety of meanings depending on context (see [1]). So no relation at all with cagar. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ | Esperanza 19:39, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Carajo hence the Portuguese caralho. I learn something new every day.

αίδεια*

05:52, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks! Belongs here, no? This should not only be on words that are currently considered profanity. -- Jmabel | Talk 02:11, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Actually, Carajo is one of the masts in sailing ships (I think the tallest one, can't be sure). I'm sure that the fallic reference is a tad obvious. :) Sebastian Kessel ^Talk 16:16, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Wrong. That would be verga, which means what you just pointed out. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ | Esperanza 17:51, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

in german Carajo (Karacho as german would write, but pronounced like spanish carajo) has to do with speed. It's not a true german, until now I would have guessed it had spanish origin, but well, maybe it's russian karaxo ;-)

While trying to make sure I quoted accurately, I noticed that we have no article on the Mexican film La Ley De Herodes (Herod's Law). Sorely needed. Anyway, I think "O te chingas o te jodes" should make its way into the article. -- Jmabel | Talk 02:15, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Oh! Just made the wikilink to have it handy. I have the movie so I'll probably write the article at some point. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ | Esperanza 02:30, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Nothing yet; it's been 6 months... - Jmabel | Talk 00:57, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Herod's Law

I question the origin of this word given in the article. In Mexico we assume it comes from buey because of the similarity of sound, but that doesn't make it true. So far I haven't come across an authoritative ethymology (same thing as chingada, by the way) and the Spanish Academy doesn't give one in its dictionary either [2]. I will remove this if no authoritative source is given. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ | Esperanza 04:21, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Nevermind, found a reference here (you have to scroll down a long way to find the word). I should work on adding proper references to this article. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ 23:20, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

afik güey comes from the náhuatl huey (great) like in huey tlatoani. It is not considered and insult, but if you call someone buey then you're implying he's stupid

buey == "ox", colloquially "oaf". Not considered profane, though. - Jmabel | Talk 19:52, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

How is the Venezuelan (possibly archaic and possibly not just Venezuelan) "tener chingas" related to "chingar", and is it considered profanity? María Josefina Tejara, Diccionario de Venezolanismos, Academia Venezolana de la Lengua, Tomo I (A-I) (1983), 345 cites G. Picón-Febres, Fidelia (1893): "El doctor Sánchez Azuero no hace otra cosa que preguntarnos por tu vida, y ya nos tiene chingas con que te llevamos una noche siquiera…". -- Jmabel | Talk 19:41, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

"Culo is the Latin American Spanish term for ass and the Iberian Spanish term for 'buttocks.'" The distinction being? Unless this is saying that this word is totally not slangy in Spain (because "buttocks" is the least slangy English language term for this), then this is simply wrong. Is this to say that in Spain, culo is as acceptable as nalgas? I don't think so. -- Jmabel | Talk 05:18, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

¿Qué?

αίδεια*

21:07, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I think the idea (though I don't know if it is true) of the person who wrote that, is that in Spain Culo means nalgas, while in South America it would mean azzhole (usually Cola is preferred for nalgas). This is not always true, since its very common to hear in Argentina "Qué culo!!!", though this comes from the Italian expression "Che culo", usually connected to good luck (The association of good luck with the butt is not spanish but Italian; Argentina got it through the numerous Italian inmigrants to the country). Mariano(t/c) 07:00, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

OK, I've raised the issue, will one of the native speakers please sort out the subtleties in the article? And, by the way, it's "asshole", not "azzhole". - Jmabel | Talk 21:19, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Depends on who's spelling - I've seen it that way before, and he may have been purposely avoiding using the blatant curse word.

In an article that contains "fuck", "shit", "anal hair… inundated with feces", etc.? Please! - Jmabel | Talk 04:09, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Lol. Never thought I'd run into an article with arguments about the distinctions about an ass. Anyway, as a native bilingual speaker here is some direction. Culo, across South and Central American countries and in Spain as well, implies "Ass" as a slightly vulgar/impolite reference to a person's buttocks. Nalga or nalgas is the more technical "buttock(s)". Many countries will use the word "cola" for a tail/line/que, eg "Hicieron cola" - "they made a line", but in can mean ass/buttock as well "Me caí en la cola" - I fell on my buttocks.--72.237.107.17 (talk) 03:37, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm a native biligual speaker (Salvadorean Spanish/West Coast US English). Only Spanish was spoken in our home until about the time I started kindergarden. I took Spanish courses in high school (to learn proper grammar). I also spent time in Spain.

I disagree with 72.237.107.17's regional use of "culo". In Spain, "culo" is as harmless as saying "buttocks". This only applies to Spain. Elsewhere, it means "asshole", as in anus. "Nalgas" is the literal translation for "buttocks"... So "culo" and "naglas" are 2 different things just like the buttocks and anus are.

"Cola" literally means "tail" (eg: a dog's tail). In Latin America, "cola" is also used for "line/que" as in "get in line for tickets/finally making it into the proper phone que" and is also used for "ass/arse/butt"..

Off topic, in my opinion (and my mother's), "coger" is the most awkward word, specifically in a Spain vs Latin America sense. My friend (in the Galicia region of Spain) first said "te voy a coger. estoy ayi en 5 minutos" upon arrival to his town the first time we met. I must admit, while I figured out, it was strange to hear it used in that sense (the first time anyways). I guess Latin America uses "recoger"?? That's what Salvadoreans say so I'm pretty sure it's used elsewhere in Latin America. | Ateo (talk) 00:57, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Hopefully someone can find a way to incorporate this:

• In Cuba they use the word "Singar" the way we use "Coger" in Mexico. My suspicion is that our word "Chingar" came from their word "Singar", as the "S" sound is frequently converted to "Ch" (as in Jesus->Chuy, etc.), but I haven't been able to prove it.
• "Mierda" is a friend of the French "merde", so they may derive from the same Latin root. (Again, not sure).
• "Maricón" may be an elaboration of the feminine-sounding prefix Mari (like in Marimacha, which is not mentioned), which comes from the name María (Mary).
• "Puta" is a contraction of "prostituta", which makes the word "Puto" (a masculinization) all the more offensive, in that it implies that the only reason a man would have sex with another man is for money.

Do you have any kind of backing for this? The pages http://lema.rae.es/drae/?val=puta and http://lema.rae.es/drae/?val=puto (included as a reference in the article) state that the origin of puta in uncertain (that's the meaning of de or. inc.). About the meaning of puto, they do not include any mention to male prostitution (even if that were the etymological origin, etymology and meaning are two separate things). As a native Argentinian I would never understand a puto to be a male prostitute any more than I would understand a rato (a short length of time, a while) to be a male rata (a rat) or a palo (stick) to be a male pala (shovel). Unless some solid reference can be found to back this etymology and this interpretation, I believe the article should be edited to just stick to the meaning and its connotations. (Apologies for having deleted the dubious meaning before first posting here, I hadn't read the specific guidelines for this article. I'll wait for consensus before redoing the edit).Wenceslao Grillo 22:43, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

• And speaking of homosexuality, it is only the passive male homosexual that is disparaged with these terms. For some reason, if you're on top, you're still a "macho" (at least in Mexico)

Not so in Argentina. If you're in bed with another man, you're a puto (sorry, no offense meant to anyone who is, just using the relvant lexicon). 22:43, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

• There are thousands of euphemisms for "to have sex" ("echar un palo" comes to mind), but only th common and offensive ones should be included.

Thats all I can think of right now...--Rockero 06:49, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Does anyone knows about the origin of "chaqueta"? I've been thinking it could be a phonetic rendering of "jack it". 201.133.187.191 03:38, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

I thought it was from English Jacket, but it turns out to be from French Jaquette. (source:

RAE) Mariano(t/c

) 07:16, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

This is a quite popular word, since it has been mentioned in Grand Theft Auto: Vice City in the mission where you have to drive a boat along with a Cuban friend across town."

This is, if you'll allow me, a load of cojones. The word is emphatically NOT of Cuban origin (there is already a Wikipedia article on cojones that gives the proper etymology). I don't think the reference to Grand Theft Auto is of much relevance.

Nortino 12:19, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm with you on all counts. - Jmabel | Talk 04:44, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

That word is common among Spaniards, I also heard it while watching a Chilean movie. Gtrojan

I grew up with this word, and I am a Chicano. Virtually any Spanish speaker, including (and especially) those of Mexican origin, understand this word; furthermore, it is commonly used by people from virtually every Spanish-speaking country and background.69.235.80.101 00:29, 16 December 2006 (UTC)James Lopez

The word comes from a Latin word meaning "scrotum", has cognates ("couille" and "couillon" meaning "testicle") in modern French, and even appears in early modern English as "cullion" or "cully" meaning an unpleasant fellow (and particularly one with low sexual habits.) Shakespeare has (in King Lear) the wonderful phrase "whoreson cullionly barbermonger". (Act 2, Scene 2: Kent to Oswald) Rdawson 19:12, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

On the use of Miercoles or eme, I believe the equivalent english expressions would be "shoot" for "shit" and "darn" for "damn". Perhaps used in place of the more offensive "mierda" in polite company.

Any comments are welcome. —The preceding

For non-native speakers, Miercoles means Wednesday. The substitution, as suggested above, is the same as exchanging any similar word for a less vulgar/offensive one (as in English - "shoot" or "sugar" instead of "shit").--72.237.107.17 (talk) 04:43, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

"follar (to fuck: to have sex, to insert rod, to eat ice cream, to play, to walk, to hang a shirt)".

To insert a rod, I guess so. To play (in a sense), sure, but wouldn't "to play around" be more to the point? But to eat ice cream?? To walk? And to hang a shirt? Would one really say "follé la camisa"? Would that be understood? (Also, if these are really used, which of these meanings would be profane/obscene? And would this vary from place to place?) - Jmabel | Talk 19:43, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

So I looked at the history. The fact that this came from a contributor whose only other contributions are a redirect of "

ghey" to Wiktionary and another edit to this very article which was basically an insult to Spanish-speakers makes me particularly doubtful, but the fact that it has stayed here four days in what seems to be a much-watched article, and that I am not a native Spanish speaker really makes me suspect vandalism. - Jmabel | Talk

19:48, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

According to the Real Academia Española Dictionary it only has the first of the meanings. All of the rest are not in any of the four versions that this dictionary has of the word. Sebastian Kessel ^Talk 20:55, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

this article is just pointless. at least put it under spanish articles, not english ones. —The preceding

(misplaced prod tag removed) —C.Fred (talk) 03:00, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Maricón isn't gay! Maricón is a "female person" and gay is a homosexual. Maricón != gay —The preceding

Second, 'maricón' does indeed mean 'gay', but specifically in the pejorative - as in "faggot" and not "homosexual". By extension it implies lack of manliness, cowardice, etc.--72.237.107.17 (talk) 04:47, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

"In Argentina the term 'boludo' it is the most used at the time of insulting." I can't make any sense of this, can someone please either reword or remove? Thanks. - Jmabel | Talk 03:35, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Fixed (hopefully). Mariano(t/c) 07:14, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I thought Pendejo means Dickhead in mexican spanish because in the game Grand Theft Auto San Andreas in the mission called Cesar Vialpando in Los Santos, after winning the lowrider hyrdaulics contest, one of the members of the Varrio Los Aztecas gang says to CJ "Who is this Pendejo". And CJ's sister, Kendl, says "Dickhead? This dickhead is my brother!" So are you sure 'Pendejo' means 'asshole' or 'pubic or anus hair'; or does it actually mean dickhead- SCB '92- Thursday 19th October- 12:48

Pendejo meas one thing, and is used as both English expressions Dickhead and Asshole. Mariano(t/c) 12:39, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

If you do not speak spanish, don't try to correct anything. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nirvana2040 (talk • contribs) 20:18, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Really? Pendejo means dickhead and asshole? No dude. It doesn't. It means "retard/idiot/dumbass", but mostly "idiot". This only applies to Salvadorean Spanish but that negates your "it means one thing"... | Ateo (talk) 01:01, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Puta madre (lit. "whore mother"), on the other hand, while vulgar, can also be a term of praise, comparable to how "motherfucker" can be used positively in English, although more uniformly positive: "Escribe como un hijo de puta" might be rendered "He writes like a motherfucker"; "es una tía de puta madre" can mean she's an awesome chick.

OK, see, apparently this paragraph originally had "Escribe como la puta madre", and it got changed to "Escribe como un hijo de puta". Upon discovering this, I tried to change it back, but accidentally changed it to "un puta madre" rather than "la puta madre", and it got reverted as grammatically incorrect (which it was). Anyway, this paragraph is talking about puta madre and not hijo de puta, which was the preceding paragraph, so the example using "hijo de puta" doesn't make sense unless it's contrasting the two terms. If it is, then that needs to be made clear. For now I've changed it to "la puta madre", hoping I've got it right this time. - furrykef (Talk at me) 03:06, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, you're right. Sorry for not getting deeper into the history before reverting. Escribe como la puta madre is not only better linked to the previous part, but also a much better example. Mariano(t/c) 13:54, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

It's all right, I understand. I should have been more careful the first time. :) - furrykef (Talk at me) 21:09, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

I liked this article, it sad the original contributor was blocked from the site. He seemed to good work, and I hope he comes back.

"Puta, shorthand for prostituta": is this a known derivation, or a conjecture? Both words exist in a lot of the Romance languages, with minor variations. Given that Italian has putana, I have my doubts about this. - Jmabel | Talk 21:51, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Our good friend, the Real Academia says Of uncertain origin [3]. Mariano(t/c) 10:27, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Shouldn't this be verguintón? - Jmabel | Talk 19:49, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I can't believe this one was left out... used at in Spain, menaing asshole.

Also, a lot of the synonims for both masculine and femenine sexual organs are missing... polla, cipote, chocho, carajo, etc...

We could probably put it with the Boludo/Huevón section; i believe it's used similarly. Same thing for Capullo. Mariano(t/c) 11:42, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

wikipedia is not wikitionary!!! the content of this page fits more in a English-Spanish Profanity Dictionary--

For one thing, writing in all caps and putting up speedy tags in articles that clearly don't fit

WP:PROD is something completely different). Second, if you feel that this article does not belong on Wikipedia then by all means afd it and find what the consensus is on that. Good day.--Jersey Devil

21:45, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

It might be a little narrow. Do we have a more general article on Russian profanity? - Jmabel | Talk 00:15, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

"Concha" actually has slang connotations in many dialects of Spanish, especially when refering (in a vulgar manner) to a woman's vagina. In Mexican and Chicano dialects of Spanish (also, Filipino slang), concha can refer to "pussy," "loot," a "loose woman/whore," or "sexual intercourse." The related expression "concha de tu madre" is commonly associated with many countries in South America, but it is largely understood by a multitude of Spanish speakers from various backgrounds.69.235.80.101 00:38, 16 December 2006 (UTC)James Lopez

As concha means shell, and looking at the cowries which are often used, I would think that rather than a vagina, the word would mean the vulva, which is visible. FaireLady 14:34, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Exactly, but sadly most uneducated people doesn't even know the word vulva (which is the same in English as in Spanish) and call the whole thing "vagina".--Againme (talk) 19:43, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Is there a source for La Malinche as La Chingada being the origin of chingar, rather than the word already existing previously, and the epithet disparaging her as "the fucked woman"? - Jmabel | Talk 07:21, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

the foot is simply absurd. Maldito is offensive but not "profanity", even coloquial. See: http://buscon.rae.es/draeI/SrvltObtenerHtml?IDLEMA=83212&NEDIC=Si

When Princess Charless in a winter holidays said: "Bloody people", here was translated as "malditos" o "maldita gente", anyway maldito is less offensive than "bloody" that is used like jodido: http://www.wordreference.com/es/translation.asp?tranword=bloody : bloody ['blʌdɪ] I adj (bloodier, bloodiest) ... 3 vulgar maldito,-a, puñetero,-a: where's my bloody key?, ¿dónde puñetas está mi llave?

Maldito=Damn or Bad, depends of the context: No seas maldito = Don't be bad. Maldito auto no prende = damn car won't start.

Will he ever be permitted to edit again?

Hi, I read this article for the first time (yeah I was bored) and I noticed this in the article: "Terms such as vete a la mierda, however, means to go to hell.". Now, I have lived my whole life in Argentina and to say "go to hell", we just say "andate al infierno", though nobody ever says that, that's what we would say. "Vete a la mierda" or "anda a cagar" usually would traduce to "fuck off" in a nonliterary traduction. In a literary one, "vete a la mierda" would just mean "go to shit" or "go to the shit (bad grammar)". Any thoughts? Slartibartfast1992 22:40, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

The vete is not Rioplatense Spanish, but in short, andate a la mierda does mean go to hell. Or, if you wish, go to hell has the same connotation as fuck off. --Mariano(t/c) 03:00, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

It doesn't mean go to hell literally. And it wouldn't be the most precise way of traducing go to hell nonliterally either. Slartibartfast1992 23:37, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure we both understand completelly what go to hell means. I would use both in the same context.

(BTW, it's translating, not traducing)

--Mariano(t/c) 13:52, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, right. Missed that point, got confused. In that case, all I have to say is to add on the article that the translation between those two things is not literal (not word for word). Sorry for time-wasting (: . Slartibartfast1992 14:18, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Most expressions are not literally translated, since it's often imposible to do so. Thanks for the input, and good wiking. --Mariano(t/c) 15:07, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

.

Please go to

Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline

is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:34, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

What's up with "Mamey"?

So in "References in media" the article says: "On their song "Atrevete-te-te!", Calle 13's Residente rhymes, "Esto es facil, estoy es un mamey". First of all, it really says "Esto es fácil, esto es un mamey". Second, what's up with "mamey"? It's not profanity, but a fairly common term for saying that something is really easy. It is also the name of a fruit.

• Mamey in Mexico is slang for mamada, or blowjob, which is slang for easy (probably "as easy as getting a blowjob"). --Solid Reign (talk) 14:00, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Mamey is a fruit very easy to peel and eat.

Pedo

I think someone should complete the article with the mexican uses for pedo, because this is a very used word, like in "El esta bien pedo" (He is really drunk) or "Alguien se echo un pedo" (Someone got a fart)

In Argentina they use pedo for a lot of reasons. "Al pedo" means bored, "en pedo" means drunk, and "de pedo" means lucky. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Njm1988 (talk • contribs) 06:17, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

            LakituAl  —Preceding unsigned comment added by LakituAl (talk • contribs) 19:51, 23 October 2007 (UTC) 

Original research? Citations needed

This article reads like a compilation of anecdotes. "My friend is from Country X, and he says that Y means Z there.." it desperately needs some citations. I'm adding the OR tag. Kwertii (talk) 00:08, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

The way I see it...

There are just too many local variations to have a section for each word, I think it will be better to have sections by country. I think it might be easier to source the article that way, ¿what do you think?. --Seba5618 (talk) 02:38, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

I agree with you. I'm Spanish and I've seen some words I didn't know, some words which aren't swearings and some missin'. At the bottom of the mage I made a section that could be "Spain". 84.76.41.153 (talk) 07:59, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

"References in media"? REALLY?

Maybe it's just how the section strikes me, but does anyone else find it odd that in an article about curse words in the Spanish-speaking world, there is a section composed primarily of minor examples in English-language media and a few stray Latin American bands' songs? I'm not sure that the section even makes sense - could any native English speakers reading this and toying around with this article imagine an article on English-language curse words with a section noting every pop culture example of an English language curse word being used? Perhaps if there were an especially notable piece of media named something along the lines of "Verga, la película", that might be worth noting, but if the intention is to catalog every minor media usage of a Spanish-language obscenity, it's going to be far, far larger than the rest of the article.--69.150.82.58 (talk) 22:49, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree with the previous comment. I think it is essentially pointless to list all the instances of Spanish profanity in English media.Not home (talk) 01:46, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. It is pretty fucking ridiculous. It should be removed it, it just unnecessarily clutters up the article. 68.25.14.28 (talk) 18:23, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Hundir can be homosexual

In Guatemalan usage "te la hundo" (spoken by one man to another) implies the listener receives anally the speaker's penis.

Irregular verbs?

Looking at these verbs it seems like some of them could be irregular. I would especially like to know if the verb "joder" is because it could be like "poder" in the present and change to "puedo", "puedes"... Please include in the article which verbs are irregular. Gracias.Don Mente Figa (talk) 19:26, 4 April 2009 (UTC) Don Mente Figa 15:26, 4 April 2009 (UTC).

Yes, joder is irregular... but I think it would be tiresome to indicate after every verb if it is regular or irregular.--Againme (talk) 20:53, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

No, poder is irregular, because it changes its root during conjugation. joder is regular. (The kind of irregularity that poder exhibits, is however a very regular one: alternation of ue for o on the sillable with the main stress, but it is still a change in the root, so it is irregular)Wenceslao Grillo 22:43, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

In Spanish all verbs are irregular for all forms, depending on the tense, if it's singulser (I/you/he-she-it) or plural (we/you/they) and if it reffers to the 1st person (I/we), the second (you/they) or the third.

e.g.

    I can >>>> Yo puedo (poder)
    You drink >>>> Tú bebes (beber)
    He/She walks >>>> Él/Ella anda (andar)
    We walk >>>> Nosotros andamos
    You can >>>> Vosotros podéis
    They drink >>>> Ellos/Ellas beben

84.76.41.153 (talk) 08:05, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

That does not mean that all verbs are irregular, it just means that Spanish verbs are conjugated. Spanish verbs are irregular when their conjugation is different from that of the model verb that has the same two last letters, with the model verbs being amar, correr and partir. Wenceslao Grillo 22:43, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Verga

I see a reference to verga but I think it needs more coverage. Most Latinamericans I've met know what it means (slang for penis) and it appears to be widely used (except in Spain where they use "polla"). Someone less lazy than me, get on it!

Insults

Aside from the other issues, the article needs accompanying examples of some of the terms used as personal insults. Centrepull (talk) 11:16, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

English references

There is a kind of in-built fault with this article. Spanish profanities are associated with different countries and cultures whereas there is only one "English" language referenced. English readers will therefore be misled by references to "English" not knowing which "English" is being referenced. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.241.131.120 (talk) 22:13, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Agree completely. While it is a useful and very interesting article, many of what are given as supposed English counterparts still baffle me (yes, maybe I should get out more). Given that the purpose is to explain the fascinating range of profanity used by Spanish speakers, should it be recognised that English speakers also come in many varieties by race, region and class? --Hors-la-loi (talk) 13:20, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Recent reverts which coincide with this article being disputed and involving original research

If we are ever going to get this article cleaned up, unsourced edits cannot be allowed to permeate the article. While some are accurate, most edits also include commentary and/or interpretations which is original research. Citations to all edits must be enforced. --Morenooso (talk) 16:27, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Recommended improvements

• Require citations for all edits.
• Archive talkpage discussion (build an archive}
• Remove unsourced edits (with a proper edit summary - if the deletion is contentious, please discuss prior on this talkpage in a new section otherwise deletions are subject to reversal. --Morenooso (talk) 17:56, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

I personally think a rewrite of the article, focusing on explaining profanity in Spanish (and how each country and region uses words in different ways) would be FAR more useful than a detailed account of all profanities in Spanish. 200.49.188.27 (talk) 23:46, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Correction "Cerote"

I add Guatemala as a country that uses Cerote too, besides El Salvador. I'm from Guatemala, that's my bibliography, don't change it, it's valid.Xevilhunter (talk) 05:11, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Provide a

reliable citation and it stays. Otherwise, no go. ----moreno oso (talk

) 05:16, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

http://www.tubabel.com/definicion/445-cerote http://www.saquencela.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=291&Itemid=8 http://www.albuenchapin.com/index.php?option=com_seyret&view=category&task=videos&id=10&cvld=oc http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYM11ZVtJRw more? Also, ask anyone from Guatemala and you'll see the truth, so it goes. Xevilhunter (talk) 02:25, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, more. None of those citations are

WP:V. ----moreno oso (talk

) 02:33, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

I already found a quote that might end the discussion, also proves the use of "Cerote" in Guatemala.

http://www.jergasdehablahispana.org/index.php?pais=Guatemala&palabra=cerote&tipobusqueda=1

And with this, I made my point. Cerot is used in Guatemala.

http://buscon.rae.es/draeI/SrvltConsulta?TIPO_BUS=3&LEMA=cerote 14:54, 11 August 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.148.181.103 (talk)

And Cerote is heavily used in Guatemala, I recommend you to search for your own and you will see. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.148.181.103 (talk) 14:50, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Cleanup tag added

As per the other maintenance tags on this article and the Recommended improvements section on this talkpage, this article needs cleanup as unreferenced edits are taking place.

WP:V and Wikipedia:Citing sources regarding how citations and sources should be used for this article.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Morenooso (talk • contribs

) 15:48, August 16, 2010‎

The general cleanup tag is not needed as there already are multiple more specific tags that deal with each of the article's issues. -- œ^™ 10:08, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Wikitionary: A More Suitable Place?

Isn't this article entirely ill befitting an encyclopedia? It deals entirely with words, which seems far more appropriate for Wikitionary. I do not know whether there are articles on profanity in other languages, but it simply seems entirely outside the scope of an encyclopedia, especially in light of Wikitionary.24.42.93.217 (talk) 05:16, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

vavoso

This belongs in the Genitalia section, referring to a man with an oversized penis. This is used by chicanos in the Coachella Valley in California, I believe it is also used in Monterrey Mexico.

Joto

In California's Coachella Valley this term was used strictly to denote a male homosexual, and the recitation of the alphabetic letter 'j' ("Jota") would entice laughs from the schoolchildren, as a lesbian connotation. I believe this is consistent across northern Mexico and the description in the main body is incorrect.

"Perra"/"Hijo de Perra"

In Spanish, "Perra" (lit: "Female Dog" or "Bitch") is a term used for insulting woman.

Similar, "Hijo de Perra" (witch is also like "Son of a Bitch") is used in a similar way than "Hijo de Puta".

"Perra"/"Hijo de Perra" is normally considered slightly less vulgar than "Puta"/"Hijo de Puta".

I suggest these terms to be added to the article. 201.132.139.2 (talk) 16:58, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Profanity in Spain

"Perra" and "Zorra" (lit: "Female Dog" and "Female Fox") mean bitch. "Puta" would mean lit. fucker, and "furcia" would mean whore. All four mean the same, and are the most common in Spanish (Spain).
"Hijo de puta" is like Mother Fucker in English.

"Picha" and "Poya" (Dick/Cock) are swearwords that mean penis ("Pene" in Spanish). Those are the most common, but people also say words like "pito, nabo (turnip), rabo (tail) or plátano (banana)". "Cojones" means testicles ("Testículos" in Spanish).
"Coño" or "Chocho/chichi" mean pussy.

"Mierda" means shit. The phrase "Vete a la mierda" (lit: Go to (the) shit) is like "Go to hell" in English. The phrase oh, shoot! would be in Spanish "miércoles!!
"Esto es una mierda" (lit: That's a shit) is in English That sucks.
"Mamar" is in English suck (of someone's mother when is a baby). "Mamón" is in English sucker.

"Culo" means butt and ass, and is not any swear word alone, but expressions like "vete a tomar por culo" or "que te den por (el) culo" are profanities.

"Hostia" is not any profanity if we mean the "Hostia Sagrada" (Sacramental Host). It can also mean a hit (Vaya hostia le ha dado).

"Capullo" (is not any swear word), "gilipollas" (dickhead, asshole, wanker) and "cabrón" (like bastard) are insults. The first and the second would mean something like fucking silly, and the second, idiot.
The words "imbécil" (moron), "idiota" (idiot), "tonto" (silly as an adjective, fool as a noun), "estúpido" (stupid), etc. aren't profanities.

"Follar" means fuck when it refers to sex.

"Joder" is a common word meaning fuck as an interjection. When someone say it as a verb, means annoy or joke (we can also say "putear"). To say fucking (+ adj.) in Spanish people say "puto/puta" (male/female).
There's no translation to Fuck Yeah/No, but we can translate it as "Sí/No senyor/señora", which is not any profanity.
"Coño", "Carajo", "Hostia" and another swear word (hostia is sometimes written as ostia,but it is a mistake) can also be seen as "joder" if it is an interjection.

Expressions in questions:
What the fuck...? >>> ¿Qué coño...? \\ ¿Qué mierda...? \\ ¿Qué cojones...?
What the hell...? >>> ¿Qué demonios(devils)...?
What the heck...? >>> (POLLITE >>) ¿Qué rayos(thunderbolts/rays/beams)...?
\\ ¿Qué leñe...? \\ ¿Qué narices...? \\ ¿Qué diantres...?

Infierno means hell/heck, and isn't any profanity. Demonio means devil.

When something is really, really great, we say that it is "de puta madre" (lit: of (a) fucking mother). When something is really difficult, ore something is damaged we say it is "jodido" (lit: fucked). e.g. Este ejercicio es bastante jodido (This exercice is quite difficult) // Se me ha jodido el coche (My car broke down). It isn't really common.
When someone hoaxes you, he/she "the ha hecho una putada" (lit: did you a fucked).

Remember that all verbs in Spanish are irregular in every form: (I dink, You drink, He/She drinks >>> Yo bebo, Tú bebes, El/Ella bebe ...).

Sorry for the mistakes, I'm Spanish. 85.58.13.126 (talk) 18:00, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Again: no, not all Spanish verbs are irregular. The have conjugations, which does not make them irregular. See my previous note. Wenceslao Grillo 22:43, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Gringo

Gringo is a short form for "green go". It was used to insult US army soldiers- that used green uniforms- talking them to back to their country in the american-mexican war. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.32.146.7 (talk) 17:35, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

This seems to be a fake etymology, from a time when US Army used blue uniforms and the real etymology seems to be a deformation of griego (greek). However, even if it might be slang, gringo doesn't seem to me to be profanity... Wenceslao Grillo 22:43, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Needs a section on female breasts

Genitals and buttocks are covered. What about slang terms for breasts? 71.56.159.147 (talk) 02:31, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Spanish profanity/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following

several discussions in past years

, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Doesn't "puñeta" come from the word "puño"? If so, I don't think that "yank" is an appropriate translation since "puño" means "fist" or "handful."

Last edited at 03:18, 10 April 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 15:50, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

COJO and ORTO re the Montreal Olympics

There was a gaffe I remember well re the Montreal Olympics; the French acronyms for the Olympic Radio-Television Organization and the Organizing Committee of the Olympic Games = comité des organisateurs des jeux olympiques (organizateurs? not sure of the spelling) and organization radio-television olympique = COJO and ORTO, were featured on billboards in Latin America and had to be changed as they had become the butt of many jokes; it was a bit of a national embarrassment in fact, with various columnists taken jabs at the news item; embarrassing also because of Quebec's own passion for correct use of their own Latinate tongue vs the bastard speech of les maudits anglos; a division which was at fever pitch in Canada at the time because of Quebec's new anti-English language laws.... I don't have a cite for this -

CanWest destroyed all its archives when taken over by Izzy Asper in 1993, and the CBC Archives might have files on this, but I have neither the time nor inclination to search for them. Cojo I guess is a former of coger, though I recall seeing that in print as cojer; in Argentina and Uruguay in particular I remember being the cases mentioned, maybe similar in Brazilian Portuguese too, for "I fuck" and "asshole/anus".....on huge billboards all over Latin America.. Skookum1 (talk

) 16:12, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

can you provide references? -No.Altenmann >t 15:11, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

I can, if I could physically access newspaper archives at Canadian universities (I live in Asia now). CanWestGlobal destroyed all of its archives when Izzy Asper took over in 1993; CBC archives don't go that far back. The Globe & Mail's online archive, accessible by university students and staff, may have something; I have a wiki-membership to newspapers.com or whatever it's called, it may have something. "I'm not making this up", it's factual and historical for certain. Your "can you provide references? No" is very presumptive and AGF.Skookum1 (talk) 06:30, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Actually "No." was my stupid choice of my signature. Changed. Apologies. Anyway, I conclude you cannot provide references and I have to believe your word. With all possiblie AGF, this is not

how wikipedia works. -M.Altenmann >t

16:36, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Removal of enormous unreferenced text

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

There are 2-3 references removed as well. I think these references are part of original research, such as comparison which other languages or other marginally relevant notes. If you think they are important you can restore them. But the wholesale restoration of huge removed text unreferenced for YEARS is inadmissible. -No.Altenmann >t 15:05, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

I looked into talk page archive and see numerous appeals for referencing, voices of ones crying out in the wilderness. -No.Altenmann >t 22:28, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

I am asking for the third time to provide justifications for huge unreferenced text, so that it can be discussed. Otherwise, I am afraid I will have to address this to administrators. -M.Altenmann >t 16:37, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Let's start by clearing up this is the *first* time you ask, at least BEFORE going ahead and deleting massive amounts of content. Having said that...

do you see dates? the problem reported 28 October, 31 October, 2 November. I don't need to beg someone to fix the problem. If you refuse to fix it, I do it in my way. -M.Altenmann >t 15:52, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

User cramyourspam was clear enough: you're never going to have a "fully" referenced page on a topic like profanity. More so, this is even more obvious when taking into account the article goes into detail on the different regional meanings of a lot of words (and, let us remember, most of this content has been added over the years by wikipedians from different Spanish-speaking countries, so this is *direct experience*, not "original research" in the sense you imply), and that's no excuse for deleting this content. Still, there can be a larger reference pool, and you should have called attention to this instead of going out and erasing everything you didn't like before asking, including erasing several references (an odd action for one who decries the absence of references...).

So let's go look up some references. Diccionario de la lengua española is a good starting point! The following entries: http://drae22.rae.es/cachar http://drae22.rae.es/chingar http://drae22.rae.es/coger http://drae22.rae.es/culear http://drae22.rae.es/correr http://drae22.rae.es/polvo http://drae22.rae.es/joder http://drae22.rae.es/pisar all contain a definition of sexual intercourse (except for «correr(se)», which "only" refers to having an orgasm). I'd go on, but I'm not going to look up every other word, only to then discover you've decided the DRAE is somehow not good enough of a source for you... (after all, one of the references you did erase was to the DRAE's definition of "puto"'

Aaaaaaall right, just onetwo more: http://drae22.rae.es/paja (masturbation) and http://drae22.rae.es/pajear (to wank).

Cheers! Mfarah (talk) 10:46, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

"direct experience" is exactly what is not allowed reference in wikipedia. you don't need to add referenced into talk page. add them into wikipedia article. -M.Altenmann >t 15:52, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

re: "you should have called attention" - what a ridiculous demand: the article has been tagged for years! This is how attention is called in wikipedia. -M.Altenmann >t 05:50, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

This article is a huge mess, but I honestly think due notice has been given for removal of these things. Mfarah - If you want to mirror this page as it exists now in your sandbox/userspace so that you can find reliable sources and add the items back to the page, I don't know that these things need to inherently be removed forever, but honestly, 4 years where most of the article is a bunch of unreferenced stuff? This isn't urban dictionary.

As to your contention that some of this stuff will never be "fully referenced", if that's the case, then it shouldn't be on here at all.

NO original research are core content policies on Wikipedia. Having a bunch of uncited regionalisms based in peoples' personal experiences violates both of these. I say remove. 0x0077BE ^{(talk · contrib}

) 19:10, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

@Mfarah: I think it's been an appropriate amount of time waiting for a response on this, so I'm ready to remove the content again since Altenmann and I are in agreement about this. I'm going to advertise this conflict at the relevant wikiprojects (WT:WikiProject Languages, maybe WT:WikiProject Lists) and see if we can get a few more eyes to build a clearer consensus. In the meantime (or even after the removal), feel free to provide a substantive response to clarify why you think that this material should stay even before any references are provided. 0x0077BE ^{(talk · contrib)} 13:50, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

• I support removal of unsourced text and any references used for synthesis or Original Research purposes.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 18:31, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
• WP:NOTDIRECTORY...making arguments for inclusion of content that will never be verified goes against everything Wikipedia is. At this point, a simple Spanish language Google search should be considered sufficient 'reasonable effort" to track down a source. If none is found that way, deletion should be the next option. The item should only be added back if a citation is found. If cross cultural issues are causing confusion of definition, that isn't an argument for keeping items, it is an argument for deleting the entire list and coming up with a better scope for the list. If "Spanish profanity" isn't a unified concept than it shouldn't appear as such with a Wikipedia article. Perhaps subheadings for regional definitions is the way to go. Dkriegls (talk to me!
  ) 22:18, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

• Delete all unsourced material, aggressively, since it's been 4+ years. Per
  WP:PROVEIT, "The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material" (bold in original) and "Any material lacking a reliable source directly supporting it may be removed and should not be replaced without an inline citation to a reliable source." Altenmann (talk · contribs
  ) is completely right to remove unsourced material at any time, especially after such a long time: Removing unsourced claims is Wikipedia policy, and adding unsourced claims violates Wikipedia policy. The following are not valid excuses to add unsourced material:
  • That you are just "restoring" previous content. It's longstanding Wikipedia consensus is that reverts and undos make the reverter/undoer personally responsible for each and every thing re-added, including adding the sources for the additions that are now their own fault for adding.
  • That you know the claims are "true" even though there are no citations. (See Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth.) Which one of them is true? Every sentence? Which sentences? You checked every one of them when you re-added 10kB of material? How about you point them out, by adding references?
  • That it's somehow quick and easy for someone else to go find and insert references in the proper place, even though it's clearly not quick and easy enough for the person who keeps re-adding the claims without proof in the proper place. These unproven claims have been here for 4 years; no Wikipedia policy supports keeping challenged unsourced claims for any significant length of time, let alone 4 years.
  • That the references are on the talk page or some other unusual place instead of inline in the article. All sources must be at the point where the claim is made: see
    WP:INTEGRITY
    , which is a Wikipedia guideline.
  • That deleting unsourced claims somehow makes the article ugly or incomplete. If that's so, then it was already ugly and incomplete, then had unsourced garbage scattered into it to try and cover it up the problem, which is worse. Visibly incomplete, with all proper references, is always better than incomplete with unreferenced noise camouflaging it. That's Wikipedia policy.

  In light of the following, I also will be removing most or all unsourced claims on sight: The existence of these unsourced sections is its own evidence that the people adding the claims think arguing about it for 4 years is quicker and easier than finding a real source; otherwise they'd be adding the source instead. If I'm wrong:

  WP:PROVEIT; don't violate Wikipedia policy. --Closeapple (talk

  ) 03:57, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

This page is a shadow of what it used to be. I think the old content should be restored. --evrik ^(talk) 20:10, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

Religion

You don't erase a whole section just because it was "unreferenced since 2012", in a wiki article 99.999% of whose contents are unreferenced as well.

If religious coarse words are too unpalatable to you on moral grounds you should seek professional help. And if you don't believe these expressions do exist then you're not a Spanish speaker. By the way there are scarcely references to Spanish profanity because profanity is mostly unreferenced, as in colloquial. That's the little thing about profanity, you see. Walter Sobchak0 (talk) 16:30, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

By the way taking out the entire section would entail erasing "hostia", "leche", "copón" and all the shitting-on-God swearing and anyone who has listened a profanity-laden conversation knows this omission would be absurd. If anything "hostia" is the most conspicuous word in Spanish profanity. Walter Sobchak0 (talk) 16:33, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Please read wikipedia policies about citing your references. Unreferenced for 4 years is a perfectly valid reason. If the word is "most conspicuous, it must be discusse somewhere. -M.Altenmann >t 16:36, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

I'll look for references for this in the future but I must say people like you are to Wikipedia what the Ebola virus is to the human immune system. Walter Sobchak0 (talk) 16:39, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Altenmann, with all due respect, SOD OFF. When we had our little discussion last November about the contents on this page, you kept yapping about references, then you proceeded to ignore the sample references I provided and kept complaining about the lack of them. No wonder, then! Just say, once and for all, that you hate the existence of this page and try to put its deletion to a vote. I let you have your way last year because no one else showed up at the discussion and I had better stuff to do than to waste my time with your vitriol. Perhaps now that there IS someone else with a legitimate interest in this page, we can actually have a meaningful analysis of the deficiencies of this page's content with the objective of fixing them, instead of going on a deletionist rampage. Mfarah (talk) 08:51, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Removal of unsourced content has nothing to do with religion: Removal of unsourced content is Wikipedia policy, regardless of where the violation occurs, and regardless of whether someone thinks their policy-violating

WP:PROVEIT. See my comment a few minutes ago at the end of #Removal of enormous unreferenced text above. Adding material, refusing to add sources at the same time, then trying to force the rest of the world to trust that someone will eventually add a source next month or a thousand years from now or whatever, is against Wikipedia policy. --Closeapple (talk

) 04:32, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

The Word Pinche On the Southwest Border. 3/21/2015

Another meaning of the Word PINCHE as used around Yuma, Arizona and El Paso, Texas, was translated as "chickenshit". If you were "pinche' you were a chickenshit or acting like a chickenshit. Not just "cheap" but so whiney, obnoxious, picky, sometimes selfish, you were called "pinche". Sometimes almost as if you were considered as a form of a pain in the ass. It seemed to vary due to context. This was based on personal experience in government service. — Preceding unsigned comment added by P38L5 (talk • contribs) 09:13, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on

nobots

|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20050415195945/http://csgrs6k1.uwaterloo.ca:80/~dmg/chingada/ to http://csgrs6k1.uwaterloo.ca/~dmg/chingada/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—

Talk to my owner

:Online 21:34, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

The lack of consensus and clarity means these definitions are "fucking shit".

Is wikipedia so white that you can't come up with a single sentence explanation of these words, with a couple of less popular usages? "Jesus Christ" this is a bad page as far as wikipedia information goes...

Can we get some "fucking" latinos from America to participate?

As a fan of language, "fuck you" for judging, censoring, disparaging or undermining this completely fair assessment of the definitions here. You know who you are!— Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.83.246.154 (talk) 21:42, February 10, 2018‎

Payoponi

As per the article, Payoponi is widely used in Spain. I am from Spain and I have never heard this word in my entire life.

Perhaps this word is used somewhere in Spain, but I would not say that it is "widely used". 141.171.134.30 (talk) 15:08, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

"Vete y chinga a tu madre" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Vete y chinga a tu madre. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Hog Farm (talk) 22:22, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Discussion of images

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Question about the image used for "Chinga"

Would it have been acceptable if the sign were depicting say Obama and using the word? I find it likely that there were other images available, but that one was selected specifically because it displayed denigration of Trump, the point being to add a politicized note to an otherwise totally apolitical article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.184.151.247 (talk) 18:07, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Do you have any suggestions for photos that are uploaded to the commons, Commons:Category:Spanish profanity? --evrik ^(talk) 18:45, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

• [[File:Trump supporters Deana Hurd (left) and Sharon Hurd traveled to Washington from Tennessee to attend the inauguration.jpg|thumb|Pendejas]] Someone just removed this image from the page citing, " Needlessly attached image injects a degree of bias unbecoming of an otherwise laudably neutral encyclopedia." Thoughts? --evrik ^(talk) 17:00, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
  • The current picture used to illustrate the word pendejo is politically biased and blatantly NPOV. There is nothing of value added to the article with this picture, other than to make a political jab at people with which the editor does not agree. I removed it in good faith, reverting my edit can be nothing but in bad faith. 47.137.189.14 (talk) 20:42, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
    • I think that saying something is not NPOV, or is advancing a political point of view on a page about profanity is somewhat humorous. My problem with the image, is that it doesn’t explain why the two women featured would be considered to be pendejas . I am not wedded to that image, do you have one you would rather see? Otherwise I think we should let some of the other editors weigh in on this issue.--evrik ^(talk) 20:56, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
      • True, it's a page about profanity but it's also a page on an encyclopedia and should be written as such. Per
        MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE, images only belong when they help explain the article. I can't see any value that the images removed in this edit add: they are only tangentially related to the article's content and furthermore, are based on common-knowledge ideas that don't need explanation. For instance, we don't need to show what a baby chick or a woman looks like. Also, several of those photos are blatantly male-gaze
        -oriented, like the one of the woman in the bikini—if a photo of a woman were necessary, it would make more sense to have her wearing ordinary clothes. Finally, regardless of one's politics, captioning an image of Trump supporters as "pendejas" is more than just an NPOV violation. It's a personal attack unbecoming of Wikipedia.

• An example of an image that clearly does belong is the conch shell, because it is less commonly understood and the photo specifically helps explain the corresponding term in the article without being biased in some way. Let's stick to only including an image if it straightforwardly improves the article. Benny White (talk) 04:30, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
  • I agree about the pendejas - Trump supporters picture, File:Trump supporters Deana Hurd (left) and Sharon Hurd traveled to Washington from Tennessee to attend the inauguration.jpg. Perhaps switching out the bikini picture with another picture of a young woman? --evrik ^(talk) 14:33, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
    • That would be better. However, is there a reason we need photos of women, buttocks, breasts, feces, baby chickens, or skimpy pants in this article at all? I can't think of anything they explain about the article content, besides what those ubiquitous things look like. Maybe add eggs to the list as well, come to think of it. Benny White (talk) 00:04, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
      • I think the images add interest to the article. My favorite is the "Sailors on a yardarm." --evrik ^(talk) 23:04, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

• Virtually any image could add interest. To be included, "Images must be significant and relevant in the topic's context, not primarily decorative" (
  MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE). "Sailors on a yardarm" is useful because a yardarm is not common knowledge, so the image helps explain the article. That's why I didn't include it among the proposed images to remove. The ones I did include are only decorative. Benny White (talk
  ) 00:31, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

• IMHO each of the images relates to, and illustrates, the section where it sits. They are not decorative, and they are an important illustrative aid to understanding. I thought it funny that you objected to the photo of eggs in the huevos section. --evrik ^(talk) 19:16, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

• Hmmm, I still can't see why any article would need to explain what women, eggs, etc. look like (unless the article is actually about those topics), since they're so common. I posted to
  WP:3O to see if someone else can weigh in. Benny White (talk
  ) 01:31, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Response to third opinion request:

Hello! 3O here (gotta say, I wasn't expecting to visit the page on Spanish profanity today). I have to concur with Benny White's citation of talk ) 03:23, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

• True, I hadn't taken a close look at the "¡carajo!" picture—doesn't seem specific enough to the term. I'll go ahead and remove the 7 images mentioned previously, as well as the "¡carajo!" one, unless there are any more reasons why those images might meet the guideline. Benny White (talk) 06:26, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

• sorry, there is no consensus to remove the images. I suggest listing each one here and proposing an alternate. --evrik ^(talk) 00:08, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

• Is there a reason we should explain what women, baby chicks, eggs, feces, etc. look like? No need for alternatives if the concept itself doesn't need an image. There are plenty of images in the article that clearly do meet the image guidelines. Benny White (talk) 02:25, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

• The images are an important illustrative aid to understanding. All the images meet the guidelines, sometimes with a bit of humor. However, this is a page on slang. --evrik ^(talk) 15:58, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

• There's still no explanation for why the images in question are important illustrative aids, and I and
  creffett (if I'm interpreting them right) seem to think that such common concepts are not important to illustrate. Out of those proposed removals, why don't we just remove the images of the women for now, since they also have that male-gaze problem mentioned above? Maybe editors will replace the other 5 (eggs, pants, feces, baby chick, and "¡carajo!") with images of concepts that do need explanation. If not, we could remove those after waiting a couple months. Benny White (talk
  ) 01:19, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

• Why? The images illustrate each of the subject areas and serve as an aid to understanding for those who do not speak Spanish. In some cases they reflect the impact the these words mean. The only one you have have highlighted that I may agree with is the young woman - chicken set, but do you have alternate suggestions? --evrik ^(talk) 16:37, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

• Thanks for the explanation. I can see some value in images as Spanish translation aids. The article already includes written English translations, so I don't know that the translation factor adds enough value to justify keeping those images on their own. However, I would be OK with leaving some of the proposed removals as a compromise. Why not remove these 5 and call it a day: the pants ("It takes cojones to wear pants like these" is kinda editorializing), bikini, buttocks, and breasts (objectification, very well-known) and feces (low-quality image, also well-known)? Benny White (talk) 01:38, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
• Can you suggest any replacements? --evrik ^(talk) 16:06, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

• How about File:Manifa alternativa Palencia 14N 10.JPG instead of the pants for cojones? It's used on the Spanish article for testículo and it doesn't require guessing to see why it's relevant. The other four really don't need illustrating. Benny White (talk) 06:46, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

• 
  Manifa alternativa Palencia
• 
  Young woman in microkini

• I swapped out the cojones photo and dropped the bikini photo. I believe the rest are still illustrative. --evrik ^(talk) 16:23, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

• Sounds good. While I would still recommend trimming more images, I'll leave it to other editors to comment if they want. Benny White (talk) 03:27, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

More image edits

No one has commented lately, but four more editors in the last few months have tried to remove some of the images in this article (diff 1, 2, 3, 4). So there seems to be interest in trimming the images. This article is unusual on Wikipedia in the wide variety of illustrations it includes. Similar profanity articles for other languages have fewer and more focused images, so I think this article would benefit from fairly significant trimming. I propose keeping the following images, which unambiguously explain something that many readers wouldn't otherwise know, and deleting the rest.

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

The teddy-bear caption ("A teddy bear dressed as a cholo") should probably be updated to clarify which of the possible interpretations of cholo it refers to. Benny White (talk) 02:37, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

• Let's keep them. Comparing unnamed different articles doesn't really help. Out of curiosity, which do propose to remove? --evrik ^(talk) 03:04, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Most editors seem to think the images are excessive, including the editor who gave a 3O a while ago. Diff 3 also removed a larger number of images. These would be removed; it's hard to draw more than a tangential connection between them and the article:

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• File:Madonna, Rotterdam, 26-8-1987.jpg
• 
• 

Unless there are specific reasons why some or all of these pictures are necessary, the article would be more focused without them. Benny White (talk) 05:08, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

• Hi, I came to this article and I was struck by the images used, but before making a change I entered this discussion page and what a coincidence, it is a matter of very recent discussion.

I found most of the images add zero value to this article, and a couple of them are plainly offensive. So I agree with @Benny White and the images proposed to be keeped and to be removed. Frodar (talk) 11:41, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

• Each of those images can be related to the text. --evrik ^(talk) 06:12, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

• Those images are not essential, they are unnecessary and some even offensive. Frodar (talk) 23:57, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

• Seems to be approaching a consensus, but I'll give it a few more days to see if other editors comment. If the consensus doesn't seem strong enough, I can start an RfC. Benny White (talk) 05:20, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

• Two people is not consensus. Perhaps we should open this up to a broader group? --evrik ^(talk) 06:10, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

• No additional editors have commented in the last week, so I'll start the RfC. Benny White (talk) 03:07, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

• Okay by me. --evrik ^(talk) 03:47, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

RfC on images

Should these 15 images be removed from the article?

• 
  File:Sweet jesus hot biker - DC Gay Pride Parade 2012 (7171055619).jpg
• 
  File:Louis Moe - konvoluttenengra00gjel 0069 A -hairy creature stylized exclamation point (21477087919).jpg
• 
  File:7oeufs.JPG
• 
  File:Concha_(pan_dulce_mexicano)_02.JPG
• 
  File:Bug Drawing.jpg
• 
  File:Woman in white bra and netted crop top.jpg
• 
  File:Muffin top.jpg
• 
  File:Truño man.jpg
• 
  File:Escultura cabrón de Gredos (Hoyos del Espino).JPG
• 
  File:Fingers and thumb in circle downward motion.jpg
• 
  File:Aurochs (PSF).png
• 
  File:Virgen de guadalupe1.jpg
• File:Madonna, Rotterdam, 26-8-1987.jpg
  File:Madonna, Rotterdam, 26-8-1987.jpg
• 
  File:Day old chick black background cropped.jpg
• 
  File:31021 Mogliano Veneto, Province of Treviso, Italy - panoramio.jpg

• Benny White (talk) 03:15, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

• Support: I proposed removing them because I don't believe they meet
  MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE
  . I think these images illustrate common words that are not very closely tied to the article and that most readers would be expected to be familiar with. The following 8 images are less commonly understood and more closely tied to the article content, so would be kept:

• File:Chinga tu Pelo sign, Women's March, DTLA, Los Angeles, California, USA (25951714598).jpg
• File:Manifa alternativa Palencia 14N 10.JPG
• File:Albóndigas_en_salsa_con_patatas_fritas._España.jpg
• File:Sailors in the yard.jpg
• File:Carved whalebone whistle dated 1821. London. 8 cm long.jpg
• File:Sea shell (Trinidad & Tobago 2009).jpg
• File:Shave and a Haircut in C Espanol.png
• File:Teddy bear cholo.jpg

Benny White (talk) 03:28, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose the images add context, illustration, and humor to the article. They should all remain. --evrik ^(talk) 03:51, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
• Agree - Those 15 images are clearly unnecessary. They add nothing to a better understanding of the Spanish profanity. The abundance of images has nothing to do with the articles about profanity in other languages. No reason for the Spanish to be the sole exception. Frodar (talk) 06:30, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

• Whataboutism should not be a criteria for judging the images. --evrik ^(talk) 12:43, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

• Partly Agree - I do agree that the number of images is excessive and that a number of them add zero value to the article. I'm not sure I agree with this particular set of images, so instead I'll propose a framework for deciding which images to keep: an image in this article should show something the average reader would be unfamiliar with (e.g. the photo of the yardarm), add useful illustration (e.g. the conch resembling a vulva), or show real life usage (e.g. any of the photos of profanity on signs). Some of the images clearly don't fit this framework, like eggs (this certainly doesn't need illustration in this article), and albondigas/meatballs (most readers would be familiar with meatballs, and these being one particular type of latin american meatball doesn't add any useful context for understanding the profanity).
  I read through some of the previous comments, and with respect to other editors, images being "offensive" isn't a reason to exclude them, particularly in an article about profanity, unless they're gratuitously so. Also, comparing this article to other profanity articles is not whataboutism, but rather is useful for understanding consensus in similar contexts, and should be a standard part of any editor's toolkit. Arathald (talk) 19:23, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

I actually was on the fence about the albóndigas one. I thought about the fact that the picture is of that specific type of meatball, as you mentioned. But you're right, it's not really what the article is trying to talk about. Benny White (talk) 04:47, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

• Strong Support. I agree that all of the proposed images fail to add encyclopedic benefit sufficient to justify their inclusion. Indeed, it would seem the majority of them were added as some sort of dubious effort at humour, but (quite aside from this not really being the place for that) they have all landed somewhere between falling flat and being outright inappropriate. I'm actually not super thrilled that we even have a photo up her demonstrating a 'muffin top' that from all indications involves someone who did not volunteer to represent that particular concept, bluntly... But even the more innocuous selections among those proposed for deletion are too weak in their connection to demonstrating something functional for the reader to survive scrutiny here. Snow ^{let's rap} 14:27, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
• Note: It was recently pointed out over on Stack Exchange that the "Prostitution" sign is in Italian, not Spanish (as evident from the filename, and the meta-data on the file which gives a geographical location, definitely in Italy). It might be relevant on Italian profanity, but certainly not here. Lurlock (talk) 13:46, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

• The article references the Italian source of the word. --evrik ^(talk) 15:13, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

• Support largely per Arathald, but generally in keeping with the view that many images in this article are essentially tangential decorations not in keeping with usual practice on this wiki. I was also concerned that one editor used humor as a justification for keeping certain images; an encyclopedia is not the place for whimsy. This, that and the other (talk) 11:11, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
• Remove images. They are of well-known objects and do not add to the article. CapitalSasha ~ talk 01:54, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
• Comment: Most editors support the 15 proposed removals. Is there also interest in removing File:Albóndigas_en_salsa_con_patatas_fritas._España.jpg based on Arathald's suggestion, or are we sticking with the 15? Want to make sure the consensus is accurately reflected when the RfC closes. Benny White (talk) 05:57, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

If possible, I support to add the "albóndigas" photo to the 15 proposed. But if we reach consensus only for the 15, no problem for me. Frodar (talk) 22:01, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

OK, no one else commented or re-opened the RfC after it closed, so I'll assume there's no consensus to remove the albóndigas photo for now. Benny White (talk) 01:37, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Right, we stick with the 15 then. Frodar (talk) 05:55, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

"zorra" vs "perra"

"zorra" was recently replaced with "perra" as equivalent to "bitch" in English. I believe both are used and "zorra" is not incorrect? Turkeyphan^t 17:41, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

That's right, both are used in Spanish. But "bitch" (female dog) is equivalent with perra (female dog), and not so with zorra ("female fox" or "vixen"). Frodar (talk) 06:27, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

"La remil concha de tu puta madre" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect La remil concha de tu puta madre. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 24#La remil concha de tu puta madre until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Hog Farm _Bacon 02:22, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

"La puta madre que te remil parió" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect La puta madre que te remil parió. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 24#La puta madre que te remil parió until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Hog Farm _Bacon 02:25, 24 August 2020 (UTC)