This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Hipster (contemporary subculture) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments and look in the archives before commenting. |
This
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It is requested that an image or photograph of a person who describes themself, or has been described, as a "hipster" be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:
|
Index
|
||
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Cambial Yellowing, what is the point of retaining these words? What meaning do they impart? I can't discern any. Sandstein 19:49, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
Response to third opinion request: |
I have taken a third opinion request for this page. After reading your discussion, I am asking Cambial Yellowing to quote the text from the sources cited at the end of the article's first sentence that verifies their edit. Please also explain me why do you think your edit improves the article. Thank you. Borsoka ( talk) 05:20, 23 October 2020 (UTC) |
As a third party intervened, my third opinion is unnecessary. I also assumed that the text was unverified. Borsoka ( talk) 05:34, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
As a result, a picture of hipster culture emerges as a translocal and layered phenomenon with contextually specific claims to authenticity.
What is absolutely crucial – and global – in defining a hipster is the claim to authenticity, uniqueness and individuality
...distinction and claims to authenticity (and not being ‘like everybody else’) lie at the core of the hipster culture
This can be characterised as the classic hipster discourse, centring around authentic individuality. Timing is of crucial importance in the hipster authenticity claim
appears to be an unsourced personal opinionimplies that you have read the source cited and found it to be wanting. If it was used without bothering to look at the citation that explains it. The version you sought to push is much less supported by the article text than the status quo. The status quo and current version sum up the Critical Analysis section, and in fact the second part of the quote I mention above "Under the guise of irony" is even used verbatim in the section, along with others of similar tenor. Cambial foliage❧ 13:18, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
Your proposed version makes it neither an overview nor verifiable. Linking to LEAD to try to justify it is counterproductive. The academic article cited summarises forty or so academic and book sources which touch upon the subject, expressing similar lines of thought to those articles cited in the History and Critical Analysis sections, citing some of the same authors. That said, even without the citation, the sentence discusses exactly the elements which are discussed in the Critical Analysis section – Authenticity, Style, etc – and in similar terms. This shouldn't surprise us – that is what a literature review is for.
Perhaps the editor who added the source originally was a novice. What of it? Cambial foliage❧ 16:00, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
this does not appear to be supported by the sources; it also seems to violate NPOV: /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view#Impartial_tone. The phrase "claims to" in the previous sentence already indicates that whether or not it is original or conformist can't really be proven (and crucially can't be disproven).
122.211.145.154 ( talk) 06:46, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Can you give an example of where it has been supported by the literature?
Citizen Premier (
talk) 02:54, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
See the multiple extracts in the preceding section, or read the literature review cited by editor Tharkur. Cambial foliage❧ 03:41, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
The article reads as a concerted attack, unnecessarily negative. The accusations of racism and sexism are baseless conjecture. The personal prejudices of obscure radical feminists do not contribute to understanding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:9800:BC13:9CF:4D6B:6B82:37F:B3BA ( talk) 19:15, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
Happy to discuss the changes made to the introduction, but please don't start an edit war. The tone was unprofessional and unfitting to an encyclopaedic entry, and was obviously not neutral. It may be true and interesting analysis but it belongs later in the introduction or probably better placed in the body with a longer discussion. I'm happy to link to the various Wikipedia policies on the tone of introductions and how they should be phrased and structured, as they support this change. But this change is a no-brainer. Gracchus250 ( talk) 03:15, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
you are clearly attached to this wordingyou mean that I believe the article should maintain its current neutral representation of the available scholarship; that’s not my "
attachment", but simply the content policy of this website. The cited sources represent an overview of the available scholarship, and it’s appropriate to use their definition of the article subject. Cambial — foliar❧ 07:47, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
overly academic" runs contrary to WP:SOURCES, WP:SOURCETYPES; you might also read WP:ABIAS.
emotive" is not grounded in reality. Have you actually read any of the available sources? From your comments and your proposal it looks a lot like you're simply editing from your personal POV - that is not how Wp editing is done. Cambial — foliar❧ 08:58, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
Overly academic" is not a reason: no jargon is used in the stable text. Your proposal does not represent the sources. You are welcome to make alternative proposals here on the talk page, but stop your disruptive editing, and, if you wish, engage in substantive discussion about what your problem with the stable lead is - repeating your unsubstantiated claims and repeatedly inserting a proposal unrepresentative of the sources is disruptive. Cambial — foliar❧ 07:27, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
good idea, but in fact contrary to the website's content policies. The status quo does not include one commentator's opinion in the lead.
The cited source is a literature review and content analysis, as is noted in the abstract. So what you think is important
,
Gracchus250, is contrary to the facts about the sourcing.
@ Binksternet: I fail to see what aspect of my querying Ghmyrtle's apparent confusion of an opinion piece with a literature review led you to imagine some emotional content to the comment - perhaps you are projecting your own feelings into the discussion? I'm at a loss for another explanation.
I note that neither you nor Ghmyrtle have made any effort to address the problems with the current opening three sentences, which lack any supporting source as a definition of the subject. Cambial — foliar❧ 13:22, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
Hipster used to mean white people that were into jazz music (which was considered black). It has nothing to do with beards and thick black eye glasses. 24.51.192.49 ( talk) 17:26, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Hipster (contemporary subculture) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments and look in the archives before commenting. |
This
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It is requested that an image or photograph of a person who describes themself, or has been described, as a "hipster" be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:
|
Index
|
||
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Cambial Yellowing, what is the point of retaining these words? What meaning do they impart? I can't discern any. Sandstein 19:49, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
Response to third opinion request: |
I have taken a third opinion request for this page. After reading your discussion, I am asking Cambial Yellowing to quote the text from the sources cited at the end of the article's first sentence that verifies their edit. Please also explain me why do you think your edit improves the article. Thank you. Borsoka ( talk) 05:20, 23 October 2020 (UTC) |
As a third party intervened, my third opinion is unnecessary. I also assumed that the text was unverified. Borsoka ( talk) 05:34, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
As a result, a picture of hipster culture emerges as a translocal and layered phenomenon with contextually specific claims to authenticity.
What is absolutely crucial – and global – in defining a hipster is the claim to authenticity, uniqueness and individuality
...distinction and claims to authenticity (and not being ‘like everybody else’) lie at the core of the hipster culture
This can be characterised as the classic hipster discourse, centring around authentic individuality. Timing is of crucial importance in the hipster authenticity claim
appears to be an unsourced personal opinionimplies that you have read the source cited and found it to be wanting. If it was used without bothering to look at the citation that explains it. The version you sought to push is much less supported by the article text than the status quo. The status quo and current version sum up the Critical Analysis section, and in fact the second part of the quote I mention above "Under the guise of irony" is even used verbatim in the section, along with others of similar tenor. Cambial foliage❧ 13:18, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
Your proposed version makes it neither an overview nor verifiable. Linking to LEAD to try to justify it is counterproductive. The academic article cited summarises forty or so academic and book sources which touch upon the subject, expressing similar lines of thought to those articles cited in the History and Critical Analysis sections, citing some of the same authors. That said, even without the citation, the sentence discusses exactly the elements which are discussed in the Critical Analysis section – Authenticity, Style, etc – and in similar terms. This shouldn't surprise us – that is what a literature review is for.
Perhaps the editor who added the source originally was a novice. What of it? Cambial foliage❧ 16:00, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
this does not appear to be supported by the sources; it also seems to violate NPOV: /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view#Impartial_tone. The phrase "claims to" in the previous sentence already indicates that whether or not it is original or conformist can't really be proven (and crucially can't be disproven).
122.211.145.154 ( talk) 06:46, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Can you give an example of where it has been supported by the literature?
Citizen Premier (
talk) 02:54, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
See the multiple extracts in the preceding section, or read the literature review cited by editor Tharkur. Cambial foliage❧ 03:41, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
The article reads as a concerted attack, unnecessarily negative. The accusations of racism and sexism are baseless conjecture. The personal prejudices of obscure radical feminists do not contribute to understanding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:9800:BC13:9CF:4D6B:6B82:37F:B3BA ( talk) 19:15, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
Happy to discuss the changes made to the introduction, but please don't start an edit war. The tone was unprofessional and unfitting to an encyclopaedic entry, and was obviously not neutral. It may be true and interesting analysis but it belongs later in the introduction or probably better placed in the body with a longer discussion. I'm happy to link to the various Wikipedia policies on the tone of introductions and how they should be phrased and structured, as they support this change. But this change is a no-brainer. Gracchus250 ( talk) 03:15, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
you are clearly attached to this wordingyou mean that I believe the article should maintain its current neutral representation of the available scholarship; that’s not my "
attachment", but simply the content policy of this website. The cited sources represent an overview of the available scholarship, and it’s appropriate to use their definition of the article subject. Cambial — foliar❧ 07:47, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
overly academic" runs contrary to WP:SOURCES, WP:SOURCETYPES; you might also read WP:ABIAS.
emotive" is not grounded in reality. Have you actually read any of the available sources? From your comments and your proposal it looks a lot like you're simply editing from your personal POV - that is not how Wp editing is done. Cambial — foliar❧ 08:58, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
Overly academic" is not a reason: no jargon is used in the stable text. Your proposal does not represent the sources. You are welcome to make alternative proposals here on the talk page, but stop your disruptive editing, and, if you wish, engage in substantive discussion about what your problem with the stable lead is - repeating your unsubstantiated claims and repeatedly inserting a proposal unrepresentative of the sources is disruptive. Cambial — foliar❧ 07:27, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
good idea, but in fact contrary to the website's content policies. The status quo does not include one commentator's opinion in the lead.
The cited source is a literature review and content analysis, as is noted in the abstract. So what you think is important
,
Gracchus250, is contrary to the facts about the sourcing.
@ Binksternet: I fail to see what aspect of my querying Ghmyrtle's apparent confusion of an opinion piece with a literature review led you to imagine some emotional content to the comment - perhaps you are projecting your own feelings into the discussion? I'm at a loss for another explanation.
I note that neither you nor Ghmyrtle have made any effort to address the problems with the current opening three sentences, which lack any supporting source as a definition of the subject. Cambial — foliar❧ 13:22, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
Hipster used to mean white people that were into jazz music (which was considered black). It has nothing to do with beards and thick black eye glasses. 24.51.192.49 ( talk) 17:26, 17 March 2023 (UTC)