First base second base dating wiki

Regarding the recent adding the "needing an expert tag", I don't think someone can be an "expert" on baseball metaphors for sex.

It should be either removed, or replaced with an alternate tag.

This article is within the scope of Wiki Project Baseball, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of baseball on Wikipedia. Fitzgerald's recent speech.- , 1 November 2005 (UTC) The title to the article is "euphemism," which means replacing something possibly offensive with something unoffensive.

If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. So unless Fitzgerald was trying not to offend by using less offensive words, this article should not do that.

You don't need to be an expert to realize that this is such an infrequent occurrence that there's not a genuine name for it. It's like putting "donkey punch" or something up there. --Artdyke (talk) , 10 January 2011 (UTC) Is it necessary to have references in popular culture?

It's a fairly common saying, that'd be like trying to reference "bling bling".

User:2.188 , 30 January 2006 (UTC) Well, 'baseball metaphor' redirects here.

first base second base dating wiki-16first base second base dating wiki-11first base second base dating wiki-42first base second base dating wiki-12

It is not about every quote that relates baseball and sex.

I agree with the changing to "euphemism" By no means are these metaphors. The first two people are right, because, if you're too young to know what these mean, you shouldn't be reading this anyways, so why is this on Wikipedia?

My Page , 20 December 2007 (UTC) so that us foreign people can also understand what it means if we happen to run across them.

-Branddobbe , (UTC) This should not redirect to Baseball euphemism, as a metaphor is not the same as a euphamism, and baseball metaphors are much broader and more widely applicable than the more specific and explicitly sexual baseball euphamism.

I do not know what belongs here, but it is not a euphamism.

Leave a Reply