Talk:hold one's pee

hold one&#39;s poop
Should be covered by senses at hold. I see that hold one's urine passed an RFV (not an RFD) in the past. Equinox ◑ 16:07, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Are we talking about hold in one's hands or hold inside one's bowels? The fact that there's a significant ambiguity here must be acknowledged.  The second one is nearly idiomatic. Pur ple back pack 89   22:43, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
 * That's just typical polysemy. We shouldn't have entries for "hold one's place" (as a bookmark does in a book), "hold [i.e. reserve] me a table" etc. ad nauseam, simply because "hold" has multiple senses. It's culturally obvious that people don't shit in their hands. Equinox ◑ 23:22, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't know about that, Equinox. Nowadays, people don't seem to be all that wise... Tharthan (talk) 23:26, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Being "culturally obvious" (or any other type of "obvious") isn't a reason for deletion, sorry. Keep.  Oh, and create the other things you've suggested P.S.: You can hold shit in your hands without shitting directly into your hands.  You can shit into something else and then pick it up . Pur ple back pack 89   02:17, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
 * As established before, PBP would also vote keep on "brown leaf" (because "leaf" can be a book page), even though that's our canonical example of something meriting deletion. His illogical conclusions ought to be ignored as having no sound basis in reason and for outright contradicting our policies. Equinox ◑ 03:31, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Just because you disagree with them doesn't make them illogical. What is so illogical about wanting more dictionary definitions to resolve ambiguities in language?  I want an actual reason, not just some blind lock-stepping to a policy it's clear many people don't support.  And, no, I shouldn't be ignored, I get as much say as you, Equinox. Pur ple back <font color="#CC33CC">pack <font color="FFBB00">89   03:46, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Also, I'd like a diff for where I said "keep" to brown leaf specifically. I may have said "keep" to other things you consider to be SOP, but not that one in particular. <font face="Verdana"><font color="#3A003A">Pur <font color="#800080">ple <font color="#991C99">back <font color="#CC33CC">pack <font color="FFBB00">89   03:50, 19 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete, but I think we need a new sense at hold to cover these, plus examples like "hold it" or "hold one's bladder" (perhaps even "hold one's liquor" or "hold one's breath", which also have the same connotations of controlling the body as it tries to expel something). Perhaps "To remain continent; to control a bodily function." I would say that having a dozen of these entries for all the synonyms of "pee" and "poop" doesn't help anyone. Smurrayinchester (talk) 23:06, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
 * There's a problem with that definition, how does it relate to the pronoun one's? Can you hold someone else's poop? Renard Migrant (talk) 22:37, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Sure, in your hands. But I completely agree with Equinox, this should be deleted. --Hekaheka (talk) 18:02, 21 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom (or redirect to ). — Ungoliant (falai) 05:05, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete all, including "urine" below. Transparent to verb sense 11 for "hold". <i style="background:lightgreen">bd2412</i> T 20:05, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

hold one's urine
All deleted. <i style="background:lightgreen">bd2412</i> T 22:44, 3 February 2015 (UTC)