Talk:Circle jerk

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Circle jerk article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Wikipedia is not censored.
Images or details contained within this article may be graphic or otherwise objectionable to some readers, to ensure a quality article and complete coverage of its subject matter. For more information, please refer to Wikipedia's content disclaimer regarding potentially objectionable content and options to not see an image.

Sexology and sexuality Low‑importance

	Human sexuality portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

LGBT studies

This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBT studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBT studiesLGBT articles

Other meanings?[edit]

In a circle jerk, is it sometimes the case that each man jerks off the fellow to this left or right? -- Guy Hoffman —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.158.35.207 (talk) 20:41, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do the research and stick in and WP:RS info. Now we need a good photo/drawing :-) CarolMooreDC 19:23, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Photograph[edit]

How would a photograph help improve this article's quality? I think we can all imagine what a circle jerk would look like. It would only disturb people unnecessarily so to request a photograph like that is kind of provocative in my opinion. There are articles in greater need of a photograph and they don't have it requested on the talk page either.

This blew my mind. Peace. BeefDaeRoastLXG ^praat 12:26, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 27 December 2017[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: move (non-admin closure). feminist (talk) 15:02, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Circle jerk (sexual practice) → Circle jerk – Circle jerk, as far as I know, originally and primarily refers to the sexual practice, and other uses of the term are in reference to the sexual practice. I think this page should simply be titled Circle jerk accordingly, and the current Circle jerk page should be moved to Circle jerk (disambiguation). Michipedian (talk) 20:35, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support, sole matching title of the term. bd2412 T 04:17, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support disambiguation makes no sense to be in the base name._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 13:49, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Trademark Issues[edit]

It would be a wise idea to make a distinction from Circle Jerk Productions, which is a registered trademark pending public opposition in the U.S This would avoid the potential issues with regard to trade mark infringement. See https://trademarks.justia.com/878/50/circle-jerk-87850560.html 71.91.178.54 (talk) 21:49, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I would Note that this is now a registered United States Trademark bearing Trademark Registration Number 5626116. Therefore, I will be amending the article to include use as a trademark at this time. 108.178.78.26 (talk) 08:05, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted as off-topic. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 00:13, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The issue is presumed to be not "Off Topic" because you have failed to detail any reasons to justify exactly why you believe mention of a trademark is off topic to the terminology. This article discusses the broad uses of the term, not just the sexual act, otherwise we would need a disambiguation to indicate "sexual practice" or similar per the relevant WP policy. Also, at this point, we have two people supporting the edit and your the only one complaining about it. Therefore, you need to gain some indication of a majority consensus prior to revision at this point.108.178.78.26 (talk) 05:36, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Someone registering a business name that contains a pre-existing word or phrase does not make any subsequent use of that phrase a trademark infringement. If "Circle Jerk Productions" has any notability, write an article about it with appropriate sources and it can be mentioned at the disambiguation page for this term. Otherwise, please stop trying to shoehorn mentions of it into this unrelated article. -- Euryalus (talk) 09:09, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is a very safe bet that any future editor or IP advocating for this is User:USN007 evading their block, and can be reverted, blocked, and ignored. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:21, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Floquenbeam. -- Euryalus (talk) 22:36, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute[edit]

I would dispute the cited psych sources as not representative of the varying views and approaches to psychology. It appears that the cited references are politically steeped in liberal political views, that don't represent a consensus of the psychiatric profession. Therefore, the material should either be removed or supported with bipartisan sources, per the WP guidelines. 71.91.178.54 (talk) 21:59, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

IP is CU-blocked. -- Euryalus (talk) 09:40, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Where do I find a definition of "bipartisan sources in psychology"? I'm moderately certain that in order to properly qualify as "psychology" the practitioner's belief system must be as free from bias as possible, and that means ANY bias, and definitely not to be trapped in some weird obsessive-compulsive or even sociopathic obsession with seeing all reality as an "either/or" construct.
Weeb Dingle (talk) 16:55, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

Circle jerk 3D illustration.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:21, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Include something like "(sexual activity)" in the title[edit]

I searched for "circle jerk" not knowing that this phrase has a sexual origin. If the title indicated that it's about the sexual meaning, then I would have known that I would see nudity if I visit this page. Dullbananas (talk) 00:54, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]