Talk:Hipster sexism

Template:Findsourcesnotice This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sam11612 (article contribs). This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Tcwgswiki, AbigailBuckingham (article contribs).

3 more sources

In case anyone wants to beef up article: Huffington Post, Slate, as well as another on on the Hindu Business Line. CarolMooreDC 04:28, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Note that the HuffPo piece is just a reprint of the original NY Mag piece already cited in the article, the Slate piece merely provides a link to the article, and the Hindu Business Line piece uses the term but does not discuss it. Obviously the term is used a lot, but it's not discussed anywhere I can find outside of Quart's original article.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 12:34, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion

• Blatantly doesn't satisfy wikipedia's Notability requirements. One mention in a New York Post opinion piece a year ago doesn't cut it. This article is also victim of WP:NOR in the 'Examples' section. If 'hipster sexism' is a notable concept, which from my research it doesn't seem to be, then this article needs to be rewritten. Otherwise it needs to be deleted or transwikied to Geek Feminism Wiki (which, despite its rich treasures of articles, doesn't have an article on hipster sexism, further supporting the irrelevance of the topic).Darkcraft (talk) 09:14, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
• I've declined it, as it doesn't really fit into the speedy category for web content. I don't see where it fits any of the speedy categories, so anyone seeking deletion will probably have to go through AfD or PROD. An alternative would be merging into Hipster_(contemporary_subculture)#Critical_analysis or creating a criticism section on that page. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:39, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Feminist perspective

This is regarding this edit, which I reverted. The addition was this:

Although many feminists argue that "hipster sexism" is just true sexism in disguise, those who engage in it do so with a mindset that sexism is an outdated and archaic institution in which only ignorant and backwards people still engage, thereby making the demonstration of "hipster sexism" seem satirical and ironic, and a way of spotlighting the fact that it is ridiculous to actually have sexist beliefs and actions in the modern age, rather than it being an actual subjugation of women.

Although I agree that the article needs expansion, the edit introduced a few "weasel words", and failed to clearly indicate where each perspective was coming from. Starting the sentence with "although many feminists..." and then later contradicting that statement is strongly implying in Wikipedia's voice (without saying directly) that the perspective of some feminists is wrong. This doesn't seem neutral to me, since it's not Wikipedia's call. The relatively few sources the article has about the phrase are not really strong enough to make definitive statements about what the mindset of "hipster sexists" is. The lead could benefit from being rewritten, but any value judgements need to be clearly attributed, and not given in Wikipedia's voice. On a related note, I'm not sure The Frisky is a reliable source, and I don't think it should be cited without indicating in the article that it's an opinion piece. Grayfell (talk) 07:50, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Notability

• A WP:NEOLOGISM that, despite a flurry of enthusiasm in 2012 (reflected in the AFD) does not seem to have caught on. A JSTOR search came up blank,, despite the fact that parsing sexism is a florishing academic field. Google [1] is not much better. And a g-News search establishes just how little use this NEO gets. Perhaps someone can propose a Merge target?E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:02, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

A search engine test in Google for 2013 to present shows multiple post-2012 results. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 15:51, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Numerous book results as well. This is one example of a 2016 book. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 16:04, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

• Sources found by Erik and those the I can find may indicate sufficient usage to make merge into a broader discussion of contemporary sexism plausible. 66 g-News hits [2] does not establish widespread use. More significantly: "No results found for "hipster sexism" site:jstor.org.". Any suggestions for a Merge target?E.M.Gregory (talk) 16:48, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Oppose merging as detrimental. There is no need for this sweep-under-the-rug style of clean-up here. Topic has established notability through significant coverage from reliable sources. Editors please ping me if this detrimental behavior persists. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 21:12, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

It should also be noted that Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hipster sexism resulted in a resounding keep, with no one suggesting to merge. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 21:14, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

User:Erik I have made good faith searches, and I remain skeptical about notability. It is very common for WP:NEO terms to be brought to AFD and kept during the wave of enthusiasm for a concept or term shortly after it is coined. Making assertions cannot establish notability. Only sources can. Please read WP:NEO or, if this is a topic you are familiar with, you might think about a topic for redirect. After a redirect, the page to which info is moved comes up on a search, and may indeed be more widely read in the context of a broader topic.E.M.Gregory (talk) 12:00, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

You tagged for notability multiple articles within the space of minutes on 1/23. Please take a little longer to research each topic. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 14:09, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

It is, in fact, amazing how many articles we have on topics that fail WP:GNG. In particular, we have quite a number of WP:NEO, written in a burst of enthusiasm about a term that, like hipster sexism, fail to gain traction, or could be far more efficiently discussed as a subhead in some broader article. User:Erik, I'm guessing that you know something about hipster sexism, it would be really useful if you could suggest an aritcle into which this could be redirected and merged.E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:26, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

I repeat, since you attempt to sidestep what I said, you tagged for notability multiple articles within the space of minutes on 1/23. Please take a little longer to research each topic. For example, please see the link to the 2016 book that shows plenty of retrospective coverage about the term. Again, I oppose merging because of the false claim that there is no post-2012 coverage of the term. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 17:44, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Potential merge targets

This article, along with the similarly marginal in terms of notability: Hipster racism could be usefully merged into section of Hipster (contemporary subculture). Notability for a stand-alone article is marginal, but this WP:NEO would be a useful part of the larger topic. I am open to other potential merge targets.E.M.Gregory (talk) 16:59, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Oppose merging as detrimental. There is no need for this sweep-under-the-rug style of clean-up here. This topic and hipster racism have established notability through significant coverage from reliable sources. Editors please ping me if this detrimental behavior persists. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 21:12, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

• Can you bring it up to standards outlined in WP:NEO? I ask, because my searches fail to produce the kind of sourcing that would do so.E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:28, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Did you not see my link to the 2016 book, which is one of the most comprehensive about the term? It is (judging from the index) a seven-page section, so that is quite detailed (not to mention retrospective). There is also this (and both actually seem to make the case for using "ironic sexism" more than "hipster sexism". I don't really have time to contribute to this article just because of your passerby tagging. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 12:24, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

• Note that Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lumbersexual on the hipster fashion trend closed as " redirect to Lumberjack#In popular and folklore culture". (A merge I carried out since it had been decided but not enacted a year ago) Some real trends are more usefully documented as part of larger articles.E.M.Gregory (talk) 10:35, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Hipster Sexism Peer Review by Abigail

Overall I think you have a great start to this topic, you come out with a good statement of what hipster sexism is and how it is played out. One comment I will make is that a couple times in your article you mention that hipster sexism is applied to women, can hipster sexism be applied to men as well? Also I think yo could benefit from adding heading and subheadings throughout. You did a great job on the sources and carrying over the definition and relating it to your main points. I do think you could expand slightly on how hipster sexism is related to the company Thinx, maybe added some quantity data to make your point stronger, but all in all it is looking to be a very good article!

-Abigail Buckingham