Talk:Lad culture

POV issue

In regards to the POV issue: The statement "The New Man image, that could be perceived as namby-pamby, failed to appeal to a wide readership. The more adolescent Lad culture appeals to the ordinary man more." is dubious for an Encyclopedia. The use of "namby-pamby" is clearly negative, and not directly attributed to an outside critic. There is no source given for the statement that New Men magazines "failed to appeal to a wide readership." - nor even any indication of what a "wide readership" might be (GQ is still in business, after all). Additionally, the term "ordinary man" is vague and a bit weasel-y. If the author cited uses the term specifically, then that should be indicated. Otherwise, it should be replaced with a better term.

Unless the usage of this statement can be justified, I suggest that it be removed from the article. It seems not to add anything relevant beyond what already precedes it.

— —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.49.140.245 (talk) 19:02, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I like the oxymoronic title. 80.2.171.76 (talk) 16:23, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nominated for deletion

This is really original research. -Dnavarro (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:31, 31 July 2009 (UTC).[reply]

It seems pretty well referenced to me. You should either complete the AfD process (you haven't, by the way) or remove the AfD notice from the article. —Neuro (talk) 01:11, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the AfD notice from the article; I'm clearly not aware, speaking in earnest, of how the full AfD process works, and I'm not willing to invest the energy either. I though I'd just be raising a flag for a delete/keep discussion. I know I wasn't quite articulate in my nomination justification either. I'll say this in the interest of full disclosure, and not of passive-aggression or sarcasm -- I'm too tired doing stuff I get paid for, which are entirely unrelated to this topic, to carry on with the process. Dnavarro (talk) 22:40, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This page has been transwikied to Wiktionary.
The article has content that is useful at Wiktionary. Therefore the article can be found at either here or here (logs 1 logs 2.)
Note: This means that the article has been copied to the Wiktionary Transwiki namespace for evaluation and formatting. It does not mean that the article is in the Wiktionary main namespace, or that it has been removed from Wikipedia's. Furthermore, the Wiktionarians might delete the article from Wiktionary if they do not find it to be appropriate for the Wiktionary.
Removing this tag will usually trigger CopyToWiktionaryBot to re-transwiki the entry. This article should have been removed from Category:Copy to Wiktionary and should not be re-added there.

Context?

There's not really enough context here for someone (me) who isn't familiar with British subcultures to understand the subject. Could someone expand the article? Lad culture is a reaction against the New Man culture? What's that? "Initially a product of men's magazines" - please describe those magazines and what is laddish about them and let us know how important they are in British society. Listing movies and TV shows that have lad culture in them is not very helpful to people who haven't been exposed to them - please explain about the characters or situations in the movies and shows that portray lad culture. The Edwards quote says "the New Lad image dominates the New Man image," implying that lad culture has some prominence in British society - please say something about this at the beginning of the article.

Thanks. I don't think this is AFD-worthy, because the subject does seem to be significant, but the article really needs more work to make sense to people who don't already know what lad culture is. Aardnavark (talk) 12:26, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's hard to reference this kind of thing. New Lad was very briefly ubiquitous in comedy sketch shows, newspaper columns etc but it hasn't left a tangible, referenceable trace, unless someone has a pile of old newspapers lying about. Essentially it was the adoption of the trappings of working class hooligan culture by the middle class, but with the genuine violence and racism taken out; especially with the racism taken out. It was a kind of self-aware boorishness. New Man in turn was a media buzz-phrase in the early 1990s that was invented to describe a supposed new wave of male touchy-feely sensitivity in the post-80s "greed is good" / shoulderpads age. It was Paul Gascoigne crying at Italia '90, and Ghost, and thirtysomething with a lower-case "t". -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 20:45, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

While I'm not deeply familiar with British pop culture, I have some familiarity with it (as far as BBC America allows) and I've never heard this term before. Yet, that doesn't make it difficult for me to grasp the thrust of this entry. It is well-written enough that it makes its' point and has judicious references for those who would learn more.

reference dump

could someone just dump (maybe a list) a cartload of cite-able information on the discussion page. That way one can come along, shift through the source material, and write a decent article. I would do it, but Google pretty much gives me nothing. Thanks, Piratejosh85 (talk) 02:26, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Have added sources as suggested, but into the article. Does this resolve the POV issue, and can the neutrality tag now be removed? Jacobisq (talk) 08:46, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]