This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
The Greatest Generation (book) 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 |
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I’ve removed the Strauss and Howe chart, which belongs only on the Strauss and Howe page. By putting that chart on each generation page, it gives a false impression to readers that that chart represents an official or widely-accepted list of generations, which is certainly not the case. While Strauss and Howe have contributed to our knowledge about generations, their theories are still very controversial, and have become very discredited in some circles. Many generations experts, for example, strongly disagree with the long length of their generational constructs. In any event, it was very misleading to put that chart on other pages than theirs. Wendy 2012 ( talk) 02:56, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
The whole concept of considering a diverse collection of people, whose birthdays happened to fall within a certain date range, as a "demographic", is pseudoscientific. The phrase "The Greatest Generation" is a sloppy mixture of war propaganda and pop culture, and is a tacit insult to all the other "not-so-great" generations. It is senseless to apply an adjective to a generation, regardless of whether the book was heavily promoted and sold well. It's pulp nonsense for the masses, and doesn't deserve to be treated as an academic area based on reality. "Collective glory" is as malignant a concept as "collective guilt". Credit and blame go to individuals, not generations. 77Mike77 ( talk) 16:20, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
Mention of putting a man on the moon as a contribution to this generation? - Unsigned noted on 09:03, 19 July 2006 by user:68.59.109.121
No. No applicability to the meaning and purpose of the term, which really only reflects their war stamina and dedication. Softlavender 03:04, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
I thought the term really applied to anyone who was old enough to serve in WWII. Since you could legally enlist at 18 anyone born prior to 1927 fits the bill. I think all the combat veterans born in 1925, 1926 and 1927 would be surprised to realize they're not considered part of this generation. Was the year 1924 actually suggested as a bound by one of the sources? Or was this just someone's back-of-a-napkin math? 1945 - 21?? I read Brokaw's book years ago, but I'm fairly certain it would certainly apply to any combat veteran. -- JayHenry 17:06, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Was this referred to as "Greatest Generation" before Brokaw's book? If not, what was the terminology used for this generation before then? -- Logotu ( talk) 20:13, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Good question. I did a little Googling on "greatest generation ambrose" to see if maybe Stephen Ambrose had used the term. Also tried to see if texts from Ambrose's books about it were online at Amazon. They are not. According to this article Ambrose had the idea, but not the phrase: "It was Brokaw, however, who christened the men and women who experienced World War II as The Greatest Generation." I'd suggest looking in the indexes of Ambrose's books or otherwise researching it, though, to confirm that. Or maybe a big dictionary like Oxford that gives first use citations. Colfer2 ( talk) 05:14, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Is this necessarily only US citizens from that era? Many people from other countries would consider the people who fought in both world wars to be their greatest generation, it's a term I've heard meritorious times to refer those from my country at that time. Especially since many other countries fought in WW1 and WW2 twice as long (from the beginning of the wars) than most US soldiers Thoughts?-- 72.139.35.107 ( talk) 16:39, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
I may be missing something, but the "US Presidents" section goes like this:
Seven consecutive U.S. presidents were from this generation: George H. W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, Jimmy Carter, Gerald Ford, Richard Nixon, Lyndon Johnson, and John F. Kennedy. President Jimmy Carter was a midshipman in the United States Naval Academy during the war.
They all served in WWII except for Johnson. Why mention only Carter's naval service? Originalname37 ( talk) 18:30, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
O.K. I fixed that, but I put them in chronological order by date of presidency. Wowest ( talk) 15:23, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
Now that the article is just about Brokaw's term, does he define year parameters? I see some reviewers give 1900-1920 and some give 1910-1925. I don't have access to the book though so I don't know if he ever proposes specifics. Sylvain1972 ( talk) 17:06, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
People born in 1901-09 (1900 was the tail end of the Lost Generation) are an odd kettle of fish. They were neither Lost Generation or Greatest Generation, but a transitional group. 208.101.138.126 ( talk) 20:02, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
Dwight D. Eisenhower was a hero of World War II, but he was born in 1890. Wouldn't that make him a member of the Lost Generation instead of this one? --- Eman91
Correct. He was a member of the Lost Generation just like MacArthur, Patton, and most of the other WWII generals. 208.101.138.126 ( talk) 19:57, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
I am struggling a little to understand the purpose or intent of the "Recruits" section. It consists of only two quotes without explanation. It seems like it might be intended to act as a sort of criticism of the "greatest generation" terminology, but it doesn't really make this clear. Anthropoidape ( talk) 04:03, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Which people did Tom Brokaw cite? Is Cyd Charisse part of the cohort or just someone who tookthe trouble to be born aound that time. This comment is in no way meant to downplay or belittle the tremendous skill, dedication, and hardwork Ms. Charisse showed during her hoofing career. Stikko ( talk) 19:16, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
@Stikko, since you obviously haven't read the book, or even the quote "Greatest Generation" within the context of the book, now would be a good time to stop editing the article regarding it. Thanks. -- A2fwiki ( talk) 22:53, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
It was mentioned that Howe and Strauss used the term G.I. generation for a British group of cohorts. However, their book on generations uses the term "G.I. Generation" for american cohorts born 1901 to 1924. I made changes to reflect this and included citations. Corenabh ( talk) 19:37, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Americans today work harder for less, are better educated, have better personal hygiene, heck we even smoke less then the so called "Greatest Generation". 98.165.15.98 ( talk) 11:21, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
I don't think they were so great. All they did was blow up and destroy everything their parents, grandparents, and great grandparents had built. Today, we called that stupid, selfish, and spoiled. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.226.11.248 ( talk) 20:46, 17 March 2012 (UTC) Agreed, to call this generation 'the greatest' would include everyone of that generation, including all the people in Germany that followed Hitler's nationalistic diatribe, as well as everyone in Italy, and Japan, and Russia that did likewise to jingoist rhethoric and lies. This generation includes not just Americans, but the whole generation around the world. When viewed in this context... looking at photos of concentration camps, pictures of the Einsatzgrupen in action, and so on... you see its actually the worst generation ever, that industrialized death factories that produced nothing but corpses. And even the Allies were no saints, not by a wide margin. The fire storm bombings of Hamburg, Dresden, Nagasaki, Hiroshima... etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.226.11.248 ( talk) 21:16, 26 December 2012 (UTC) Brokaw was clearly referring to Americans in the generation only (although I think it's fair to include Britain, Canada, Australia, and the Soviet Union's people in the generation as well), not the people of the Axis nations who believed the big lies. Revisionists like to look at things in a way that makes them feel superior, hence "Why are they so great?" Americans and their allies were up against opponents that were waging total war. The Allies were responding in kind. If they hadn't built that industrial base, filled the ranks of armies and embarked upon that great crusade, we'd live in a very different world. So degrade their accomplishments all you like. Those that degrade the GI Generation do so from behind the comfortable lifestyle and personal liberties their labors secured. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.58.87.110 ( talk) 17:24, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
|
It's a bit much. And none of the other generations contain such a list. Est300 ( talk) 01:06, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
In 2013, as I read the data on [ [1]], some 5,493,433 Americans over the age of 85 were still alive. I'm wondering how many of those remaining served in the military in WWII. Can someone put a better estimate together? Terry Thorgaard ( talk) 13:26, 17 April 2015 (UTC) In Military history of the United States, it is stated that 11% of the population served, so mutliplying 5.5 million by 11 % gives me the figure of about 600,000 left (in 2013). How close is this? Terry Thorgaard ( talk) 18:52, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
This article does not even define its topic in a way that is understood immediately even by readers who are not American, and not for want of possibility. I am very well aware that sociological generations cannot be delimited sharply, so I do not insist on a definition such as "born between 1901 and 1924", but an observation along the lines of "there is no precise widely agreed-upon definition, but it can generally be said to refer to the generation born in the early 20th century (or: at the beginning of the 20th century, roughly in the first quarter of the 20th century)" should be possible without problem. -- Florian Blaschke ( talk) 14:17, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
The origin statement of the first line is not supported by the cite. The cite says only he wrote a book by that name. "Brokaw went on to chart their personal narratives of sacrifice, friendship and small-town heroism in his best-selling work, The Greatest Generation."
This is not saying that he made the term as the line says "The Greatest Generation is a term created by journalist Tom Brokaw". I'll move the cite down to External links. Since the List of generations seems to be long standing, and there is no support to indicate origin with him ... I'm also going to alter the phrasing to Brokaw made it currently popular instead. Markbassett ( talk) 18:11, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
What birth years does the "Greatest Generation" fall into? There is currently no birth range given. It says they grew up during the depression, but according to the dates given on our Wikipedia article for the Silent Generation (mid 20s to mid 40s), the Silent Generation were the young children of the depression. Seems we need additional sources and text to clarify this. I recently removed an image which said they were the children of the depression, because it seemed inaccurate, but I actually have no objection to an image of the depression being in this article, if it's clarified where the Greatest Generation falls into the depression (perhaps they were older children and adolescents during the depression while the Silent Generation were young children and/or born during the depression). Rough dates for this generation would help clarify things and make it easier to accurately illustrate. -- DynaGirl ( talk) 13:26, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
The large amount of evidence provided by our historians reveal that the "Greatest Generation" were involved with numerous war crimes against civilians and prisoners of war, as well as numerous rapes during service in both Europe and Japan during WWII. Many shameful acts and atrocities have been written in great detail on the "take no prisoners" concept that many of the Greatest Generation Soldiers did, offering no quarter to disarmed and surrendered combatants. It can't compare to the greater generation of American Soldiers in this current generation who have been involved in the longest wars in U.S. history, with the nearly absent involvement of war crimes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8800:9081:B100:EC31:53EA:6EF1:2E8F ( talk) 23:59, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
requested move/dated|G.I. Generation
Greatest Generation → G.I. Generation – The Greatest Generation is a term coined by Tom Brokaw to refer to those who grew up in US during the depression, and then went on to defeat Hitler in WWII. But generations are international topics. The birth years of this generation (approximately 1901–1924) includes not just the young adults of the time who worked to defeat Hitler, but these birth years also includes those who fought for Hitler in Germany and also the young adults of the other Axis nations of the time fighting against the US such as Japan and Italy, whom Brokaw was not referring to as the Greatest Generation. Notable demographers Strauss & Howe call this cohort the G.I. Generation, which seems more neutral and accurate as a title. This article is currently titled the Greatest Generation and G.I. Generation redirects here. I think that should be switched. The article should be titled G.I. Generation and Greatest Generation should redirect here. DynaGirl ( talk) 15:42, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
If you want to replace an unprotected redirect with an article, you need not list it here. Turning redirects into articles is wholly encouraged. Be bold!-- DynaGirl ( talk) 13:48, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
I moved this page from "Greatest Generation" to "The Greatest Generation" to reflect the exact title of Tom Brokaw's book and term. -- DynaGirl ( talk) 15:26, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
I propose that the article G.I. Generation be merged into this article.
The reason is that both articles are about the same American generational cohort, with the term "G.I. Generation" coined in 1991 by Stauss and Howe, and the term "greatest generation" in general use in the 1960s and 1970s, popularized further by Brokaw in 1998, with the term "greatest generation" having always been much more commonly used than "G.I. Generation."
It appears that the intent of the G.I. Generation article was to fix the Americentric focus of the term "greatest generation", but since "G.I." is American slang for "government issue", it doesn't change the focus at all. If someone wishes to create an article about the worldwide generational cohort born roughly 1905 to 1925, they should call it something plainly descriptive, such as the World War II generation. Binksternet ( talk) 18:34, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
The term "greatest generation" appears prior to Brokaw's 1998 book. Below are some examples. Binksternet ( talk) 19:48, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
The Greatest Generation →
The Greatest Generation (book)
G.I. Generation →
The Greatest Generation – The Greatest Generation is the term most used to refer to the generational cohort born before The Silent Generation. The article "G. I. Generation" is currently being used to describe this cohort. Moving "The Greatest Generation" to "The Greatest Generation (book)" would allow "G. I. Generation" to be moved into "The Greatest Generation".
"The Greatest Generation" is more common than
"the G I Generation" in relevant WP:RS books.
The New York Times,
Time magazine,
the Pew Research Center,
The Atlantic, and
Gallup all use "The Greatest Generation" to refer to the cohort.
Kolya Butternut (
talk) 18:11, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Isn't this term a neologism, coined by Tom Brokaw himself? Dimadick ( talk) 07:19, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved to The Greatest Generation (book). The second article will require its own full move request and for now the base title has to redirect to a disambiguation page, because no consensus was found for its move or for what to do with the article on the generation. This is not an ideal situation, so WP:RFD is the next step, alongside perhaps a move request for G.I. Generation. ( non-admin closure) Red Slash 19:21, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
– Please see "Requested move 17 February 2019" above where I describe my rationale for the proposed page name changes. This tag was mistakenly left out. Kolya Butternut ( talk) 21:24, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
Exhibit from the University of Iowa celebrating the 20th anniversary of the book: [7] Kolya Butternut ( talk) 11:06, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Summary of the book in the NYTimes: [8] Kolya Butternut ( talk) 11:06, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Although Tom Brokaw claims that the generation that fought in US forces during World War II were the greatest any society has produced, militarily this view has not been supported.
"Signficantly less well trained than their opponents, three out of four American soldiers did not shoot to good effect in combat." [1]
"Despite the fact that the US Army was willing to accept virtually anyone over five feet tall who weighed more than 105lb and who had 12 or more of his own teeth, 40 per cent of citizens failed these basic criteria." [2] [3]
It appears no one will suffer alternative views to stand in the article. The above has been removed more than once. Surely other American generations (such as the Boomers) could do at least as well. Stikko ( talk) 10:13, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
References
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
The Greatest Generation (book) 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 |
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I’ve removed the Strauss and Howe chart, which belongs only on the Strauss and Howe page. By putting that chart on each generation page, it gives a false impression to readers that that chart represents an official or widely-accepted list of generations, which is certainly not the case. While Strauss and Howe have contributed to our knowledge about generations, their theories are still very controversial, and have become very discredited in some circles. Many generations experts, for example, strongly disagree with the long length of their generational constructs. In any event, it was very misleading to put that chart on other pages than theirs. Wendy 2012 ( talk) 02:56, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
The whole concept of considering a diverse collection of people, whose birthdays happened to fall within a certain date range, as a "demographic", is pseudoscientific. The phrase "The Greatest Generation" is a sloppy mixture of war propaganda and pop culture, and is a tacit insult to all the other "not-so-great" generations. It is senseless to apply an adjective to a generation, regardless of whether the book was heavily promoted and sold well. It's pulp nonsense for the masses, and doesn't deserve to be treated as an academic area based on reality. "Collective glory" is as malignant a concept as "collective guilt". Credit and blame go to individuals, not generations. 77Mike77 ( talk) 16:20, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
Mention of putting a man on the moon as a contribution to this generation? - Unsigned noted on 09:03, 19 July 2006 by user:68.59.109.121
No. No applicability to the meaning and purpose of the term, which really only reflects their war stamina and dedication. Softlavender 03:04, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
I thought the term really applied to anyone who was old enough to serve in WWII. Since you could legally enlist at 18 anyone born prior to 1927 fits the bill. I think all the combat veterans born in 1925, 1926 and 1927 would be surprised to realize they're not considered part of this generation. Was the year 1924 actually suggested as a bound by one of the sources? Or was this just someone's back-of-a-napkin math? 1945 - 21?? I read Brokaw's book years ago, but I'm fairly certain it would certainly apply to any combat veteran. -- JayHenry 17:06, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Was this referred to as "Greatest Generation" before Brokaw's book? If not, what was the terminology used for this generation before then? -- Logotu ( talk) 20:13, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Good question. I did a little Googling on "greatest generation ambrose" to see if maybe Stephen Ambrose had used the term. Also tried to see if texts from Ambrose's books about it were online at Amazon. They are not. According to this article Ambrose had the idea, but not the phrase: "It was Brokaw, however, who christened the men and women who experienced World War II as The Greatest Generation." I'd suggest looking in the indexes of Ambrose's books or otherwise researching it, though, to confirm that. Or maybe a big dictionary like Oxford that gives first use citations. Colfer2 ( talk) 05:14, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Is this necessarily only US citizens from that era? Many people from other countries would consider the people who fought in both world wars to be their greatest generation, it's a term I've heard meritorious times to refer those from my country at that time. Especially since many other countries fought in WW1 and WW2 twice as long (from the beginning of the wars) than most US soldiers Thoughts?-- 72.139.35.107 ( talk) 16:39, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
I may be missing something, but the "US Presidents" section goes like this:
Seven consecutive U.S. presidents were from this generation: George H. W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, Jimmy Carter, Gerald Ford, Richard Nixon, Lyndon Johnson, and John F. Kennedy. President Jimmy Carter was a midshipman in the United States Naval Academy during the war.
They all served in WWII except for Johnson. Why mention only Carter's naval service? Originalname37 ( talk) 18:30, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
O.K. I fixed that, but I put them in chronological order by date of presidency. Wowest ( talk) 15:23, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
Now that the article is just about Brokaw's term, does he define year parameters? I see some reviewers give 1900-1920 and some give 1910-1925. I don't have access to the book though so I don't know if he ever proposes specifics. Sylvain1972 ( talk) 17:06, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
People born in 1901-09 (1900 was the tail end of the Lost Generation) are an odd kettle of fish. They were neither Lost Generation or Greatest Generation, but a transitional group. 208.101.138.126 ( talk) 20:02, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
Dwight D. Eisenhower was a hero of World War II, but he was born in 1890. Wouldn't that make him a member of the Lost Generation instead of this one? --- Eman91
Correct. He was a member of the Lost Generation just like MacArthur, Patton, and most of the other WWII generals. 208.101.138.126 ( talk) 19:57, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
I am struggling a little to understand the purpose or intent of the "Recruits" section. It consists of only two quotes without explanation. It seems like it might be intended to act as a sort of criticism of the "greatest generation" terminology, but it doesn't really make this clear. Anthropoidape ( talk) 04:03, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Which people did Tom Brokaw cite? Is Cyd Charisse part of the cohort or just someone who tookthe trouble to be born aound that time. This comment is in no way meant to downplay or belittle the tremendous skill, dedication, and hardwork Ms. Charisse showed during her hoofing career. Stikko ( talk) 19:16, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
@Stikko, since you obviously haven't read the book, or even the quote "Greatest Generation" within the context of the book, now would be a good time to stop editing the article regarding it. Thanks. -- A2fwiki ( talk) 22:53, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
It was mentioned that Howe and Strauss used the term G.I. generation for a British group of cohorts. However, their book on generations uses the term "G.I. Generation" for american cohorts born 1901 to 1924. I made changes to reflect this and included citations. Corenabh ( talk) 19:37, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Americans today work harder for less, are better educated, have better personal hygiene, heck we even smoke less then the so called "Greatest Generation". 98.165.15.98 ( talk) 11:21, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
I don't think they were so great. All they did was blow up and destroy everything their parents, grandparents, and great grandparents had built. Today, we called that stupid, selfish, and spoiled. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.226.11.248 ( talk) 20:46, 17 March 2012 (UTC) Agreed, to call this generation 'the greatest' would include everyone of that generation, including all the people in Germany that followed Hitler's nationalistic diatribe, as well as everyone in Italy, and Japan, and Russia that did likewise to jingoist rhethoric and lies. This generation includes not just Americans, but the whole generation around the world. When viewed in this context... looking at photos of concentration camps, pictures of the Einsatzgrupen in action, and so on... you see its actually the worst generation ever, that industrialized death factories that produced nothing but corpses. And even the Allies were no saints, not by a wide margin. The fire storm bombings of Hamburg, Dresden, Nagasaki, Hiroshima... etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.226.11.248 ( talk) 21:16, 26 December 2012 (UTC) Brokaw was clearly referring to Americans in the generation only (although I think it's fair to include Britain, Canada, Australia, and the Soviet Union's people in the generation as well), not the people of the Axis nations who believed the big lies. Revisionists like to look at things in a way that makes them feel superior, hence "Why are they so great?" Americans and their allies were up against opponents that were waging total war. The Allies were responding in kind. If they hadn't built that industrial base, filled the ranks of armies and embarked upon that great crusade, we'd live in a very different world. So degrade their accomplishments all you like. Those that degrade the GI Generation do so from behind the comfortable lifestyle and personal liberties their labors secured. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.58.87.110 ( talk) 17:24, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
|
It's a bit much. And none of the other generations contain such a list. Est300 ( talk) 01:06, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
In 2013, as I read the data on [ [1]], some 5,493,433 Americans over the age of 85 were still alive. I'm wondering how many of those remaining served in the military in WWII. Can someone put a better estimate together? Terry Thorgaard ( talk) 13:26, 17 April 2015 (UTC) In Military history of the United States, it is stated that 11% of the population served, so mutliplying 5.5 million by 11 % gives me the figure of about 600,000 left (in 2013). How close is this? Terry Thorgaard ( talk) 18:52, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
This article does not even define its topic in a way that is understood immediately even by readers who are not American, and not for want of possibility. I am very well aware that sociological generations cannot be delimited sharply, so I do not insist on a definition such as "born between 1901 and 1924", but an observation along the lines of "there is no precise widely agreed-upon definition, but it can generally be said to refer to the generation born in the early 20th century (or: at the beginning of the 20th century, roughly in the first quarter of the 20th century)" should be possible without problem. -- Florian Blaschke ( talk) 14:17, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
The origin statement of the first line is not supported by the cite. The cite says only he wrote a book by that name. "Brokaw went on to chart their personal narratives of sacrifice, friendship and small-town heroism in his best-selling work, The Greatest Generation."
This is not saying that he made the term as the line says "The Greatest Generation is a term created by journalist Tom Brokaw". I'll move the cite down to External links. Since the List of generations seems to be long standing, and there is no support to indicate origin with him ... I'm also going to alter the phrasing to Brokaw made it currently popular instead. Markbassett ( talk) 18:11, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
What birth years does the "Greatest Generation" fall into? There is currently no birth range given. It says they grew up during the depression, but according to the dates given on our Wikipedia article for the Silent Generation (mid 20s to mid 40s), the Silent Generation were the young children of the depression. Seems we need additional sources and text to clarify this. I recently removed an image which said they were the children of the depression, because it seemed inaccurate, but I actually have no objection to an image of the depression being in this article, if it's clarified where the Greatest Generation falls into the depression (perhaps they were older children and adolescents during the depression while the Silent Generation were young children and/or born during the depression). Rough dates for this generation would help clarify things and make it easier to accurately illustrate. -- DynaGirl ( talk) 13:26, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
The large amount of evidence provided by our historians reveal that the "Greatest Generation" were involved with numerous war crimes against civilians and prisoners of war, as well as numerous rapes during service in both Europe and Japan during WWII. Many shameful acts and atrocities have been written in great detail on the "take no prisoners" concept that many of the Greatest Generation Soldiers did, offering no quarter to disarmed and surrendered combatants. It can't compare to the greater generation of American Soldiers in this current generation who have been involved in the longest wars in U.S. history, with the nearly absent involvement of war crimes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8800:9081:B100:EC31:53EA:6EF1:2E8F ( talk) 23:59, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
requested move/dated|G.I. Generation
Greatest Generation → G.I. Generation – The Greatest Generation is a term coined by Tom Brokaw to refer to those who grew up in US during the depression, and then went on to defeat Hitler in WWII. But generations are international topics. The birth years of this generation (approximately 1901–1924) includes not just the young adults of the time who worked to defeat Hitler, but these birth years also includes those who fought for Hitler in Germany and also the young adults of the other Axis nations of the time fighting against the US such as Japan and Italy, whom Brokaw was not referring to as the Greatest Generation. Notable demographers Strauss & Howe call this cohort the G.I. Generation, which seems more neutral and accurate as a title. This article is currently titled the Greatest Generation and G.I. Generation redirects here. I think that should be switched. The article should be titled G.I. Generation and Greatest Generation should redirect here. DynaGirl ( talk) 15:42, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
If you want to replace an unprotected redirect with an article, you need not list it here. Turning redirects into articles is wholly encouraged. Be bold!-- DynaGirl ( talk) 13:48, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
I moved this page from "Greatest Generation" to "The Greatest Generation" to reflect the exact title of Tom Brokaw's book and term. -- DynaGirl ( talk) 15:26, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
I propose that the article G.I. Generation be merged into this article.
The reason is that both articles are about the same American generational cohort, with the term "G.I. Generation" coined in 1991 by Stauss and Howe, and the term "greatest generation" in general use in the 1960s and 1970s, popularized further by Brokaw in 1998, with the term "greatest generation" having always been much more commonly used than "G.I. Generation."
It appears that the intent of the G.I. Generation article was to fix the Americentric focus of the term "greatest generation", but since "G.I." is American slang for "government issue", it doesn't change the focus at all. If someone wishes to create an article about the worldwide generational cohort born roughly 1905 to 1925, they should call it something plainly descriptive, such as the World War II generation. Binksternet ( talk) 18:34, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
The term "greatest generation" appears prior to Brokaw's 1998 book. Below are some examples. Binksternet ( talk) 19:48, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
The Greatest Generation →
The Greatest Generation (book)
G.I. Generation →
The Greatest Generation – The Greatest Generation is the term most used to refer to the generational cohort born before The Silent Generation. The article "G. I. Generation" is currently being used to describe this cohort. Moving "The Greatest Generation" to "The Greatest Generation (book)" would allow "G. I. Generation" to be moved into "The Greatest Generation".
"The Greatest Generation" is more common than
"the G I Generation" in relevant WP:RS books.
The New York Times,
Time magazine,
the Pew Research Center,
The Atlantic, and
Gallup all use "The Greatest Generation" to refer to the cohort.
Kolya Butternut (
talk) 18:11, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Isn't this term a neologism, coined by Tom Brokaw himself? Dimadick ( talk) 07:19, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved to The Greatest Generation (book). The second article will require its own full move request and for now the base title has to redirect to a disambiguation page, because no consensus was found for its move or for what to do with the article on the generation. This is not an ideal situation, so WP:RFD is the next step, alongside perhaps a move request for G.I. Generation. ( non-admin closure) Red Slash 19:21, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
– Please see "Requested move 17 February 2019" above where I describe my rationale for the proposed page name changes. This tag was mistakenly left out. Kolya Butternut ( talk) 21:24, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
Exhibit from the University of Iowa celebrating the 20th anniversary of the book: [7] Kolya Butternut ( talk) 11:06, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Summary of the book in the NYTimes: [8] Kolya Butternut ( talk) 11:06, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Although Tom Brokaw claims that the generation that fought in US forces during World War II were the greatest any society has produced, militarily this view has not been supported.
"Signficantly less well trained than their opponents, three out of four American soldiers did not shoot to good effect in combat." [1]
"Despite the fact that the US Army was willing to accept virtually anyone over five feet tall who weighed more than 105lb and who had 12 or more of his own teeth, 40 per cent of citizens failed these basic criteria." [2] [3]
It appears no one will suffer alternative views to stand in the article. The above has been removed more than once. Surely other American generations (such as the Boomers) could do at least as well. Stikko ( talk) 10:13, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
References