Talk:Bogger

Untitled

A bogger is a forum where people can write their opinion. Isn´t? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.77.165.180 (talk) 11:58, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Erm, no... that would something along the lines of blogger... --Kiand 12:02, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Possible Vandalism?

"eg. Fionn from Galway, a quintessential bogger who shovels pig droppings in his spare time.Like all boggers,he seems fixated with trying it on with every city bird he sees,as if in some effort to dilute the cow urine in his blood for future genations. Fionn, a male bogger in his prime can always be seen machinig birds at any time,and is willing to sink to very low levels to achieve his goal, such as placing pictures of himself as a kid in a pathetic attempt to appeal to the female motherly instinct." This sounds like vandalism to me, so I think it's wise to delete it... Andrewharrington2003 18:52, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

pretty funny tho :P —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.192.78.61 (talk) 17:25, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a wikipedia-fit article -- an unreferenced slang dictionary entry

NOTES:

While there are some exceptions to the Wikipedia is not a dictionary guideline, to be one of those exceptions there should be sources, rather than mere assertions.
In any case, there are other meanings of "bogger," than the Irish slang.

SO: Will see what can be done with with regard to sources, and then evaluate. Proofreader77 (talk) 01:39, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FOLLOW-UP COMMENT: After researching "bogger," it's clear why there is a rule/guideline that says "Wikipedia is not a dictionary." A word has variable meaning, even within the same culture -- and certainly in the global context of English usage. If someone looks up "bogger," they should not be (authoritatively / encyclopedically) informed that it means one particular meaning out of the set of possible meanings. Those possible meanings should be in a dictionary (Wiktionary). SO: This page should probably be turned into a disambiguation page with a link to Wiktionary (and the citations moved there). This is NOT an article. Proofreader77 (talk) 04:02, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FOLLOW-UP: Noting boggers vs chavs ... and the issue of Urban Dictionary type assertions within Wikipedia. I.E., see main topic. Proofreader77 (talk) 19:04, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Follow-up: sourcing or removing

Page is being carefully reviewed to see if a fully sourced article can be created. To correct the wording in my recent edit summary (in which I typed Wiktionary by mistake) Wikipedia is not Urban Dictionary. Personal assertions of the meaning of words and phrases do not go in an encyclopedia. etc etc. But let's see what can be done, encyclopedically. Proofreader77 (talk) 19:00, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]