Talk:Generation gap

message: Generation Jones fills the gap between Boomers and Xers, Baby Busters is a synonym for Generation X.  For more, see discussion pages for Baby Busters and Generation Jones.  21st century Susan 15:07, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This line is word for word identical with the cited reference(1)!
when older and younger people do not understand each other because of their different experiences, opinions, habits and behaviour:
someone needs to vet the whole article, and I'm nested way too deep right now.
<B>Fra</B>nkB 09:44, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Installing COPYVIO 

message: Not to burst anyones bubble but Gen X and Baby Boomers possess no gap other than Generation Jones, and this was not coming out from the 80s - which was instead the birth of the gap between X and the newer unfounded "Y" generation, this gap being the MTV Generation which has more similarities with the original Lost Generation due to the problems and social issues both have begun to face currently. Piecraft 13:55, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Several generations ignored 

message: This article needs a lot of cleanup. I almost want to nominate it for deletion (due to the childlike typos and grammar found in the bulk of this stub), but there's a little voice in the back of my mind that suggests this article could gain some references, prose, and eventually GA/FA status.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.111.40.194 (talk) 23:28, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  BIG cleanup 

message: I came to this article by following a link from Chinese_democracy_movement#Current situation. China has a generation gap between those born before and after the Cultural Revolution. The Etruscans employed the concept of the saeculum, originally referencing the period of time from the moment that something happened (for example the founding of a city) until the point in time that all people who had lived at the first moment had died. There is no doubt there is a generational heartbeat in the evolution of politics, society, and culture (in my words, the "psychosphere"). Maybe I'll enjoy reading this article someday. (Sorry, I don't have the sources to expand the article myself.)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.111.40.194 (talk) 23:45, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Amero-centrism  

message: You have one reference for all this information...looks like original research to me. Either come up with some verifiable sources or cut it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.110.43.95 (talk) 23:51, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Is any of this cited? 

message: A year later, and apparently not much improvement.  This article seems pretty well written, but I am also concerned that the majority of it is original research.  Are there any regular editors to this article whom might be able to do a little citation legwork?  //Blaxthos ( t / c ) 15:44, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original research 

message: The article doesn't seem to have received recent revisions. Who is responsible for working on it or deleting it? The topic could be developed. 
Prof2long (talk) 10:09, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  General Suggestions 

message: Any expert--demographer, sociologist, or other expert--discussing the current generation gaps automatically includes GenJones. Why wouldn't Wiki do the same, since the goal is for Wiki readers to be given an accurate depiction of current thinking?
The concept and name “Generation Jones” has achieved widespread acceptance and usage, especially in the last year or so. The Associated Press’ annual Trend Report chose The Rise of Generation Jones as the #1 trend of 2009. Many very influential experts, pundits, and analysts have publicly supported the GenJones constructs, from media outlets including The New York Times, Newsweek, NBC, Time Magazine, CNN, MSNBC, etc. Books about generations now almost always automatically treat GenJones as a full bona fide generation. 
If interested in exploring some of the major support GenJones has gotten, you may want to check some of these links out…
This 6 minute video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Ta_Du5K0jk) features over 20 top pundits expressing support for GenJones, including :
David Brooks (New York Times) 
Karen Tumulty (Time Magazine) 
Dick Morris (Political Advisor)
Roland Martin (CNN) 
Jeff Greenfield (CBS) 
Michael Steele (Chairman, GOPAC) 
Doyle McManus ( Los Angeles Times)
Chris Van Hollen (Chairman, DCCC) 
Stuart Rothenberg (Roll Call) 
Karen Brown (CBS) 
Michael Barone (U.S. News & World Report) 
Juan Williams (Fox News Channel) 
Howard Wolfson (Political Advisor) 
Susan Page ( USA Today) 
Mel Martinez (U.S. Senator [R-Florida])
Lynn Sweet ( Chicago Sun-Times) 
Bill Press (Fox News Channel) 
Carl Leubsdorf ( Dallas Morning News) 
Al Sharpton (Activist, Minister) 
Here is a full page column about GenJones by Jonathan Alter in Newsweek:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/107583
Here is a column about GenJones by Pulitzer Prize winning columnist Clarence Page in The Chicago Tribune:
http://archives.chicagotribune.com/2008/oct/22/news/chi-oped1022pageoct22
And here is video of Clarence Page bringing up GenJones on NBC:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6uZSiKd0B54
All of the above are recent (in the last year or so,) and there are many more recent ones, as well as many more from earlier years. You can find many more on this page: http://generationjones.com/2009latest.html ,as well as in the reference section of the Generation Jones article, as well as in the talk pages of the various generation pages on Wikipedia, as well as many thousands of GenJones references on Google.
If you for any reason want to revert this edit, let's please avoid an edit war and discuss possible changes here on the talk page; please give detailed and sourced reasons why you think this edit should be reverted. Thank you.TreadingWater (talk) 23:12, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Why Generation Jones needs to be included in this article

message: "From a transformation of the dating system (going steady and early marriage became the norm, as opposed to the "rating and dating" trend that was fashionable before the war), to new medium of television gaining widespread popularity and often portraying teenagers as juvenile delinquents. 'JDs' followed the standard black, The War in Southeast Asia, and the rise of counter-culture hippies during the mid and late 1960s with diverging opinions about the draft and military involvement in Vietnam as well as the use of drugs were significant topics of the generation gap of this era."
I think I can see what that sentence is trying to say, but it's so poorly written it's impossible to follow. Would anyone care to rewrite it? Robofish (talk) 14:09, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It was vandalized a number of times. Going back through the history there was a long lead in. I partly restored it. Here's what I left out.
Teenagers prior to World War II were expected to take life seriously. Young males were expected to join the military and/or go out and get a job in order to help bring in money for their family.
Young females were taught how to take care of the household and prepare themselves to be a dutiful wife and take care of children. Also, teenagers in the late 1930s had very little economic freedom, independence, and input into decision.
In the 1950s, this changed. The United States emerged from the War the most powerful and
affluent nation in the world. The economy picked up and teenagers began experiencing a great deal of economic freedom and independence. The "American Dream" was born, but at the same time there was a fear of losing America's prosperity and security. The focus for much of the fear over what America was becoming was youth -  it was an adult obsession and shared assumption that young people lacked the discipline and get-up-and-go that had made America great.''
--Quartet 23:10, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  This sentence is gibberish 

message: My language class is having my group add to a wiki article that relates to language. Our group wants to study the generational language gap. Over the next few weeks we will be trying to add to this article, probably 3-6 paragraphs. We are will to take any constructive criticisms and would appreciate and editing done to what we write. Kulosle (talk) 04:01, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Generational Language Gap 

message: There is a new a major generation gap going on now. It involves the Internet. Here is a video that details the subject. It is at this URL: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/kidsonline/.
Anonymous71.164.209.8 (talk) 04:14, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Internet Gap 

message: Most of that section might do better in an article about the postwar history of the USA. There is very little discussion of the generation gaps in it! 99.108.47.68 (talk) 04:27, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed, the vast majority of this article is totally off-topic. This is basically a pop-sociology/history of the US in the 1960s. The majority seems to have been added last February/March by an anonymous user. The user seems to have a fairly checkered history of using non-sourced/copyvio materials so I'm inclined to axe the whole section without moving it to other articles. The article needs a major clean-up even beside the issue of off-topic inclusions. Any objections? Peregrine981 (talk) 13:55, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  section 1 is waaaay too long 

message: Under the heading "Technological Influences", a sleep study is used as an example.  Different age groups put different emphasis on their sleep requirements, based on their home and work requirements, it has nothing to do with a generation gap.  The older the person, the more responsibilities and people depending on them, and therefore the greater requirement for sleep.  A married adult with children isn't going to be texting his friends from work every night before bed, esp. when performing well at work is essential to the entire family.  If you want to include tech. use, look up ownership rates: adults own more personal computers and laptops, and young people own more phones.
Da9iel (talk) 11:40, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  A sleep study is not an example of a generation gap 

message: We are way behind here. While my experience with Mellineals seems to verify the general findings of the main article, there needs to be more study done into attitudes between generations, and what psychological results we are seeing amongst Melinneals, as well as all generations. With the potential of Wikipedia, these articles should be more comprehensive. Just my thoughts. 
70.181.230.61 (talk) 20:13, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Research is generally correct from what I observe... But more work on society needs to be done 

message: What does the article (or section) do well? 
I find the article very interesting. I like the way the author distributed the article information, the different sections he has chosen to write about and the amount of information he includes in each of them. I also think, the article is well written and easy to understand, what makes it more appealing to read through it. It has a neutral point of view and there are no signs of personal opinions.
What changes would you suggest overall?
I will make a format change on the sections and categorize Generational Consciousness, Intergenerational living and Demographics at the same level of Distinguishing generation gap. I also will add a little bit more information on the Lead Section, so the audience get a more general idea of the article.
The sources need to be more trustworthy and come from scholar resources is possible.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ana Estrada (talk • contribs) 20:55, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer Review 

message: This article is almost entirely WP:OR. It really needs to be redone from scratch. JQ (talk) 10:44, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original Research 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Generation gap. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140606205004/http://mediazioni.sitlec.unibo.it/ to http://mediazioni.sitlec.unibo.it/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:44, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Generation gap. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070716123559/http://employeeevolution.com/ to http://www.employeeevolution.com/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:42, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The article is a stub and should show the cycle of every generation gap since the early 20th century. The Lost Generation's more liberal turn after Worl War I, the Greatest Generation's demonization of war during WWII and opposition against white supremacist groups, the Silent Generation's questioning the racial and sexual segregation of the 50s, the Baby Boomers' freedom of expression and so forth. Therefore the article needs to be expanded.--2001:8003:8560:3D00:F814:6996:5CDA:D0E (talk) 14:03, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Each Generation Needs Clarification of their Differences 

message: — Assignment last updated by CDSFortin (talk) 16:52, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Adult Development Spring 2023

message: I think this article has a lot of potential. Although there may be some confusing spots and missing information, with a few edits it could be a great source of information. In the Lead it mentions beliefs and politics but then does not address either in the article itself, these points could be added in. For the topics that are talked about they could use more information that is applicable and more recent sources since the most recent one is from 2013. I don't think it should be taken off; more effort needs to go into making it better. CDSFortin (talk) 15:14, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Great Potential