Talk:Troll (gay slang)

message: I have to go to work but will address wikifying this article within the next day or so. I feel the limited explanation on the disambiguous page was not sufficient. Benjiboi 00:10, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed .  The gay troll as an epithet is definitely encyclopedic, just as much as the internet troll.  There's a lot more to go into this article. Cleduc 03:11, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

text: That having been said, the article is in terrible shape: it's a linkfarm and "also sees" many more articles than even vaguely necessary.  The references section needs to be restricted to sources that specifically back up facts in the article.  Marked for cleanup. Cleduc 03:12, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the attention, the initial items placed were for initial researching  not definitive must haves for the article. Having said that I think most of it fits rather well within the context of what the article _can_ be.Benjiboi 09:47, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article in process 

message: It seems the word as a noun means an insistent lascivious old, or at least unattractive, man; and the verb means moving through, picking up indiscriminately. I have noticed that there is a form of fishing called trolling (trailing a line with many hooks rather than a net). This, I think, explains the difference between the noun (repulsive man) and verb (indiscriminate cruising).
The verb form was used often in exactly this sense in the 60's British radio program Round the Horne.
unsigned comment added by 122.105.64.120 (talk) 21:28, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Troll/trawl

message: Why is 1/5th of this article (this glorified slang dictionary entry of an article) devoted to the "potential health risks" associated with sexual activity in general?  "Troll"'ing may certainly be related about sex, but other articles on Wikipedia don't carry such extensive and stern warnings when they are not *directly* applicable to the term being defined.  Rather, they LINK to the pages describing the health risk of sexual activity of any nature.  To me, the inclusion here is misguided nonsense.  No one who comes here is going to be looking for a condescending diatribe about healthy sexual activity, and even if they were, this article isn't the place for it--we have numerous other articles that cover this topic in FAR more detail with NUMEROUS--and further--SUPERIOR references.  I move the health risks section be struck altogether and not replaced at all.  If I can't find consensus there, at the MOST we should incorporate a link to sexually transmitted diseases somewhere in the article.  This is an encyclopedia.... not a pamphlet from your local clinic.  NiftySwifty (talk) 09:07, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  This is one of numerous problems with the article, not least of which is the conflation of the two distinct meanings of the term.  I see no reason to await discussion on the removal of the health section.  Exploding Boy (talk) 19:55, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. For the most part that section refers to the risks of unprotected sex, not trolling.--Dvd-junkie (talk) 22:34, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This article, in its present state, heavily overlaps cruising for sex or other existing topics, meanwhile info which was missing five years ago (such as the concept of a unattractive old man attempting to lure a younger mate by being pushy or aggressive) is still missing now. We already have pages on promiscuity, safer sex and all the rest; this article in its current state adds nothing. K7L (talk) 05:32, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Health Risks?!