Talk:Virgin boy egg

Ministry of Tofu

It translates articles from China so it should be a valid source. CallawayRox (talk) 18:34, 3 April 2012 (UTC) Possibly our friends on the Chinese pages are putting us on? MollyNYC (talk) 12:06, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

It is just a local dish which is eaten by perverts in one district in China who love urine. --Däädaa (talk) 22:20, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Either way, we should try to use more reliable sources if they are available, as is the case here.--Yaksar (let's chat) 23:41, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

I am removing the segment about urine being sterile, as it doesn't have a source but i have a source for urine not being sterile http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/04/120409164156.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.54.93.168 (talk) 18:31, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Needs some seriously better citations.

The blogosphere most definately does not count as a citation. Nothing a blogger says should ever be considered as true. Those people are just 'dudes' who talk smack on the internet. This article sounds a heck of a lot like a school project on 'how long does it take for someone to notice a bogus article on wikipedia' please make some REAL citations that do not include a blogger. I've read some pretty ridiculous blogs on reuters, and forbes that were obviously a blogger and not an actual journalist. Despite the famous name behind them, the vast majority of these bloggers have no adult supervision, and can write whatever bull-'feces' they want, with no professional proofreaders to fact check anything they say. Tothmetres (talk) 00:20, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

The article was just nominated for deletion. Feel free to participate. CabinetCavers (talk) 17:20, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

You cited yourself.

Citation number [5] actually cites your own website. Most definately not allowed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tothmetres (talk • contribs) 00:31, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

deleted.

<< deleted because it was obviously bogus, the guy cited blogs and his own website as a source. If a Wikipedia moderator could please explain how to do this correctly, I would be more than happy to comply with proper wikipedia etiquette, but this was just stupid. Has this bogus article seriously been around since 2012?>> Tothmetres (talk) 00:39, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

lack of reliable sources

I think this is what I meant to say when I spuriously just deleted it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources Tothmetres (talk) 01:03, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

The spelling is very bad

Capitalisation is wrong, there is no white space after ',' and sentences don't end with a full stop. Needs to be fixed or deleted 1mpossible c (talk) 18:13, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

By all means go ahead and fix any problems with spacing or punctuation. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:04, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Racist propaganda

Very bad article please delete ok 2402:B801:2823:E200:1946:8649:CBBC:7D2 (talk) 16:50, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Do you have any sources to support the claim that this article is "racist propaganda"? It doesn't appear to be a "very bad article" as it is reasonably well-written and well-sourced. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:03, 9 December 2023 (UTC)