Talk:Dirty Sanchez
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article was nominated for deletion on 19 February 2006. The result of the discussion was keep. |
|
This article was nominated for deletion on 15 May 2006. The result of the discussion was keep. |
| This page has been Transwikied to Wiktionary. The transwiki process is complete. |
This page was placed on Votes for Deletion in July 2004. Consensus was to keep; view discussion at /Delete.
Documented examples???? What the F are you talking about? Tell you what, my girlfriend is pretty wild, I'll do a dirty sanchez tonight. There. In 4 hours, it will not be an urban legend anymore. I'm sorry, but I'm not going to post photos or give you a juicy description. But it will happen. I will stick my finger in her anus and wipe the poo on her upper lip. And then it will be real. And if you don't believe me, well, I think you should do it yourself to prove it is real. Happy camping!
Contents |
[edit] urban legend? ummm...
Basically, this is funniest shit I've ever read...dirty sanchez? Who's heard of hot plating? It's where you stretch some saran wrap over your lovers face and shit on it. Or the hot carl? It's fairly straightforward: Pull down your pants, and shit on your lover's chest. Or do it when you're spooning, that way you can share in the sexiness.
There's a lot of freaks out there. If it was an urban legend before it became a popular toilet-humor reference, I'm sure some poo-loving weirdos have made it a reality.
Yes, what's the basis for saying it's an urban legend? Face-sitting, front and back, is common enough.Dr Zen 06:45, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Dirty Sanchez is not face-sitting. Actually I'm inclined to remove the reference to face-sitting as it's a bit of a wild conjecture and in no way related to the act, which is performed with the finger. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 11:17, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
On the urban legend question, well if there are documented examples of this practise let's have them. Until then it could be regarded as an urban legend because of its viral circulation and the absence, or elusive nature, of concrete cases. I'm not wedded to this idea, though. It's a judgement call. One could just as well refer to it as an apocryphal sexual practise. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 13:06, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Yes there are web sites that feature the Dirty Scanchez... It is quite alarming to see it happen and you wonder what drugs the person is on.... usually after anal penetration the member is thrust into the mouth of the other partner(s)... More shocking than sexual... RW
- If you're talking about ass to mouth, it's well-documented in gonzo porn and at least has the barest minimum of sexual arousal value (humiliation and/or actual penetration) and I know for a fact that the practice is not limited to just porn. A dirty sanchez is just plain absurd, most likely even for scat-lovers. I dare anyone to actually present links to a sites that even advertise to stock actual pornographic footage of it.
- Peter Isotalo 10:46, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] swingers film
i know the movie swingers pretty well. no recollection of a "dirty sanchez" bar. 63.28.37.157 18:45, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
The bar "Dirty Sanchez" shows up in the movie "Dodgeball". There is no reference to it on the wiki page, if anyone would care to elaborate. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodgeball:_A_True_Underdog_Story
[edit] Should be Dirty Sanchez, not Dirty Mexican
I'm not sure why this article was moved. Does anyone have sources that refer to a "Dirty Mexican"? ApolloCreed 04:08, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] AJ Matthews T-shirt?
What is that line doing in the external links anyhow? Does it belong as a popculture reference? I'm going to move it, and hopefully someone will be able to figure that out for me. Also, while the intro could be improved, I definitely think it's short enough as an appropriate intro to have that tag removed. --Waterspyder 08:56, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] South Park: "hitler," not "shitler"
I'm 99.9% sure that in the episode of South Park mentioned where Cartman gives Butters a poop "moustache," it's called a hitler, not a "shitler." Some googling seems that it should be "hitler" instead of "shitler" as well (Google query of "cartman gives butters a hitler" with quotes gives 160 results.. changing hitler to shitler and still keeping the quotes returns 0 results). I've changed it on the page. --Josh1billion 21:33, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Move
This page should be moved to Dirty Sanchez and the page currently there in the article space should be moved to Dirty Sanchez (disambiguation). At which point the current disambiguation notice should be changed to {{otheruses}}. With the exception of Mescaline—in which article the words "dirty sanchez" do not appear—all of the other things on that disambiguation page are derivative. If Mescaline is actually called "dirty sanchez" in any context, it is likely either less notable or derivative as well. savidan(talk) (e@) 01:30, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
- Support. That's where it was until a couple months ago when it was moved by someone with a history of using poor judgement when it comes to page moves. 24.18.215.132 03:15, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Jack Layton tie-in
Because of the nature of the comment, I removed it from the article. This can be construed to be libel and should not be asserted without a solid reference. BigNate37(T) 03:27, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Seven-card stud poker variant "Dirty Sanchez"
This article is about the fecal moustache. I've moved the description of the card game to Dirty Sanchez (disambiguation). BigNate37(T) 20:20, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Low Point
Listing this sick sexual practice has to be a serious low point for this website. Jtpaladin 01:22, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- Perhaps. Maybe giving information on suicide is instead. Or abortions. Or satanism. I'm not trying to incite anything, but a lot of people disagree with a lot of parts of society which we have documented here at Wikipedia. If it's out there and it's verifiable, it's probably in here. BigNate37(T) 20:15, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Happy fece?
Sorry for the bad pun. I'm talking about Image:Dirtysanchez.jpg, and specifically about whether it is encyclopedic. It's definately illustrative of the subject of the article without being too vulgar or offensive, and we have illustrations at other articles like mammary intercourse, albiet more elaborate ones. What does everyone think? BigNate37(T) 20:17, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Screeched
Any particular reason this article should not include the sentence (or a close variant)? BigNate37(T) 04:10, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- "This act can be seen in the 2006 sex tape Screeched as performed by Dustin Diamond of Saved by the Bell fame."
- The Problem I have with the Screeched reference is that he claims to do a dirty Sanchez but there isen't any fecal matter involved. Is it really a dirty sanchez if you have no fecal matter mustasch? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.252.38.173 (talk • contribs) 01:41, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- Hmm, I don't think so, but is there a source to verify that it was not actually a Dirty Sanchez or that there was no fecal matter? Remember, verifiability, not truth. So far the sources I've seen are leaning towards the fact that he did the act. I'm inclined to believe you, but we need at least one good source if its going to go against two other sources. If you take another look at them and change the article to something like "sources say he performed a Dirty Sanchez..." that would be fine, but removing or refuting a sourced statement requires backup. BigNate37(T) 01:57, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Well I can fix a couple of screenshots of the girl's face during and after the act. To be honest it's quite hard to see to be totally sure cause of fingers are in the way. But there doesn't seem to be any fecal matter on his finger and the fact that the girl had a long dildo up her ass earlier in the movie with barely no fecal matter on the dildo tells me that she had an enema before the scene therefor the lack of fecal matter on both the dildo and screechs finger.
- Not that I want to even accidentally see that, but we can't use a primary source anyway. The information would have to come from an article about the video. BigNate37(T) 14:54, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Pictures
anybody else think we should include pictures? Preferably HD —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.178.251.253 (talk • contribs) 12:18, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
