301:. OK, points well taken and respected. Not sure if this counts as verifiability, but just last night, CNBC's evening news had a whole piece about that movie - I guess the name is Open House - and how one of the plot elements is people having sex in open houses. the reporter mentioned either house hunting, or house humping - it was hard to make out which. In any case, it verifies the phenomenon if not the terminology itself. I tracked down the film's page and they've got the clip up from CNBC. As the kids say, 'are we there yet?' --
241:
market about 5 years ago. Someone in our group said there's a movie that had a scene about it, but they called it "sexy swiping" which I think involves sex and stealing, so that's slightly different. Frankly, the CSI reference was new to me, but that only proves the point. Not sure how else to prove it to you unless you have an open house and invite us over. --
236:. I'm the original poster (laptop just crashed, that's why I signed on as new today BTW), and yes, I'm new to Wiki (which is great, IMHO!) but I just posted several more links to references to house humping and related context. I'm a member of the Yahoo group, and yes, I know this is a true phenomenon (just ask my fiance). In England, maybe you have
240:
for gay folks, but that's no stranger a fetish than house humping, which seems to be primarily hetero, but not exclusively. I understand that the term itself is new, but based on our user group messages and other correspondence, this has been going on since the beginning of the hot real estate
326:
Sorry about that - like I said, I'm new to the Wiki world, and it seemed like Czyl had indicated his deletion vote twice (nominating and posting), but maybe that's OK, I don't know. And what about this CNBC piece? Last I checked it was about as MSM as you can get.
110:, standards of verifiability should apply to sexual practices. Although, this one is mentioned on a few blogs, which makes it much more verifiable than "cleaning the spoon" and "bagging the bunny", which apparently had no source other than the writer. --
216:. Neither the article, the external links, nor a search reveals any evidence of the phenomenon existing in the real world outside of that story, or any secondary sources dealing with it (as either fiction or fact).
161:. Although the term may be unverifiable, the phenomenon certainly is well-known (at least, i had heard of it before). Thus, keep and maybe move later if an alternative term is found. And WTF is BJAODN?
173:
is "Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense" - Knowledge (XXG)'s museum of the terminally strange and bizarre edits which have been condemned to an early exit from articlespace.
289:
suggests, attempt to interest a media source in publishing a story on the topic before introducing this article? It's nicely written.
92:
17:
217:
281:
seem to apply. Without outside verification, we can't know if it's a thirty-person fad, or something destined to go the way of
212:
360:
36:
273:. I originally nominated for deletion. I certainly believe that people may be doing this, but the requirements in
78:
359:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
162:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
310:
St germain23, you should only vote once (bolding keep or delete is usually seen as a vote), but you can add a
345:
331:
318:
305:
293:
265:
245:
228:
205:
187:
165:
153:
126:
123:
114:
102:
85:
65:
328:
302:
242:
202:
148:
71:
170:
180:
210:
The phenomenon is only well-known because it was an element of the storyline of one episode of
99:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
286:
278:
258:
198:
143:
77:
Content does not appear in a reputable published source, thus does not meet guidelines in
342:
274:
254:
174:
62:
225:
96:
315:
262:
139:
135:
111:
290:
237:
82:
282:
49:
197:. Nothing on Google but some blogs and some Knowledge (XXG) mirrors.
353:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
138:
has the right to exist, than so does this. Fortunately,
314:
if you want to add information to the discussion. --
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
363:). No further edits should be made to this page.
8:
122:, interesting but not encyclopedic. --
341:echoing above arguments for removal.
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
24:
285:. Perhaps the author could, as
213:CSI: Crime Scene Investigation
95:. Listing now. No opinion. —
1:
79:Knowledge (XXG):Verifiability
44:The result of the debate was
346:11:56, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
332:12:29, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
319:14:47, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
306:13:27, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
294:08:03, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
266:02:01, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
246:13:27, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
229:11:02, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
206:19:08, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
188:12:49, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
166:09:37, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
154:05:49, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
127:05:20, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
115:05:14, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
103:01:52, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
86:18:07, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
66:10:24, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
380:
356:Please do not modify it.
261:seem relevant to me. --
91:This afd nomination was
32:Please do not modify it.
142:doesn't exist. Yet.
163:The Minister of War
218:Original research
186:
124:TantalumTelluride
371:
358:
183:
178:
151:
146:
59:
56:
53:
34:
379:
378:
374:
373:
372:
370:
369:
368:
367:
361:deletion review
354:
181:
149:
144:
75:
57:
54:
51:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
377:
375:
366:
365:
349:
348:
336:
335:
334:
321:
296:
268:
248:
231:
208:
192:
191:
190:
156:
129:
117:
105:
74:
69:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
376:
364:
362:
357:
351:
350:
347:
344:
340:
337:
333:
330:
325:
322:
320:
317:
313:
309:
308:
307:
304:
300:
297:
295:
292:
288:
284:
280:
276:
272:
269:
267:
264:
260:
256:
252:
249:
247:
244:
239:
235:
232:
230:
227:
223:
219:
215:
214:
209:
207:
204:
200:
196:
193:
189:
185:
184:
176:
172:
169:
168:
167:
164:
160:
157:
155:
152:
147:
141:
137:
133:
130:
128:
125:
121:
118:
116:
113:
109:
106:
104:
101:
98:
94:
90:
89:
88:
87:
84:
80:
73:
72:House humping
70:
68:
67:
64:
60:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
355:
352:
338:
329:St germain23
323:
311:
303:St germain23
298:
270:
250:
243:St germain23
233:
221:
211:
194:
179:
158:
131:
119:
107:
76:
45:
43:
31:
28:
140:Bar hopping
136:Bar hopping
343:Dottore So
199:Andrew pmk
145:freshgavin
238:Cottaging
171:WP:BJAODN
283:toothing
175:Grutness
93:orphaned
324:comment
312:comment
226:Uncle G
97:Cryptic
339:Delete
316:Kjkolb
287:WP:NOR
279:WP:NOR
271:Delete
263:SCZenz
259:WP:NOR
251:Delete
222:Delete
195:Delete
132:Delete
120:BJAODN
112:Kjkolb
108:Delete
100:(talk)
46:DELETE
150:ΓΛĿЌ
134:. If
16:<
299:Keep
291:Czyl
277:and
275:WP:V
257:and
255:WP:V
234:Keep
203:Talk
182:wha?
159:Keep
83:Czyl
63:Talk
253:.
177:...
327:--
224:.
220:.
201:|
81:.
61:|
50:—
48:.
58:P
55:I
52:J
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.