Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Generation Catalano

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's

talk page or in a deletion review

). No further edits should be made to this page.

Generation Catalano (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats

)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I nominated this article because the only primary reference I can find is an opinion piece article written in Slate [1] making reference to the term, and a couple of minor articles referencing that. I do not believe that this term is widely used in any context beyond the targets audience of that Slate article. If the term Xennials, which generates more hits and references than this subject, was not deemed good enough for its own article, I don't see how this one meets wide enough notability outside of the small fanbase of the show My So-Called Life. Justinm1978 (talk) 21:37, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Keep - I know it's a shout in the dark and this article is as good as dead, but, aside from my admittedly inclusionist leanings, I do like the name it gives to the many hundreds of thousands of late-70s, early-80s kids that are caught in the no-man's-land between Gen X and Millennials. I think Slate is a good source, but clearly it appears to be virtually the only one. And, yes, you don't hear people ever actually mentioning they are a self-identified member of Gen Cat, but hey, at least this is one 'keep' before the
  WP:SNOWBALL comes roll'n on in. :) Buddy23Lee (talk) 23:18, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply
  ]

For the record, the version of the article I am making mention to and voting for in the above is/was this one, as recent edits had cut out some of the weaker, but still seemingly plausable citations. I added them back for maximal disclosure, but the above link can obviously be referenced if it gets all gutted out again. Buddy23Lee (talk) 18:47, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:15, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:15, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's my biggest point here; there is no mention of this that does not refer back to that one Slate article, which is an opinion piece from someone not notable. The author of that article attempted to make something happen and it went nowhere beyond a couple of brief mentions in a couple of other thinkpiece articles, and then alongside other terms. This is a no-brainer delete to me.Justinm1978 (talk) 20:58, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I know Xennials didn't fly. Doesn't anyone know of a good term (at least better than gen cat) which describes the grey area between gen X and Millennials? Maybe just maybe something that will eventually have some merge potential? Buddy23Lee (talk)

A cursory search to answer that question turned up this Poll: What Should Be The Name Of The Generation Between Gen X And Millennials? I didn't vote due to clear conflicts of interest, but I'd encourage everyone to get behind "generation sandwich" as it is clearly no less sexy than Jordan Catalano. Hah! Buddy23Lee (talk) 10:32, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: the one source is basically a blog post, far from getting past
  WP:GNG. Vrac (talk) 11:14, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Weak Delete or Merge as appropriate to
  My So Called Life) - There are a few sources which picked up on the Slate article, writing about the same subject of, basically "if you're at the very end of one 'generation' or at the very beginning of another 'generation' you might feel like you don't fit into either one, so let's make up a name for you based on pop culture at the time". We have two variously and arbitrarily bounded generational spans which have been written about extensively (in book form, in academic journals...everywhere), then we have a hodgepodge of names in blogs and magazines for the people "in between" (while making the case that an "in between" exists at all). — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 14:55, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply
  ]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's

talk page or in a deletion review

). No further edits should be made to this page.