Talk:Cut-Me-Own-Throat Dibbler

From Discworld & Terry Pratchett Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Which name should we use?

Should we write it as CMOT Dibbler, C.M.O.T. Dibbller or Cut-Me-Own-Throat Dibbler? I personally have no oppinion other that that the whole name is quite long. Jeltz 21:11, 29 November 2005 (CET)

I'd say Cut-Me-Own-Throat Dibbler (with redirects from CMOT & C.M.O.T. of course). I feel we should use the characters "full name" as the char's main page. Then again, it raises the questions of Angua (Delphine ?) and vampires whith very long names ... --Silaor 21:21, 29 November 2005 (CET)
Yeah using the whole name makes sense in this case but not in some others. What should we call Nobby for example? I'm starting to think that using Cut-Me-Own-Throat is best even if it is a bit long. This is a wiki and not paper :) Jeltz 21:33, 29 November 2005 (CET)
As you may have noticed I chose the full names as page names in the German wiki with redirects from all the short names. Even if it means an article name like Cecil Wormsborough St John Nobbs. Everybody who enters Nobby will still find their way. In case of Sally I went for Sally von Humpeding because the full name wasn't there. It just seems right because this whole thing is like a lexicon and full seems to be appropriate. --Death 22:12, 29 November 2005 (CET)
I was concerned about typing all that long name while writing articles. I think the page with abbreviated name can be kept as a redirect so the abbreviation can be used while writing the articles. -- Vsl

Well done, Old Dickens! I saw this earlier but really couldn't face doing it - --Knmatt 22:35, 4 January 2008 (CET)

I love the image, but do we have an excuse to use it? We're traditionally very afraid of lawyers (Feeglish, almost.) --Old Dickens 02:13, 5 January 2008 (CET)


As far as I am aware, nowhere in the canon does it suggest that CMOT's sausage inna bun tastes awful, or that people have actually been made ill from eating them. From my memory (buried somewhere in one of the Watch books, G!G! probably), it is explicitly pointed out that they don't actually seem to taste of anything. It can be argued that this is more amusing than the obvious and hackneyed "taste awful and they make you ill".

Might also be worth chasing up to see whether a link can be found to Fam(m)ine in Good Omens, whose "food" is devoid of any nutritional value whatsoever. --Lias Bluestone (talk) 13:28, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Sample reviews of Dibbler sausages:
  • of Throat's sausages, cast aside by a hungry reveller who had decided he was never going to be that hungry.
  • And then you bit into them, and learned once again that Cut-me-own-Throat Dibbler could find a use for bits of an animal that the animal didn't know it had got.
et al. No reviews of more than one star found. --Old Dickens (talk) 01:00, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

I'm really unsure how to properly edit this, but there certainly are some indications that Dibblers sausages inna bun may make you ill, one example from Interesting Times:

“I’ve never seen anyone eat three of Throat Dibbler’s sausages inna bun and look so happy,” said the Senior Wrangler. “I’ve never seen someone eat three of Throat Dibbler’s sausages inna bun and look so upright,” said the Dean.

Being upright as unusual suggests that they may usually/often make you ill. Irreverend (talk) 22:43, 18 June 2020 (UTC)