Talk:Millennials

Why not make it scientific and graph it?

Why doesn't anyone graph the birthrate for America? The baby boom of the late 40's to early 60's was how they defined the boomers, so why not do that with the Xers? If you strictly go by the graph, the boomers are from 1945 to 1959, X is 1960 to 1975, and Y would be 1976 to 1991. This creates some problems, because the "boom", which really started in 1946 due to the huge increase from the previous year, was still going, despite it starting to decline, as more than 4 million babies were born each year from 1960 to 1964. Also, the births in 1976, 1977 and 1978 were still below the 3.5 million mark, and don't reach it until 1979- if you round. So, looking purely at the numbers, the three generations would be:

1946-1964: Boomers; 1965-1978: Gen X; 1979-1994: Gen Y

Here are the numbers from the U.S. Census report:

1940: 2,559,000; 1945: 2,858,000; 1950: 3,632,000; 1952: 3,913,000; 1953: 3,965,000; 1954: 4,078,000; 1955: 4,104,000; 1956: 4,218,000; 1957: 4,308,000; 1958: 4,255,000; 1959: 4,295,000; 1960: 4,257,850; 1961: 4,268,326; 1962: 4,167,362; 1963: 4,098,020; 1964: 4,027,490; 1965: 3,760,358; 1966: 3,606,274; 1967: 3,520,959; 1968: 3,501,564; 1969: 3,600,206; 1970: 3,731,386; 1971: 3,555,970; 1972: 3,258,411; 1973: 3,136,965; 1974: 3,159,958; 1975: 3,144,198; 1976: 3,167,788; 1977: 3,326,632; 1978: 3,333,279; 1979: 3,494,398; 1980: 3,612,258; 1982: 3,680,537; 1983: 3,638,933; 1984: 3,669,141; 1985: 3,760,561; 1986: 3,731,000; 1987: 3,829,000; 1988: 3,913,000; 1989: 4,021,000; 1990: 4,179,000; 1991: 4,111,000; 1992: 4,084,000; 1993: 4,039,000; 1994: 3,979,000;

Plus, those born from 1979 on were the first cohert to come of age (21) starting in 2000.

What's this (US Only) crap in regards to Generation Jones?

Oh... I get it! 1954-1964 only happened in the good ol' US of A. Yanks.... just keep on offending the rest of the world with their self-centred crap. Or should I type, CENTERED. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.239.208.43 (talk) 11:07, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

centred could be mispronounced as cent-red so is demonstrably less efficient and more error-prone than centered

different countries have different names and generations that is all--Wikiscribe (talk) 20:15, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not really the place for your ill-advised insults. Generation Jones crap? I haven't a clue what you're talking about, but GenJones has not just developed a large following in the U.S, but also in many other, particularly European countries.

I’ve removed the Strauss and Howe chart, which belongs only on the Strauss and Howe page. By putting that chart on each generation page, it gives a false impression to readers that that chart represents an official or widely-accepted list of generations, which is certainly not the case. While Strauss and Howe have contributed to our knowledge about generations, their theories are still very controversial, and have become very discredited in some circles. Many generations experts, for example, strongly disagree with the long length of their generational constructs. In any event, it was very misleading to put that chart on other pages than theirs.

I’ve also added in the reference to Generation Jones because it was incorrect otherwise; Gen Xers are primarily the offspring of Baby Boomers, while Gen Yers are primarily the offspring of Generation Jones.Wendy 2012 (talk) 02:52, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Not really. Here in the Philippines and the Asean Region as a whole (formerly known as South-East Asia Region), Generation cut-offs and names are the same as the rest of the world. Even though some will argue there are differences, but if we go deeper and understand and analyze things objectively, we start to see and realize how similar the Eastern Hemisphere to the Western Hemisphere. First video game there? Same year here. High birthrate? Same year here. The list goes on. So I for one believe the "US Only" should be removed or re-worded or be defined more clearly as to "what IS" "US-only". --- Laibcoms (talk | Contribs) 12:53, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

A Conversation from the talk page of %%-SYKKO-%% (talk to me)

Thanks I've added another reference justifying the point about Generation Y being labeled as 'Civics' and 'Nation Builders'. It is a common label they are often given. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jreconomy (talk • contribs) 00:09, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

you provided a really great link there! which is to a well-worded article. but I dont think it really goes in line with the terms "civic" or "federation generation" perhaps between the 2 of us we could come up with a good way to rewrite the statement to reach what it is that you are trying to say. I think if we drop the reference to Federation generation and instead say something to the effect that:

The generation is sometimes defined as "Civics", characterised as wealth creators and nation builders. They are sometimes described as an "overachieving, overscheduled" generation

with a single ref that points to the smh article... what do you think about that? shoot back a revision if you think there should be a way to word it better.

by the way, perhaps we should take this to the article's Talk Page what do you think? %%-SYKKO-%% (talk to me)

Thats fine, but I think the quotations from the authors (the "civic minded heros") should stay in there —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jreconomy (talk • contribs) 00:11, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Why do you feel that the phrase is so important? part of why I question the phrase is because it really is on the edge of being a problem for NPOV. what if a reader were to come along who is critical of the generation and they read that and the entire credibility is shot for them because they see it as oppsing to their point of view? It really is best to abide by WP:NPOV because it adds the best tone possible to articles %%-SYKKO-%% (talk to me) 00:20, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I went ahead and made the edit. %%-SYKKO-%% (talk to me) 14:50, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay, thats fine, I agree with your change —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jreconomy (talk • contribs) 07:19, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Ever revolving time frames!!!

Ok, I understand that the time frame on Gen Y tends to be defined differently by several publications, but something I constantly see on this article is one person changes one of the sets of dates, and another person comes in and either changes it back, or worse only changes part of it and then another person still comes in and edits it to some other set of dates.

What is really bad about this is that the generations time line is not consistent throughout the article. All I am asking is 2 things. If you change one of the sets of date ranges on the article, please either edit them all. If not, please make it clear when editing one of the time frames that it is an alternative view than other dates on the page.

Also, Please give refs on your dates! too many of these dates are being edited per WP:OR. all I am asking is that you please consider that this article is likely to be read by people who are interested in reliable information not opinions. Perhaps if we can clear that one thing up we could also start to improve the article to a point where it is more encyclopedic. In the mean time I am going to tag this article with wikify cleanup and will try to come back and write a properly referenced section about the time frame of births of the generation and how they tend to vary. %%-SYKKO-%% (talk to me) 14:50, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

The best thing to do would be to mention which sources give which dates. I don't know what the primary sources for the dates are, though... journalists and authors have used various dates, but I don't know where they're drawing their information from.--Father Goose (talk) 20:37, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

True, which is why I plan to write a new section for the article explaining the variance in reported dates... the same thing could potentially help out other generation articles as well actually :) %%-SYKKO-%% (talk to me) 22:41, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Thats a good plan. Right now the dates are 1980-1994, but according to some accounts that even overlaps with Generation Z. We need a section to explain different dates, or how certain Generations can overlap give or take a few years. For instance a child born in 1990 to a mother who was in Generation Jones probably has more in common with Generation Z, who were born to Generation X which was only a few years apart from Generation Jones, Jones was sandwhiched between X'ers and the Boomers. Thats much different than say a child born in 1984 or 85 to a Baby Boomer who is now in their early 60s and nearing retirement.Rumble74

Please change the Gen Y start date to 1977

This will include ALL members of this generation. No discrepancies.

The youngest members were born in 1994.

There are 3x sub-cohorts/waves to this generation:

1) 1977-1983(4) (Core Net Generation)

2) 1984(5)-1989 (Core Millenial Generation)

3) 1990-1994 (Core/Cusper Millenial Generation)

Each of these sub-groups share roughly similar life/cultural experiences, and attitudes towards work, technology, politics, religion, etc.

What demarcates the (American) Generation Y from previous and subsequent generations is their coming of age during (b. 1977-85), or their strong memory and capacity to appreciate (b. 1986-94), the transition into the digital/information age. Most members can still appreciate the pre-internet/digital society.

Individuals born after 1995 (when internet became mainstream (i.e. AOL)) are of a different generation because they are (currently) coming of age when digital/internet technology has been firmly established and deeply integrated into society.

Added a few sources here:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m4467/is_2_54/ai_59949724
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/259995
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/brainiac/2008/03/net_generation.html

jlh629 (talk) 18:50, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

While I agree with you 100% and have always heard of the start date as late 70's (with 1977 being the most common) I think that the internet is publishing different information than what I had seen previously. Unfortunately I couldn't find any of the sources that I had read nearly 10 years ago about generation y so I just went with one of the sources that I could find, one that included the majority of what I know it to be. The reason I insist on a reference for this is because this article has constantly been up for debate on 2 major things. The first being the name (which you can see by browsing this talk page) and the second being the date range (which I have seen some argue is as late as the mid 90's). I will do some more searching again later, maybe collect some reference material in part of my user sandbox and will try to find something more reliable than what is currently up there. %%-SYKKO-%% (talk to me) 19:56, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Here's a source: http://www.usatoday.com/money/workplace/2005-11-06-gen-y_x.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.119.123.218 (talk) 01:10, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

If you use that article as reference you'll have to put the start date for gen y at 1976 not 1977 because that article date is from 2005 and states people who have not turned 30 yet hence people born in 1976 had not turned 30 yet in 2005,lets give a halt with this insistance with the inclusion of people born in the 70's as gen y starters, first off there is a bridge type generation already,its called the mtv generation people born from 75-85 these are people from gen x and gen y who share some bonds in other words cuspers some gen x will have a little gen y in them and vice versa. I can hardly believe that that would include only 2 years of gen x and 8 years of gen y,also a good reference for the start of gen y is gen x if you check a lot of the end dates for gen x it ends some where from 1980-1982 even on the gen x article now there are 2 reliable sources that would conclude the start date for gen y either in 1980-1982 gen y starts with the 80's most likley 1981 or 1982--TheGrailHermit (talk) 01:00, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

This article needs a major clean-up. The start of Generation Y is WIDELY ACCEPTED as those born between 1977 and 1994. Even the Gen-Y blog site makes this reference. The Washington Post states: "Lumped under millennials or generation Y, some in their 20s and early 30s..." (Washington Post). Furthermore, Inc. Magazine refers to Gen Y-ers as those born between 1977 and 1994 (Inc. Magazine). The O.C. Register also puts Generation Y as those born between 1977 and 1994 (O.C. Register). The Post Gazette echoes this sentiment: "Age is the obvious difference between the two: Generation X consists of those born between 1965 and 1976, Generation Y between 1977 and 1994" (Post Gazette). The Boston Globe define the generation the same way: 1977 to 1994 (Boston Globe). Not to exhaust the point, but The Chicago Tribune also states that Gen Y-ers are "those born between 1977 and 1994" (Chicago Tribune). --USLeatherneck (talk) 11:54, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Hold up you can't use terms like widley accepted particulary when we are talking about generations which is highly debateable people are still debateing the baby boomers and generation x start and finish dates,we should include all all sourced material on this subject, like some of these which have various dates for start date of this generation

[[1]] early 1980's

[[2]] 1981 or 1982

[[3]] 1980 or 1981

[[4]] 1982

[[5]] 1982

[[6]] 1981

[[7]] 1980

[[8]] 1981

[[9]] early 1980's

[[10]] 1981

[[11]] 1976

[[12] 1976

[[13]] 1976

[[14]] 1976

[[15]] 1979

[[16]] 1979

with all that said there are to many sources going in a 100 different directions there is no general consensus by sources on one start and finish date of millenials/gen y, so all dates must be used in the article in other words in the begining of the article have a span of possible starting states which would span as early as 1976 and starting as late as 1982(and everything in between of cousce) and ending as early as 1990 or as late as 2000 the article must contain all souced points of view on this sort of subject being generations are very subjective--TheGrailHermit (talk) 15:47, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Im not trying to play dueling sources but im just trying to bring out that there are enough varying differing opinions to include all sourced years--TheGrailHermit (talk) 16:50, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

This seems to be the best approach. I just didn't like how the entry prior to the revision defined the generation as 1982 to 1994, considering many articles claim it spans before that (e.g. 1977). --USLeatherneck (talk) 22:48, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I want gen Y to include the entire 1970s so I don't feel so old! Seriously though, if you remember the cold war you are gen X or earlier. Quite whining!

Prepping for Archive

I am prepping this talk page for archiving soon. I am marking old discussions either stale or resolved based on my personal opinions. please review what I have marked above and remove or change tags as you feel fit.

Next sunday August 10 2008 I will be moving all topics with stale or resolved tags into archive 3. %%-SYKKO-%% (talk to me) 20:02, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Tomorrow I will be doing this archive. I will be including everything that doesnt have discussion in the last 29 days (the reason it's 29 and not 30 is because there is one topic right there on the edge and I would rather just take care of it tomorrow instead of waiting another day to clean this talk page up. Anyway this will include all discussions on this page from "I have redirected the article Echo_boom_generation here" up with the exception of "What's this (US Only) crap in regards to Generation Jones?" %%-SYKKO-%% (talk to me) 17:00, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

OK this archive has been completed %%-SYKKO-%% (talk to me) 21:33, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Who's Herbig?

This sentence in the intro

Generation Y are primarily the children of Baby boomers, though some are the children of Generation Jones or older members of Generation X .

has a reference to "Herbig et al 1993". There is no other reference to Herbig on the page, so no indication of what (if anything) Herbig wrote that associated Generation Y with the Baby Boomers, Generation Jones, or Generation X. Google doesn't show anything for Herbig except for other references to "Herbig et al 1993" which I'm guessing are because of straight copies of this wikipedia page. If there is no Herbig, the sentence should be removed. Patrickbowman (talk) 22:44, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

I saw that as well and considered removing it myself. I think it would be best just to get rid of it but hesitated and while I try to keep WP:Bold in mind, I tend to resist it rather often. %%-SYKKO-%% (talk to me) 23:55, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Familiarize yourself with bold, revert, discuss, if you haven't already. Once you realize that you are allowed to do anything on Wikipedia as long as you accept that anyone else is allowed to disagree and reverse your actions, you'll see that you're free to do pretty much anything. Just be sure to explain your thinking with every edit (in edit summaries, or on talk pages if it's too complex). If you share your reasoning, no one can fault you, even if they disagree with you.--Father Goose (talk) 06:29, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I have read that one before but never really took it to heart. I think this article is a good example of how that process could be very valuable. Thanks for pointing it out to me again! %%-SYKKO-%% (talk to me) 18:27, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Sexuality

This generation might be one of the most sexual in a long time, why has no one made more note of this in the article? I added a note and some cites. --IdLoveOne (talk) 00:50, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Timespan

We really need a proper definition of Generation Y.

Some thoughts

• Anyone born before 1977 is certainly not Generation Y.
• Anyone born post-1995 is probably Generation Z.
• A human generation is either 20 or 30 years, depending on which source you go by (though 20 years more reasonable).
• The majority of Gen Y are generally in the teens or 20s now.

--Josh Atkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 11:33, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

• • Certainly agree - I tend to think of a Generation as 18 years - the generally accepted time to maturity and adulthood. The start date of Gen Y and demarcation with Gen X is a problem area, no one seems to agree upon. However - I believe the enddate of Gen Y and start of Gen Z is clear, to qualify as a Gen Y you have to be able to remember (in a very basic sense) what the world was like before terrorists brought down the twin towers, which of course happened in September 2001. For the record, I am not American, but that even did change the entire course of human history, that is surely indisputable.

• • Given that, I would say anyone younger than 5 or 6, at the time of 9/11 therefore does not qualify as Gen Y - they are by definition part of the next Generation, Gen Z. That to me puts the end date of Gen Y at about (Northern) Summer of 1995. If you extrapolate back from that date by a Generation (of 18 years) you get to 1977.

• • Younger than 5 should work, I was 5 the year of 9/11 and can remember it vividly.

• • Given all that, it seems perfectly reasonable to mark Generation Y as "generally accepted" as those born between 1977-1995. (Summer to Summer if you must)

• • Personally I think there are other factors in play, and they go largely to the ages of your siblings. If you are the youngest sibling in a family of 6, and your 3 brothers and sisters were born in the early 1970s and you were born in 1977 or 1979 or even 1981 - you are far more likely to identify strongly with Gen X themes because of the influence of your siblings.

• • If, however, you were born in 1975 but had three or four younger siblings born in 1979, 1981, 1984, 1986 for instance, you have been far more heavily influenced by more Gen Y themes. This is where the bridging explanations come from and why people of the same age may very well belong to different Generations. It is about environment as well as just date of birth - but that is far too complicated to go into properly when no one can even agree on when the basic parameters of Generation Y start and end. - I do plant my flag for 1995 as the final year of Generatio Y though, and I stand by that demarcation strongly.

• • Sorry to dissagree, but the end should be the Summer of 1996. 9/11 is a good point when the world changed and people born before the summer (Including myself in January) can remember 9/11, but people born afterwards in late 1996 or 1997 cannot.

202.139.104.226 (talk) 10:30, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Some thoughts on this article

3 years ago I came to this article and found that it was a complete mess. No scratch that, it was a complete and utter fucking pathetic excuse for an encyclopedic article. Being a (begrudged) member of "generation y" I actually found the article insulting. It basically read like it was telling me what I'm supposed to be, listing a bunch of stereotypes presented as facts, dubiously sourced statistics, partisan screed, and a laundry list of "reasons" why generation y are a bunch of moronic, consumerist, shiftless layabouts who are contributing to the downfall of society. It was just trash talking from top to bottom.

I was so incensed by this trashy article that I came onto the talk page, and totally slammed it. I got a comment on my talk page from one of the contributors saying that he'd fixed some things, but I ignored it. I thought this article was a lost cause, and to be honest I felt like starting a vote for deletion.

3 years later I've returned to find an interesting, informative, non-assuming statistics based article. No wild claims are made, no questionable conclusions are extrapolated from statistics, no insults or derogatory commentary masquerading as encyclopedic fact.

I'm really genuinely proud of you guys, you've won over a hardcore skeptic. Keep up the good work, stick to Wikipedia's rules, and this'll be a fascinating, front page article yet.▫Bad▫harlick♠ 23:45, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

I think a big mention should be made about the gross stereotyping seen on Gen-Y. Here in Australia, all media categorize this whole generation (including I) as law-breaking, rude, lose-moralled, criminal, trouble makers. It is really over-bearing. We are being treated with disdain for no apparent reason. Probably because of 'What Corey Worthington Did'. Sick Of It All. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.219.255.133 (talk) 05:41, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

in America, you're mostly characterized as a generation of whiners. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Notchdoctor (talk •

Sounds like the fault of the parents for being lazy in raising us.Richco07 (talk) 21:06, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

contribs) 15:15, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Citations

Let's not cite blogs in general, but especially on articles like this where entire generations are being characterized and there are weird interests at play (I feel baby boomers and even gen X sometimes like to nitpick gen Y, i dont know what thats all about). I'm removing "characterized by a heightened sense of entitlement, of comfort, and of rights and privileges" from "Trophy Kids" until this sort of characterization can be backed up with a study. (April.s (talk) 22:44, 25 October 2008 (UTC))

Mentioning the Me Generation

Although it may deserve its own page, this page should at least mention the Me Generation or Entitlement Generation – other names given to this generation and (to some degree) Generation X. I'd add it myself, but I'm busy with other Wiki work. Sources include: Boston Globe: The New Me Generation and Generation Me. I'm not trying to be biased, just pointing to other terms and views that this encyclopedic article should address. –Visionholder (talk) 22:45, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

• Generation Me does not deserve its own article. It should be merged here or deleted. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 20:11, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

• Generation Me does not exist as an article, nor is it mentioned here. Hence my suggestion to some aspiring editor to mention it. It's just a suggestion. –Visionholder (talk) 20:44, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

• Oh you've got to be kidding me, there are two of these? Fine, this one should be deleted or merged immediately. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 06:34, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Most popular web sites for gen y

See [17] Wrad (talk) 19:23, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Definition

According to the New York Times, Generation Y is the generation "born after 1980". [18] Kaldari (talk) 21:50, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

1976 is Gen X

It seems that 1976 is too early for Gen Y. It should be the final year for Gen X, since it was the last group to graduate from high school (1994) before the internet came out.

Kh298 (talk) 01:11, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

The internet came out in 1991 and grew each subsequent of the early and mid 90's and exploded in the late 90's(your just counting when windows first came out)and did kids born in 1975 and 76 not benefit from the internet as college kids? i think people born in 1975,76,77,78,79,80,81 and maybe even possbly in 1982 and beyond will never be considered hard gen y's or hard gen X's because people born those years have a little of each in them culturaly, just like with barrack obama he is not considered quite a baby boomer but not quite gen x he is considered gen jones which is a bridge generation between bommers and xers and i believe gen x and gen y may have there own its called the MTV Generation--TheGrailHermit (talk) 23:51, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Banners added

For all the reasons above banners have been added to this article. We seem to be unsure as to when Gen Y starts and ends and while it may start in (for example) 1981 in the US it may start in 1982 in the UK or 1981 in Canada. Who really knows. And since this article is not bassed on strauss and Howes work we can argue dates all day long. Also, do not get confussed with a marketing group (several in links) telling when a group starts and ends. They are not doing research for history they are doing it to find a target group to sell things to. --Mickey 14:59, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Confusing 1977 for 1978

I have noticed that some of the reasoning for defining the beginning of Gen Y to 1977 actually points to 1978. This is not a claim whether or not 1977 or 1978 is an actual generational border. However it is an examination of the evidence that may lead to a later generational break.

1- The College Class of 2000. Considering that the bulk of those born in 1977 graduated in 1995, then they were generally the class of 1999, not 2000. That distinction belongs to the class of 1996 who were born on 1978.

2- Bruce Tulgan was associated with the idea that Gen Y ranged from 1977 to 1994 according to the USA today article. http://www.usatoday.com/money/workplace/2005-11-06-gen-y_x.htmhe However he defines it in his writings as being only between 1978-1984. http://www.amazon.com/Managing-Generation-Y-Carolyn-Martin/dp/0874256224

3- As an earlier contributor has noticed, the article states that Gen Y was the under 30 set. Yet when the article was published in 2005, this also included those born in 1976.

4- Finally the idea of the internet being a definitive break is fuzzy as well since there is no one definitive start of the internet. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Internet Also the use of the technology is not exclusive between people born between Dec.31st 1976 and Jan. 1st 1977

5- Many of articles referring to 1977 being the start of the term may in fact be due to simple repeating of the USA today article. This is because the article as of Nov.30th, 2008 is and has been in the top 3-4 Google and possibly other search results for Gen Y. http://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1GGLS_enUS299US303&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=Gen+Y. While the 1977 to 1994 date was an established concept among many others beforehand, there does seem to have been an increase of the use of that term shortly afterwards.

6- Finally as a previous contributor had proposed, a generation is 18-20 years in length. If 1977 is used as a starting date, then if Gen X is confined between 1965-1976 it would be the only 11 year generation in history. Using 1961 as the beginning would require the justification used by Strauss and Howe which state that the full generation spans from 1961 to 1981. Also if such a sharp and unnatural division exists (normal span generations are long enough to include overlapping cusps and waves), then who claims what culturally belongs to people born in 1976 and 1977 who grew up, are at the same stages in life, and are friends and classmates with each other. Or does this mean that those born in 1976 only had one year of youth and became out of touch and outdated as soon as those born in 1977 became teenagers the next year? (Wyn (talk) 05:20, 1 December 2008 (UTC))

End Date September 11, 1996 or January 1997

The end date should be 1997. Using being able to remember 9/11 as a requirement for entrence into Gen Y, September 11, 1996 or January 1, 1997 would be a good end of the generation. Children could certainly remember what was going on when they were 5 years old. Using myself (Born in January 1996) as an example, I can remember 9/11 completely. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Duffy2032 (talk • contribs) 20:34, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

• • And people born in early 1996 were entering school a few weeks before 9/11 so they were able to interact with peers about the attacks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Duffy2032 (talk • contribs) 21:02, 11 December 2008 (UTC)