Talk:coitus

RFC discussion: March 2014–August 2015
The definition we have is a little too encyclopedic. --WikiTiki89 06:07, 6 March 2014 (UTC)


 * I think it's alright now. Eloquio (talk) 10:27, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Definition
Hi, KIeio. Yeah, I think that this revert is in error. "Coitus" especially means sexual intercourse between a man and a woman. But not just any type of sexual intercourse (such as anal or oral sex); it usually means penile-vaginal sex. I reverted so that the definition was accurate and didn't consist of only "Sexual intercourse." Although, yes, "sexual intercourse" and "coitus" commonly mean the same thing too (when "sexual intercourse" is not being used more broadly).

With this edit, -sche made the addition better by stating "especially between a man and a woman." But I think it would be better to state "especially penile-vaginal penetration between a man and a woman." Or something like that.

I'm not sure if you reverted me because I'm "new" to editing Wiktionary and you assume I'm messing something up. But I am an active editor on Wikipedia and I mainly edit medical and sexual topics there. I am very familiar with the sexual literature. You asked me to make a statement on your talk page about this, but I think that the article talk page is the best place to challenge article content. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 06:09, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

All that stated, I'm not overly concerned with this Wiktionary issue. Wikipedia will remain the main wiki that I edit. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 06:15, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
 * This is all nice and dandy, but honestly I mainly just reverted because the definition was verbose and awkwardly worded to the point of seeming silly, because it was added without regard for the definition that was already in place, because in my experience most uses of the word just refer to any (penetrative) intercourse, and because upon consultation the OED's definition was also rather brief. As you can see above on this talk page, the definition you reinstated had previously been clipped because it was simply far too descriptive and encyclopedic (people don't come to a dictionary to learn how to have sex); if you want to clarify that it refers especially to heterosexual penetrative sex, just add that little disclaimer to the existing definition, shouldn't need more than maybe 4 additional words. — Kleio (t · c) 09:05, 18 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Kleio, yeah, I was aware of the discussion above, but I felt that the editor trimmed too much off. Thank you for your implementation of my suggested wording. "Penile-vaginal penetration" is clear. I thought about "genital-to-genital," like the sexual intercourse article currently does (but with "especially genital-to-genital contact between a man and a woman"), but non-penetrative sex can also be genital-to-genital and the sexual intercourse article points to the coitus and copulation articles via wikilinks for further detail. Because it points here, I wanted this page to clarify what we mean (just like the copulation article does). Thanks again. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 09:38, 18 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Please note that Wiktionary is a descriptive dictionary: we're concerned with what people mean when they use a term, not what authoritative sources say it's supposed to mean. We're also only concerned with the terms as language, not with the concepts they refer to- we leave the lengthy theoretical/technical explanations to encyclopedias like Wikipedia. Chuck Entz (talk) 14:02, 18 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Chuck Entz, I understand about being descriptive on Wiktionary. But I do see a number of articles on this site being accurate with their descriptive language, and sometimes including usage notes. I was not arguing for anything lengthy; I was arguing for clarity. And, from what I can see, this site is concerned with clarity. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 20:05, 18 April 2017 (UTC)