Talk:Surra de Bunda

This article was nominated for deletion on 16 February 2018. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

A fact from Surra de Bunda appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 16 June 2010 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the Brazilian dance known as the Surra de Bunda describes a female dancer pounding her buttocks into a male's face?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2010/June.

Wikipedia

Brazil: Arts Low‑importance

	Brazil portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brazil, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Brazil and related topics 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.BrazilWikipedia:WikiProject BrazilTemplate:WikiProject BrazilBrazil articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Arts in Brazil task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Dance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dance, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Dance and Dance-related topics 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.DanceWikipedia:WikiProject DanceTemplate:WikiProject DanceDance articles

WikiProject Dance To-do list:

To nominate at WP:FAC:
To improve to Featured standard:
To nominate as a Good article:
To expand: 18th century dance - 20th century ballet - Bolero - Choreography on Broadway - Dance education - English ballet - Indian classical dance - Italian ballet - List of dance companies - Meg Stuart - Opera ballet - Sasha Waltz - Scotch reel - Set dance - Physically integrated dance
To cleanup: Contra dance - Salsa (dance) - Dandiya - Lead and follow
To unbias:
To check for copyvios:
To merge: List of dancers and List of dance personalities‎ as per AfD discussion
Substubs needing expansion: see /substubs
To destub: Amir Hossain Babu - Canada Dance Festival - Dance etiquette - Flash dance - more
Needing references: Chorus line - specifically verifying that each girl actually started out as a chorine
To create: Broadway dance - Country Western Dance International - Dance and cinema - Dance and society - German folk dancing - Latin swing - Post-structuralist ballet - Push (dance) - Salon dance - Shuffle dance - Swing boogie - World Dance Alliance - Xavier Le Roy - more
Wanted Pics/Graphics: Category:Dance articles needing images

Non-reliable sources

[1]- April 28, 2010 blogpost in Portuguese decrying the song as vulgar, and setting out some of the lyrics.--Milowent (talk) 14:22, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
[2] (January 27, 2010) blogpost in Portuguese notes the dance.
[3] (December 23, 2009), [4] (December 13, 2009), [5] (December 11, 2009) negative blogposts in Portuguese.
[6] (December 2, 2009) blogpost embed of a video without commentary.--Milowent (talk) 14:39, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ass licking

Some english source may report that "surra de bunda" means ass licking, because Google translate may translate it that way. But "licking" really means "beating" in this case, so its better say "ass (or butt) pounding" or "ass beating" instead of "ass licking" (conjuring up a nonexistent use of the tongue) to avoid confusion.--Milowent (talk) 15:31, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Translation

The closest translation of "surra" is "spanking" or "beating (as punishment)". "Butt beat" is vague and could be translated back to Portuguese in many ways, more closely as "surra NA bunda" (beat on the butt) or "surra DA bunda" (beating of the butt). Likewise, "butt pounding" is ambiguous and is a poor translation.

"Butt" is a PG-rated version of "ass". In Portuguese, "bumbum" is a PG-rated version of "bunda", so "bunda" should be translated as "ass".

In this case the word "de" is better translated as "by", which makes "punishment by ass" a much more appropriate translation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joemaffei (talk • contribs) 02:56, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

More information

I've noticed that the July 1, 2010 version has more information than the current one. Through the history, we can see that on July 3 an IP removed content and no one reverted it. It's been quite a good time since then and I think probably people would note it and maybe considered it to be irrelevant, But maybe no one noticed it. So, in this case, is the content of July 1 note worth to be restored? I'm pinging Milowent as the main contributor, but any opinions are welcome. Gabriel Yuji (talk) 17:46, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Gabriel Yuji! If supported by decent sourcing, this article can certainly deserve to be longer than its current state. I have not researched the subject recently, have at it!--Milowent • ^hasspoken 19:50, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]