Talk:Damnation

message: This article could probably do with some conceptions of the subject by non-Christian religions, as well. Hephaestos
Is it worth mentioning here the fact that to "give a dam(n)" has a double meaning, and perhaps in Gone with The Wind it was meant as "dam" (sometimes spelt damn) the small indian coin. Both uses are of course intended to show a lack of caring - the Dam had a low value, so to not give [even] a dam means you don't care very much...Tompagenet 09:10, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I wonder about the origin of the phrase "Dammit", which seems strangely unlike "Damn" in all but its usage.
Is this simply a contraction of "Damn it"/"Let it be damned"? Why then are two "m"s used instead of "mn"? Is this due to the terms evolving seperately, only to be rejoined in modern usage? Or perhaps it was "cleaned up" as it was contracted? Or is there just some rule of contraction I am unaware of, which would justify "mn"->"mm" at the join?
 --vstarre 17:11, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Dammit" 

message: My understanding was that the word in an adjectivial form was conjugated in the past participle.  I.e., the correct grammar would have "That damned dog" instead of "That damn dog." 67.103.5.26 19:29, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're correct. People use bad grammar. Grr at them. -- 12.116.162.162 16:54, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adjective Use 

message: I'm informed by some of my American friends that the word is considered a little more severe over there (particularly in the bible belt) however I don't know if it would be universally regarded as "Moderate" profanity.  Should a wikipedia article really reflect the views of the United States or the wider world? Solar Eclipse (talk) 13:16, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moderate Profanity? 

message: "Damned" is also used as an adjective synonymous with "annoying" or "uncooperative," or as a means of giving emphasis. For example, "The damn(ed) furnace isn't working again!" or, "I just washed the damn(ed) car!" or, "The damn(ed) dog won't stop barking!" (The word "damned" is usually only used in North America, whereas in other English speaking countries the word is simply "damn".)
This is simply not true. "damned" and "God-damned" may have fallen out of fashion but it is certainly not US-specific usage. 
I note there is no reference for this entire paragraph. I would remove it entirely unless someone has something useful to say about the use of "damned" in its original form.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.125.3.73 (talk) 00:48, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Damned vs Damn 

message: The article states ""Damn" is a mildly profane word used in North America, the United Kingdom and Australia." They are not the only places to use the word "damn". What about Ireland and New Zealand? I think it would be over-doing it to list all the countries. How about just "western countries" or something? Also, "damn" is not profane at all outside of America as far as I'm aware. You can say it in children's programmes. There's no mention of this however. I think this sentence needs to be changed or expanded upon. McLerristarr (Mclay1) (talk) 13:23, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Damn 

message: Why is this article in the category Forteana? This looks like a mistake to me. 95.150.94.91 (talk) 20:59, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong category? 

message: How is "damn" considered profanity? User:Jackninja5  —Preceding undated comment added 17:06, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Damn a cuss? 

message: This article has two references to Abrahamic religions. The first one says "Abrahamic religions such as Christianity" but the source is explicitly related to Christianity. It's not as if there's a flood of Abrahamic religions with many holding Christianity's views. Unless somebody can rewrite this in an objective way with sources, it should be changed to reference Christianity. 
The second reference refers to the Christian concept of demonology as "Abrahamic demonology." That can't be true by definition unless all Abrahamic religions hold such a view, and they don't.  It needs to specify religions, or make the reference about Christianity. 
Hagrinas (talk) 20:55, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Abrahamic religions 

message: The lead makes a number of statements e.g. Egyptian practice, which are not in the article, nor cited in any way.  These need to be moved to an appropriate section with references, and a lead which summarizes provided. Chemical Engineer (talk) 13:23, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead 

message: I put an npov tag on the article. Specifically, it only talks about certain religions (Egyptian, Christian, Hindu). Sungodtemple (talk) 20:40, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: , Yes, the article is clearly unfinished. It doesn't even mention Judaism or Islam. Jarble (talk) 19:11, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:NPOV|npov issue]]