Talk:Sleepover/Archive 1

Not necessarily a party
Sleepovers do not have to be parties. You could sleepover a relative's house and not engage in any activities. Tamajared 21:13, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, but that's not a sleep over per se, just sleeping at someone else's house. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.110.194.205 (talk) 20:49, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Is it? I've always had "sleeping at someone else's house" be referred to as a "sleep over". The word isnt clearly defined. Also, saying that girls have sleep overs more than boys is a statement that i fund questionable. Maybe girls do more of the party aspect, but even this is questionable to me 220.240.36.206 (talk) 09:08, 11 August 2008 (UTC)


 * One kid can "sleep over" at their friend's place.  It really takes 3 or more kids to be a "slumber party" or "pajama party".Eregli bob (talk) 17:00, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

But the title of this is "Pajama Party" so everything they said in this article is appropriate to it being a pajama party. Perhaps there SHOULD be a section in this article called "Sleepovers". Then it would be appropriate to mention that boys generally have sleepovers, rather than pajama parties, and then tell what the boys do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.149.165.123 (talk) 10:31, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Sorry. I was confused about the title. Now I see that the title IS "Sleepover". I found this article by typing in "Pajama Party" which is why I thought that was the title of the article... However, I still stand that maybe there should be separate sections describing with the girls do and another section telling what the boys do.

In addition, the tag says "The examples and perspective in this article may not represent a worldwide view of the subject". Why does it have to represent a "worldwide view"? Perhaps it should be worded as being an American activity? Would that be better? I'm an American living in Norway, and I looked this up so I could explain what a pajama party is to my Norwegian and German friends who have never heard of such a thing, and thank goodness Wikipedia had this article for me to show them. Then I find out that you want to delete it simply because "this article may not represent a worldwide view of the subject". It's a part of OUR culture! Why does that have to represent a worldwide view? I'm sure that if I were to look hard enough, I would find SOMETHING on Wikipedia that talks about some activity that is done in another country, but not worldwide--only in that country. Should that be removed too because it doesn't represent a worldwide view? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.149.165.123 (talk) 10:48, 9 February 2012 (UTC)


 * There's absolutely no reason not to have articles about American cultural phenomena. There is a reason not to have articles that read as though they apply to the world, when as you say they simply don't. Add a line or two at the start of the article making it clear that this is very much an American thing, and that would be fine. In short: keep the article, just don't have it read as though the writers thought US culture applied worldwide. 109.149.143.15 (talk) 02:02, 26 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't know about it being very much an American thing ... sleepover parties are very common here in Australia. Maybe they're more common in the anglosphere? Graham 87 02:14, 26 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't really get why they say a sleepover is also called a "rite of passage". — Preceding unsigned comment added by JLPrairie (talk • contribs) 02:43, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Because being part of a sleepover indicates maturity, and the establishment of connections beyond your family. Graham 87 05:28, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Cleanup
I'll see if I can tackle anythingN734LQ 03:55, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Cleaned it up
Yep. Tried to organize it better. I'll see if I can find an image. — Preceding unsigned comment added by N734LQ (talk • contribs) 04:07, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

More universal point of view?
Currently, this article seems to be very gender-role biased, and altogether biased. It seems to be written from one person's experience or research, and the tone of the whole article doesn't seem to be very Wikipedia-like. TheOtherSiguy 23:01, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
 * You're right. Needs less original research. --Ortzinator 05:49, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Um, it's all original research. I guess even movie citations and stuff would be better than this. Dan Guan 01:34, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

This is NOT a game!
So, why is it listed among Wikipedia's "party games"? I'm removing it from there. 74.234.215.75 (talk) 19:24, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

I AGREE WIKIPEDIA IS NOT A GAME STOP ACTING LIKE ITS A GAME Trevor the trevoire (talk) 02:49, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Sleep and Sleep Disorders?
It seems like the { { SleepSeries2 } } tag is out of place here. This article isn't really related to sleep, and definitely isn't related to sleep disorders. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.216.196.223 (talk) 16:29, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

I agree completely. Removing the tag now in the absence of any objections. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Beej175560 (talk • contribs) 18:53, 18 November 2010 (UTC)