Talk:Hippie: Difference between revisions
→Why does hipster redirect here?: new section |
m Signing comment by 68.183.100.74 - "→Why does hipster redirect here?: new section" |
||
Line 86: | Line 86: | ||
Seems they're very different things, at least when comparing 60s hippies to modern hipsters -- totally different. |
Seems they're very different things, at least when comparing 60s hippies to modern hipsters -- totally different. |
||
If you all really want to present them as the same thing, it would warrant a new section for modern hipsters in the hippie article. |
If you all really want to present them as the same thing, it would warrant a new section for modern hipsters in the hippie article. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/68.183.100.74|68.183.100.74]] ([[User talk:68.183.100.74|talk]]) 13:40, 15 May 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
Revision as of 13:41, 15 May 2013
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hippie article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7Auto-archiving period: 3 months |
Hippie was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Former good article nominee |
This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
Breathtaking POV
I can't think of a stronger example of POV than the attribution of the long list of social advances to whatever it is this article refers to but I removed the tag from the Legacy § for the usual reason given in the log. It's also amusing to see the typical etymology job on a word you saw come into existence. I doubt any etymology is valid, it was just there at the right time when the subculture emerged that would receive it as a label. Geo. Carlins hippie-dippy weatherman was apparently first performed in '67 and I'm sure Steve Allen and Louis Nye used the term before that. 72.228.177.92 (talk)
"Hippies use side door"
What's the story benind those signs? Thanks 219.78.115.187 (talk) 12:25, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
- As far as I know, it was designed to treat hippies like black people were treated—as second-class citizens. In the pre-Civil Rights era, blacks were only allowed to use side-entrances in many parts of the U.S. I don't know if the signs were intended to be serious or not, or a way to annoy hippies since they supported Civil Rights for blacks. Viriditas (talk) 22:28, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
looking for picture
dangitall * what happened to the picture that was at the top before it was replaced by the present woman * i wanted it as an example of the lame stereotypes a hippie isn*t * is it in a history of the site somewhere * 75.147.48.65 (talk) 15:15, 6 December 2012 (UTC)grumpy
Origins of the words 'hip' and 'hep'
I've identified three sources that cite 'hip' originating from 'hep', which itself originated in the very early 1900s (1903-1908), though how or where is uncertain. Therefore, I've removed the part of the introduction that stated that the origins were "certainly" of African American roots. Here are the three sources, in case I am reverted again and they are not showing on the main article:
- 1) http://www.britannica.com/bps/dictionary?query=hep
- 2) http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hep?show=0&t=1361648094
- 3) http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=hep
Randomocity999 (talk) 19:44, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- The origins of the term before 1903-1908 may be uncertain, but the modern sense of the word coming from the African-American jive era slang of c. 1940 is verifiably cited to Sheidlower and should not be removed again. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 19:50, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- I looked up your last source and very interestingly, it says "hip" is attested in 1904 as "apparently black slang", and "hep" not until four years later, in 1908, as "underworld slang". Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 20:08, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- The origins of the word and its meaning are cited by three independent sources as being uncertain, with no mention of African-American origin. Therefore, I find your conclusions inaccurate. Perhaps there is some indication of African-American influence on the term, but more likely, given the available references, its meaning is simply of unknown origin, therefore to state "with certainty" that it is of such origin is simply unsupported.Randomocity999 (talk) 20:14, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- Just go to the third source you gave, etymonline, and then click the link from there to the entry for "hip". There it says "hip" is found in 1904 as "apparently black slang". Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 20:18, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- I removed that part of my previous comment because I found it. The point is that no source claims certainty; the one source of mine that does intimate African American influence claims it loosely (apparently). Therefore, the intro language should be softened to more accurately reflect the available evidence. The intro doesn't even have the year correct: it states 1940s, while the sources provided indicate a much earlier origin, and not necessarily African American. Randomocity999 (talk) 20:21, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- It is certainly stated in most sources that by the 1940s it was primarily black jazz and jive slang, and that's exactly what the article correctly states. Before that is less cetain, and that's also what the article correctly states. What is the problem? Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 20:26, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- I removed that part of my previous comment because I found it. The point is that no source claims certainty; the one source of mine that does intimate African American influence claims it loosely (apparently). Therefore, the intro language should be softened to more accurately reflect the available evidence. The intro doesn't even have the year correct: it states 1940s, while the sources provided indicate a much earlier origin, and not necessarily African American. Randomocity999 (talk) 20:21, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- Just go to the third source you gave, etymonline, and then click the link from there to the entry for "hip". There it says "hip" is found in 1904 as "apparently black slang". Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 20:18, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- The origins of the word and its meaning are cited by three independent sources as being uncertain, with no mention of African-American origin. Therefore, I find your conclusions inaccurate. Perhaps there is some indication of African-American influence on the term, but more likely, given the available references, its meaning is simply of unknown origin, therefore to state "with certainty" that it is of such origin is simply unsupported.Randomocity999 (talk) 20:14, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
Randomocity999, your insistence on eliminating this seems like edit-warrring to me. Sheidlower is a noted authority, and if he says the word gained currency in African American culture, I trust his take. No one is arguing for African linguistic origins, which was your original basis for eliminating the reference. Apostle12 (talk) 20:37, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- The problem is that the first clause references "ultimate derivation", while the second clause references "clearly inherited": this is misleading because it can be seen as implying ultimate derivation from African American culture, which is not what the sources state, at least not anywhere near the level of "clearly"; that's my beef. Randomocity999 (talk) 20:42, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- For the word "hip" (or "hep") to be "clearly inherited" from African American culture (based on reliable sources) is not the same thing as saying that the "ultimate derivation" of this word is unknown. Somehow African Americans started to use the word, and it crept into the language of the Beats and the Hippies, that's all we're saying. What we are not saying is that the word itself is derived from a Wolof word or that we can otherwise trace its origins to ancient African culture. I presume you know that Jesse Sheidlower edits the Oxford English Dictionary. [1] Apostle12 (talk) 20:57, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- Many people edit the Oxford English Dictionary, though I was not aware that Sheidlower was among them. That's beyond my point, however; the manner of phrasing, with clause one referencing "ultimate derivation" and clause two referencing "clearly inherited", is misleading, pure and simple. It can be better phrased to lessen the implication that the ultimate derivation of the terms (and their meanings) flowed originally from African American culture. Randomocity999 (talk) 21:02, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- For the word "hip" (or "hep") to be "clearly inherited" from African American culture (based on reliable sources) is not the same thing as saying that the "ultimate derivation" of this word is unknown. Somehow African Americans started to use the word, and it crept into the language of the Beats and the Hippies, that's all we're saying. What we are not saying is that the word itself is derived from a Wolof word or that we can otherwise trace its origins to ancient African culture. I presume you know that Jesse Sheidlower edits the Oxford English Dictionary. [1] Apostle12 (talk) 20:57, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- Why don't you write a new version that you believe more clearly conveys the reality (which we all agree on) and submit it here for review, comment, and editing so we can arrive at consensus? That's the hippie way, after all. :-) Apostle12 (talk) 21:05, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- In classic hippie fashion, I've lost interest and am thus unmotivated to further pursue this. Perhaps the "but" can be replaced with "though"? Randomocity999 (talk) 21:42, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- Change has been made; thanks for the suggestion. Actually most of us original hippies were quite motivated people. Apostle12 (talk) 00:18, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
- In classic hippie fashion, I've lost interest and am thus unmotivated to further pursue this. Perhaps the "but" can be replaced with "though"? Randomocity999 (talk) 21:42, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- Why don't you write a new version that you believe more clearly conveys the reality (which we all agree on) and submit it here for review, comment, and editing so we can arrive at consensus? That's the hippie way, after all. :-) Apostle12 (talk) 21:05, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- Random has just been blocked for edit-warring (interestingly, at a different page, at the same time as the multiple reverts to this page), and so won't be able to (if he chooses to) respond to queries until his block is released.--Epeefleche (talk) 22:25, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
Alternate Spelling?
I have no idea why I'm thinking this but I used to think that hippy was an acceptable/alternate spelling. Is it?--71.131.179.39 (talk) 08:31, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
- According to Merriam-Webster you are correct. I changed the lead sentence to reflect this. Thanks! — alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 13:36, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Why does hipster redirect here?
Seems they're very different things, at least when comparing 60s hippies to modern hipsters -- totally different.
If you all really want to present them as the same thing, it would warrant a new section for modern hipsters in the hippie article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.183.100.74 (talk) 13:40, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
- ^ To say "I'm hip to the situation" means "I am aware of the situation. See: Sheidlower, Jesse (2004-12-08), Crying Wolof: Does the word hip really hail from a West African language?, Slate Magazine, retrieved 2007-05-07
{{citation}}
: Italic or bold markup not allowed in:|publisher=
(help)
- Former good article nominees
- Old requests for peer review
- All unassessed articles
- B-Class sociology articles
- Low-importance sociology articles
- B-Class fashion articles
- Mid-importance fashion articles
- B-Class California articles
- Mid-importance California articles
- B-Class San Francisco Bay Area articles
- High-importance San Francisco Bay Area articles
- San Francisco Bay Area task force articles
- WikiProject California articles