|Generation 9/11 was nominated for deletion. The debate was closed on 28 December 2010 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Generation Z. The original page is now a redirect to here. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.|
|The content of Pluralist Generation was merged into Generation Z on 11 January 2013. That page now redirects here. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see ; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page.|
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Generation Z article.|
|Archives: 1, 2|
|WikiProject Sociology||(Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)|
|This page was previously nominated for deletion. Please review the discussions if considering re-nomination:|
Delete the fashion section
First of all, no Gen Zer was into fashion in the early 00s, when the oldest members would be like, six years old. Second of all, even if they were, that fashion surely counts Gen Y too, who were also young in the 00s?
Introduction paragraph reference to "iGen"
126.96.36.199 wants to include "iGen" in the introduction paragraph but there are not alot of news sources (or academics) who refer to the cohort by that name. I move to remove it and leave it under the terminology section with the reference intact as it has been for some time. "iGen" also has a commercial connotation. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 16:03, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Special section for iGen and Plurals name needed?
184.108.40.206 wants to have special catagories for the names "iGen" and "Plurals". If so, please provide us with your reasons for -- or against below:
(1) Not needed -- this term was used in the past for Millennials. See http://jezebel.com/millennials-dont-know-shit-about-clothing-care-1646751839 and http://adage.com/article/news/igen-influential-peers-household-buying-decisions/230427/
"Back in 2006, Twenge, says she used the term "iGen" in a brief reference in a book she'd written. At that time, there was no iPhone or iPad. But there was an iPod and, yes, an iMac computer. She remembers getting the idea while driving to visit her mother-in-law, who lives north of San Francisco. Maybe it was because she was driving so close to Silicon Valley. It just popped into her head, she says, that iGen would be a great name for a generation — and for her book. She pleaded with the publisher to change the book's title, but the publisher found the term confusing and stuck with Generation Me: Why Today's Young Americans are More Confident, Assertive, Entitled and More Miserable than Ever Before".
The above book (Generation Me) is about the Millennials and younger Gen Xers -- not Gen Z. See the back cover.
(2) Not needed -- the term has a commercial connotation to it.
Generation C introduction
I believe perhaps in USA Generation Z is a global adoption, but please have a look into: , we do use a lot also the Generation C. I don't want to argue, just add a missing additionnal world, was absolutly not told the previous version. I beg your pardon if not correctly writed, I add a few references into 'further reading'. Best regards --PaKo (talk) 15:10, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
- PaKo, you've got the wrong article. This article defines Generation Z as "...one name used for the cohort of people born after the Millennial Generation." One of your sources describes Generation C as "...a term coined by Nielsen and Booz Allen Consulting in 20101 to describe millennials." --NeilN talk to me 15:50, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
- Interesting Google NGram posted by PaKo above but it shows discussion in books about the terms "Gen Z" and "Gen C" back in 1980? I don't think that could be right. 220.127.116.11 (talk) 03:28, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
Additional of Centennials to the Generation Z page
Hi, I saw that you deleted my entry to the Generation Z page - this was actually my first contribution so I am not sure what I did wrong... I added the term Centennials as another popular name referring to Gen Z, which seemed to be in line with the rest of the content on the page and I thought it was an important addition. Below are some links to recent articles that reference this. Can you explain what I did or didn't do? Thanks
This has been widely used in the media: below are some links to recent articles that reference this:
- Emsparenti, I have copied your post to my talk page here, so other interested editors can participate in the discussion. The change you made requires sources that show that Centennials is a more popular alternative name for Generation Z than the other alternates listed in the Terminology section. --NeilN talk to me 22:03, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
New info box added
This info box makes the range of dates very confusing. Why add another layer to what the lede already says. The lede was debated over a long period of time. Please see the talk page. 2606:6000:610A:9000:1D0F:636F:39A:867D (talk) 20:48, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
- Agreed. The year info adds nothing. --NeilN talk to me 12:16, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Oh, you are THAT IP....
Direct quotes are not required; a reasonable rewording of the source data supports the contribution that you reverted with this diff. But, as I have had to deal with you before, I will bow out of this "discussion" and let you have your little playground before you go running to an admin over it. It's just not worth it. Oh, wait - you already did. ScrpIronIV 18:48, 11 August 2015 (UTC)