Talk:Snowballing (sexual practice)

message: I changed some contents and brought up somes sources. Thank you for your reading. My opinion is further to give somes advices about sexual transmitted diseases through this specific doing.zusasa   — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zusasa (talk • contribs) 07:09, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  new aspects 

message: I have added an image to this article. It is an image of my own creation and released to the public domain. If you would like to make suggestions for an alternate image, or request an image for another article, please see my user page. Thanks. --SeedFeeder (talk) 08:40, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image

message: There are a couple of references to dominant roles in this article which, I think, should either have citations or be removed.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.21.102.176 (talk) 00:00, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Dominant roles?

message: I notice that at the end of the page this entry is described as "pornography related" - surely that isn't right is it? It describes an actually existing sexual practice (which can be portrayed in pornography) but the article hardly dwells on porn. Personally I think that reference should be removed as it is misleading about the article. Jim Jay (talk) 21:46, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.181.6.163 (talk) 08:04, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Pornography?

message: Look, the image doesn't belong in the article, as it doesn't illustrate any content of the article - it shows two females (and the participation of at least one third party (a male) may be inferred), and there's nothing in the article or sources about this. Removing the image on that grounds seems like a no-brainer, and Cptnono is just being obstreperous. Does anyone want to back me up on this, or are we really going to have to go to an RfC over this basically incontrovertible point? Herostratus (talk) 04:36, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd say it matches the article well enough. The image when combined with the title and the prose (which undoubtedly needs improvement/expansion) makes it perfectly clear what is being illustrated. One person is passing the semen into another person's mouth from her mouth. Would you prefer it if a guy was present? We have had this argument multiple times but I can copy and paste in my reasoning if you want.Cptnono (talk) 05:27, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems a reasonable image to have to me. Do we NEED sources to say that it is possible for two women to snowball? I think that can be inferred from solely requiring two people with mouths. -mattbuck (Talk) 05:41, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Okey-doke. I hear you. Herostratus (talk) 06:51, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image (redux) 

message: Cptnono, it's blatant OR. The source cited is the film itself, so the commentary is completely unsourced. It also looks like the analysis is simply made up and quite likely wrong; Urban Dictionary has several entries for snowblowing as an alternative word for snowballing, and janeguide has snowblowing as a related, but different practice: kissing after a blow job without exchanging the fluid. Neither has it as Julia Roberts' character getting the word wrong. So please let's just take it out until we get some reliable sources. --JN466 10:17, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Stepmom, WP:OR

message: This falls under WP:USERG; it's a self-published source, and no use to Wikipedia.  JN466 13:36, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Unreliable source

message: From the page -- "A somewhat similar practice in heterosexual pornography is cum swapping, in which a woman passes semen from her mouth into that of another woman." -- I really want to point out the irony of two women kissing being described as heterosexual.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:56A:7152:AA00:90C0:7094:72D7:A555 (talk) 03:34, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heterosexual pornography