Talk:Going commando

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Personal experiences 2 VFD 3 Among celebrities 4 Senfeld 5 Probable Origin 6 Going Bareback? 7 Request 8 Upskirts

[edit] Personal experiences

In my experience, this term was in use in the mid-'80s by member of Canadian highland infantry battalions in much the same way: denoting wearing no underwear beneath the kilt. The usage in diverse contexts is interesting; I wonder how far back it can be traced. —Michael Z. 07:25, 2005 Jan 7 (UTC)

Can confirm from personal experience mid-70s among college students and Vietnam vets. Anyone remember anything earlier? --Pmeisel 16:23, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I believe when Highland soldiers do it they call it "going Regimental." --SigPig |^{SEND - OVER} 07:16, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] VFD

This article was proposed for deletion January 2005. The discussion is archived at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Going Commando. Joyous 19:01, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Among celebrities

Jonemerson needs to stop reverting all edits. No decision seems to have been made here, and I vote that verified celebrity occurances are certainly of merit. Londo 01:55, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Is this list really encyclopedic? Is it verifiable by means available to Wikipedia editors? My guess would be "no" to both questions. Any other input? -Willmcw July 5, 2005 00:40 (UTC)

Well, whether they've admitted in interviews to going commando is probably verifiable. Whether that fact is encyclopedically significant... —Michael Z. 2005-07-5 03:51 Z

Since there are no sources listed it'd be awfully tough to verify. Willmcw July 5, 2005 05:20 (UTC)

I'm going to go ahead and remove the list of celebritities. Anyone who has verifiable sources is welcome to add the names of notable people who "go commando".

Good move getting rid of the list. This is supposed to be an encyclopedia, not People Magazine. --RoySmith 15:31, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

Hahaha I just called it People Magazine in my deletion of the Celebrities section :). I didn't even read your comment :). Jonemerson 08:37, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

The part about Tori Spelling's vagina being exposed on Jay Leno is rubbish - do a google search —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.13.241.91 (talk • contribs).

To say that Lindsay Lohan "accidentally" flashed is unverifiable - we can verify that she did so from photographs, but whether this was an accident or a publicity stunt we can't know unless she tells us. I have therefore deleted this word. Rodparkes 03:50, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Most of the citation errors have been corrected.(Sjohnsonaz 04:44, 6 December 2006 (UTC))

Celebrity gossip does not belong on Wikipedia. I have deleted the gossip and protected the page until this dispute can be resolved here. I believe that if this gossip is to exist anywhere on Wikipedia, it should exist on the individual celebrity's Wikipedia pages, where there fans would be more interested. This article should instead be about educating people about what "Going commando" is. Jonemerson 08:50, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Sjohnsonaz has readded the celebrity gossip in violation of 3RR. Jonemerson 09:08, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree that gossip does not belong, however, verifiable facts about celebrities (or anyone notable, for that matter) going commando should be included in this page in my opinion. I imagine a wiki user interested in finding examples of notable personalities 'going commando', this would be the article they'd come to, and if Sjohnsonaz is willing to put in the research to make such a list, why, that's just wonderful. Dept of Alchemy 09:10, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. If there's a celebrity that claims to go commando (and, most importantly, there is a cited source of said claim), I don't see why we shouldn't keep it; while List of celebrities who go commando isn't encyclopedic, a section in this article is relevant. EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:21, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I wish I knew WP policy a bit better, but content like the Celebrities section would not appear in a published encyclopedia, so I don't think it should appear on Wikipedia. However, dictionaries do use published works to decide what to publish, and often use quotes from those works in their usage examples. So perhaps a compromise I could live with is to only keep those sections where the word "Going commando" was used -- however, the editor is choosing to add any reference to a celebrity not wearing underwear. My preferred solution is still to have the section removed, because 10 years from now it will be completely outdated, and I don't think the talk of the day should be in an encyclopedia (Unless there was a Talk of The Day December 6th, 2006 article :)). Jonemerson 20:49, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I've got to agree with the individuals who have said that a section (or worse, an article) on this topic would not be encyclopedic. Further, a list of people who have – at least once in their lives – gone without underwear would be utterly unmanageably long, even if it were possible to source. This is indeed an encyclopedia, and not People magazine. I remind everyone that 'verifiable' does not automatically mean 'encyclopedic', and that not all trivia associated with a noteworthy individual are automatically noteworthy by that association. Wikipedia is not a repository for useless celebrity trivia. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 20:38, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

It seems to me that you meant "disagree", given the rest of your response. Could be wrong.

I'm not suggesting that we list every single person who has ever gone commando; that would indeed by horribly long, and would count as listcruft. However, citing some individuals who regularly go commando would be in line with the article. EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:52, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I've corrected my comment by adding the bolded text; your reading of the sense of it was correct. Citing 'some' individuals just doesn't happen here—there will be editors who insist on listing every minor celebrity with an article who has ever reported that they go commando. It will be a nuisance and source of pointless edit wars. It will be the worst sort of listcruft, in that it will continually attract conflict. Course, I could be wrong. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 00:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I've remained silent on this topic for far too long. The list of celebrities, while understandably controvercial, is relevant. The statistics on the amount of people who actual don't wear underwear are few and far between. If one does even a simple search, you will see that there is only moderate discussion on the internet about the practice, beyond simple blogging. The practice is discussed mainly with reference to celebrities, and therefore this deserves note in any encyclopedic article. Therefore, in order to back up this finding, ample citations and discussion need to be provided. I have therefore created a compromise. Since the celebrity page was causing controversy, I have created a subpage where they can be seen, but do not detract from the article as a whole. The article remains intact in its "encyclopedic" status, while the other topics are only referenced, but still remain accessible, since considerable research went into them. Please understand my reasoning, and try to look at the changes with a reasonable eye. Thank you. (Sjohnsonaz 21:58, 6 December 2006 (UTC))

I posted a merge article tag for going commando and list of celebrities going commando. The latter is not significant enough to deserve its own article, therefore (pokes Sjohnsonaz), the articles should be merged in my opinion. Dept of Alchemy 23:13, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I have to note that we don't have statistics on the number of people who don't wear underwear. (Note that trying to create such statistics here would be original research.) The fact that isolated cases exist is undisputed. That there is limited discussion beyond blogging suggests that reliable sources for a list of celebrities will be few and far between. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 00:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Senfeld

That Seinfeld episode doesn't use the phrase "going commando" or even imply it. There's no evidence the writers were even familiar with the phrase. Merely having a character wearing no underwear seems like a pretty loose criteria for inclusion. I propose it be removed. --221.249.13.34 02:52, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

It was included at the specific request of somebody during the VfD. You're right that they don't use the phrase, but they were talking about the same concept. --RoySmith 04:23, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Probable Origin

This term probably originates from the soldier's practice of not wearing underwear in jungle or desert climates. In desert climates, it's more comfortable, and in jungle climates, it's healthier, as it lessens the chance of contracting various crotch rots. It's called going commando because special forces generally have more operational experience than regular troops, and have accepted the advantages of these practices. It should also be noted that normal underwear is often replaced with pantyhose in jungle climates to deter leeches.

• I concur with this. One of my father's co-workers was a SEAL, and confirmed this for me. (Don't ask how it came up)

[edit] Going Bareback?

Could someone verify where this term came from? I have heard the term referred to not using condoms, but never for not wearing underwear.Rookie Rover 21:16, 21 September 2006 (UTC)Rookie Rover

Going bareback definitely relates to sexual use without a condom, not the use of underwear. Jonemerson 08:38, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Request

I strongly ask that those who have recently been removing parts of this article to modify or add content, but not just blatantly remove things that you do not personally like. If the relevance of topics, such as physical health of those that go commando, or the reports of people who do not wear underwear, appear to be irrelevant to the topic of the article, please discuss it. But DO NOT just erase it because you don't like it. The concept of why people go commando for health benefits is a very important argument for the article to contain, yet it was deleted. This is a perfect example of careless editting and wreckless admin work. Please be more careful. (Sjohnsonaz 02:42, 7 December 2006 (UTC))

[edit] Upskirts

I created a link to Upskirts a while back, which I thought would end the whole debate about inserting celebrity material here. If there is evidence of a celebrity going commando, that's an upskirt.

Having said that, this is NOT an invitation to insert that material in Upskirt - at least not without reading the article first.

By the way, that article needs additions to it's legislation portion. I have URLs to sources, if anyone is interested. NinaEliza 03:38, 14 December 2006 (UTC)