Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Decade Nostalgia


 * 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.  

The result of the debate was keep (no consensus). Sjakkalle (Check!)  14:30, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Decade Nostalgia
I'm really not sure about this at all. Perhaps I shouldn't have put it in AfD; however.... as mentioned on Talk:Decade Nostalgia, it could be construed as a collection of "original research" or POV subject matter.

Before you assert that it's about "popular perception" and nostalgia, not reality, I'd like to say this. The article primarily reflects an American perspective of nostalgia, and as I mention here, this isn't necessarily the view held by other people; not even as *nostalgia*. Whilst the stereotypical 'nostalgia' view of the 1950s in many countries is undoubtedly that of post-war Americana, I believe that this applies less to other decades (e.g. 1970s, 1980s).

The article should reflect the (probably inaccurate) perception(s) to the extent that they are currently seen, but it should not add to a particular bias. To have a US-centric article would reinforce these views more than they currently exist, and would not be suited to Wikipedia.

Here's the problem; the article already has some potential issues with POV/bias to begin with, but I think it would be hard to accurately reflect 'common' stereotypes without bias towards one's own cultural perspective. And I can see the whole thing descending into a horrid list of country-specific and argumentative stuff, obscuring the inherent generality of the "decade nostalgia" being described.

At the same time, this is no excuse for keeping a US view alone, unless that reflects the view of the rest of the world.

So, I am not voting for or against at present; although if the vote is to retain, I certainly intend keeping it as universal as possible; not as a historical article, but as an accurate representation of 'nostalgia'. Fourohfour 13:31, 26 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Merge any content not already covered with the articles about each decade - 1960s, 1970s, etc. The popular perception angle is already more than adequately covered in those. Gimboid13 14:44, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak keep after clean up. Very interes6ting topic, and nice to see everything in one place. Renata3 22:35, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Without sources, this is a personal POV and original research.  Yes, there could be an article with this title (except for incorrect capitalization), but this isn't it.  --A D Monroe III 01:18, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep this page! Sure it's US-Centric, but that is now mentioned on the page. (Preceding unsigned comment was made by creator of original article, User:65.197.143.150, at 21:40, 28 November 2005)
 * As the person who already pointed this out in the article, I don't have a problem with "decade nostalgia" not reflecting reality; that's what nostalgia is! The reasons I nominated it for deletion are described above; that wasn't for that reason. Fourohfour 13:51, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - the subject matter is inherently flawed because nostalgia is a personal perspective on a bygone era, and such a subjective view is impossible to describe in any one (or 6 billion) way(s). Barneyboo (Talk) 21:51, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Actually, I disagree with this; the decade-nostalgia concept (whatever it's called) encompasses the *commonly held* views within a society about what it was "about". My problem is that it still varies from country to country, and whilst (e.g.) the 1950s have a common image, others such as the 1970s and 1980s don't, and this shouldn't be a discussion page. Fourohfour 13:51, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
 * The problem is sources. Something that could be called decade nostalgia exists, and could be an article, or even several.  But, without sources, this article is just personal ramblings, POV and OR.  (BTW, all AfD pages are discussion pages.  The goal is to reach a consensus, not just vote.)  --A D Monroe III 14:29, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
 * No, no; I meant the article page itself. Of course we can discuss things here :) Actually, I have this problem with the 'decade' pages themselves too. Fourohfour 18:36, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Okay, I understand. I agree that all the decade pages are somewhat poor this way.  This article just seems to pull all the unprofessional comments together; it's like crap squared.  --A D Monroe III 19:53, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - big old keep on this one. Cleanup for WP:POV though, but worthwhile subject matter. Zordrac 12:02, 1 December 2005 (UTC)


 * 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.