Talk:Cultural icon

message: While reading through this page, I found it to be a little too specific to the UK. Could we add other cultural references to it, especially if it's something non-Western.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mllemonique (talk • contribs) 17:09, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too UK-centric 

message: Again there has been an attempt to turn this article into an unsourced image gallery of original research.   I outlined the problems with this previously here.  This article is about the concept of cultural icons.  It is not the place to create a list of what some editors think are cultural icons, without any references. Particularly when they're factually suspect.  --Escape Orbit (Talk) 23:03, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lists by Country 

message: Why only a photo of stuff related US. Wikipedia is active all around the world. I think there should be no photo. If there is no reply here by 1st July, I will strongly consider removing it. WARNER one--9999 (talk) 14:46, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: That stuff isn't even popularly understood to be an American cultural icon in USA today (2018). It should be some Indian stuff like Buddha or something 173.88.130.255 (talk) 02:34, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why only USA cultural icon 

message: There are a number of references e.g. "Foudy et al, 2003" that are incomplete and therefore useless to find the source. Btljs (talk) 06:20, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: References

message: I'm not sure that the article should be quite so hung up on the over-usage of the term. This is an encyclopaedia article ABOUT the subject NOT the term itself. It would be more interesting to find out the processes which lead to iconic status and see whether these have changed. Someone somewhere will always be moaning about use of some word to mean something it didn't when they were younger and the world was golden. It's totally not NPOV to imply that Spongebob Squarepants has any less right to be called iconic than, say Madonna (I had to re-read this as I thought it meant the mother of Christ, who is, after all, an icon). Btljs (talk) 06:20, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Over-usage

message: Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
The "Cultural Icon" article on wikipedia seems quite short for an entry rated Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Counting 457 words excluding references, it has significant less content than similarly important entries. Other examples of Mid-importance articles provided by wikipedia include:
* Titan in fiction, which contains 2,938 words.
* Cultural depictions of Joan of Arc, which contains 8,728 words.
* Space warfare in fiction, which contains 2086 words. Although this is the shortest example article, it also contains 10 "See also" links to additional content.
The small amount of content in the article overrepresent some examples and fails to explain the importance of cultural icons. In it's brief introduction, the article begins with a definition of cultural icons and explains the term is used in many fields. Some believe the term is heavily overused and misused, which may explain the lack of detail in the article. Beyond the introduction, "Cultural Icon" focuses mainly on types of cultural icons and examples of the various types. Examples from London are overrepresented compared to the other nations and cultures mentioned. Furthermore, many predominant countries and cultures are excluded completely. The final section of the article focuses on the use of cultural icons in popular cultures, where the overuse of the term has lead to its criticism.
Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
The information is not out of date, but the article could use many additions. I took the point about the overuse as a reason by wikipedia editors to leave the article in its short form. However, I conjecture that this point is slightly biased to the use of the term in the media. A more complete version of the article could describe the history of cultural icons, provide a more varied and uniform approach to highlighting examples and explain what led the terms overuse.
GlasHero (talk) 17:11, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Evaluation of this article 

message: *No - Keeping the image of Madonna opens the page up for editors to add their favorite pop-stars. There are countless cultural media icons so narrowing it down to just adding an image of Madonna would be cherry-picking. Meatsgains (talk) 17:09, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Cultural icon. 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/20101225101358/http://www.christianexaminer.com/Articles/Articles%20Aug09/Art_Aug09_oped2.html to http://www.christianexaminer.com/Articles/Articles%20Aug09/Art_Aug09_oped2.html
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) 10:34, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The redirect Icon (secular) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  🌺 Cremastra  (talk) 00:46, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Icon (secular)]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]