Talk:Poo

Discussion

Amazing that an article this bad still exists in a mostly high-quality Wikipedia.

Thanks for clearing up the vandauary 2006 (UTC)68.144.49.48 (talk) 19:47, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

This page really should be moved to Poo (which currently redirects here). The latter is the most common usage among those covered on this page.--Srleffler 23:28, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Done. —Nightstallion (?) 09:05, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Rampant vandalism

Just about every edit on this page is vandalism or someone reverting vandalism. Shouldn't this page be (semi?)protected? Richard W.M. Jones 12:22, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

It's nothing we can't keep up with. Semi-protection is a temporary measure used to stop rampant vandalism. Here, we've had eight incidents since September 1. That's nothing compared to what some pages get. Powers ^T 22:45, 12 September 2006 (UTC) HI

Another Idiot!

Someone vandalised the article AGAIN! Someone just went tglkhjidtjortjyhifyouhftihjyijhogtijhgyoi or somthing to that effect to nearly all of it. weeqgyepoopopopopopopopsgdffsdfgfgysdsdbsvbfui. I'm not registered and i couldn't be bothered trying to fix it but someone has to. If you are reading this do what you can. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.70.78.118 (talk • contribs) .

• I think that vandal should be banned permanently for being so horribly uncreative. ~ Infrangible 03:57, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Note: there were some posts here that look like they got chopped up, but I'd have to search through the whole page history back to 2009 to find the originals. —Soap— 19:48, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

tglkhjidtjortjyhifyouhftihjyijhogtijhgyoi is not accurate SilverAce200 (talk) 10:24, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Way back machine? 2607:FEA8:A4C3:9E00:B03B:E588:F30A:25B3 (talk) 12:30, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Poo - use as actor's makeup

The Desolation of Smaug, video blog #11 has a section which uses the word "poo" in the sense of actor's makeup. That should be added here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmD5qwjeJws

Jerryfern (talk) 17:40, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Wow... SilverAce200 (talk) 09:37, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Clarification on first sentence

User:Bkonrad: just wondering why we cannot have more than one wikilink in the first sentence? I had suggested this: "Poo is a colloquialism (or child language) for feces. It is less offensive term than the other colloquial term: shit." - If we are not allowed to wikilink to colloquialism, can we please use a word that lay person would find easier to understand. EMsmile (talk) 15:39, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

I came to this page because there is a World Toilet Day coming up in November and it will have a topic on poo, so more people might look this one up around then.EMsmile (talk) 16:13, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Neither of the articles colloquialism or shit mention the term "poo". MOS:DABENTRY provides the guidance Include exactly one navigable (blue) link to efficiently guide readers to the most relevant article for that use of the ambiguous term. Do not wikilink any other words in the line. older ≠ wiser 17:12, 18 July 2017 (

Requested move 9 November 2024

Poo → Poo (disambiguation) – I see that feces is the primary subject. I will put

"Poo" redirects here. For other uses, see Poo (disambiguation).

on the top of the feces page. Kolano123 (talk) 13:32, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

• Support, feces is probably PRIMARY where it should redirect.--Ortizesp (talk) 19:05, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
• Support feces. Theparties (talk) 01:06, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
• Support Wikinav shows most people going to the poo page are looking for feces (clickstream data), and feces probably has the most long term significance for poo as well. Dantus21 (talk) 13:25, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
• Support clear primary topic in feces, as others have said. Bensci54 (talk) 16:59, 12 November 2024 (UTC)