Talk:Fad

Trends added to title

I am sorry if I caused any inconvieniance for moving the article to its current location, but the list of fads grew too big and included more than fads, so I added Trends in the title as well. -Unsigned

I think the right thing to do would have been to remove the non-fads and leave the title the same. "Trends" is way too broad a topic. A fad is a particular kind of phenomenon that can be talked about in its own right. There's a recognizable pattern to them, and people can see pole-sitting and streaking as clear examples of the same kind of thing. When you throw in trends, you suddenly include almost all social phenomena. -Unsigned

How are some of these things in the list trends? I can understand consoles, iPods, and places where social outcasts get together, such as MySpace, but what about everything else? Please explain, as I haven't heard/seen/tasted/felt/smelt anyone wearing/using Fairly Oddparents merchandise in the last 11 years. -Unsigned 02:36, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Not all fads are particiapated by a certain age group. Fairly Oddparents merchandise is usually worn by people younger than the age of 5, so that is their own little fad. Adults participate in fads that kids don't and kids particiapate in fads that adults don't. Maybe for some reason there was a huge surge of parents who bought the shirts for their kids (Tigerghost 03:13, 28 February 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Nokia N-Gage

A fad? I disagree. I've never actually seen or heard of anyone owning/using one. I move for removal from list. -Unsigned

Me too. Nokia want's this thing to be a fad, but it isn't. -- Cheesus 12:57, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know one person, who owned a N-Gage and have seen a few people using it in the subway in my hometown Vienna shortly after it came out, but it never was really widespread. --Qaywsxedc (talk) 19:06, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Branching out

I had the idea to branch out the article because "list of fads" is getting to grow to big. So I am working on making a branch page for certain decades fads (2000s fads and trends, 1990s fads and trends) it was just an idea. If people don't agree with this, please post below (Tigerghost 03:13, 28 February 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Christianity?

One of the items listed as a fad for the 1990's is Christianity. Seeing as how Christianity (according to its own article) has "an estimated 2.1 billion adherents" and is "world's largest religion" can it really be called a fad? 18:03, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Probably shouldn't be there. Fix it. Maybe the person who added that was thinking of some particular "fad" of Christian Clubs and organizations becoming increasingly popular among that generation, in which case we'd need numerous sources. This reeks more of someone's personal distain for Christianity. Don't get me wrong, I share it - but it's certainly not a "fad" and should be removed from the list if it hasn't been. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.253.36.46 (talk) 04:47, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Video game consoles

I don't see how any video game consoles or video games can be called fads, with the exception of Pokemon. Zelda definitely does not belong, seeing as it is still one of the most popular games today and current game consoles are not wise to list, nor are most previous ones. The game industry is well-known not to be a passing fad. That was proven wrong 20 years ago. Both DS and PSP could become fads, depending on whether PSP can come back from its year-long slump and DS can collapse. If one of those events happens, the other does and that determines which one is a fad. But, both of them are definitely POV. 205.166.61.142 14:27, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, although Nintendo-related merchandise may have been a fad in the 80s, especially merchandise that included Mario and Link (Nintendo Cereal, Nintendo gift wrapping paper, Nintendo Valentine Day cards, Nintendo clothing, Nintendo posters, Nintendo stuffed toys, Nintendo TV shows (Super Mario Bros Super Show), Nintendo "music" CDs, Nintendo Power magazines, Nintendo Shampoo (shampoo bottle shaped like Mario, I kid you not), etc.) --64.86.141.133 17:30, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mambo craze

Kind of missing here? ROGNNTUDJUU! 13:02, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Where do we draw the line..

Between what is popular, and what is a fad? For instance, the PS2 is listed as a fad. yet it's popularity was constant. it never really spiked or waned. -Malomeat 02:13, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of Fads and (((((TRENDS))))) I would say think about whether or not the trend "continued". For instance. Barbies should not be a "Fad" because although they were "trendy" at one point, their continued to be prominent toys for sale. They evolved, adapted, and exist to this day. Furbies, on the other hand, enjoyed very good sales for very brief period of time before people started realizing they wasted 40 dollars on a complete piece of annoying plastic shit with poor A.I. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.253.36.46 (talk) 04:49, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Video games

I agree with everyone else, whoever put PS2, Nintendo DS and the like in this list was taking extreme POV. Niether can be said to be a fad, the Nintendo DS might but most gaming systems turn out to not be.

Reconsider what is a trend and what is not

Why is HDTV a fad? Why is the Rubik's cube a fad? These products have easily outlived the 'fad' stage of every growing business. Video Game culture is a fad? Since when was a culture a fad? Is 20 years enough not to be on the fad list? I think someone should go through and seriously revise this article, and maybe open it up for a community discussion as to what should still be on the list. Oh and to let the person who put Anime in as a fad, it has been going on in Japan since the 1960s, thats not a fad, unless to specifically say the American version of anime, which might be.

Proposed fads?

Can Newton's cradle be considered a fad? --Abdull 12:35, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And what about pin sculptures (Google images) --Abdull 12:40, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And plasma lamps? --Abdull 12:45, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And looping straws? --Abdull 11:55, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And Green Day? -Unsigned

A fad is not a craze

A fad is about something that's popular for its own sake, where a craze is about something that people purchase in the hopes of selling it back at a higher value. Sarge Baldy 17:01, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pov?

Flagged articial as pov alot of this is little better than personal opinion {Gnevin)

"articial", oh man. It is very wonderful that anybody can edit Wikipedia. Anyway, just because people aren't being pants-shittingly positive doesn't mean it's POV. --Nugneant 17:14, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for additions to the list

I would add leetspeak, but I don't know what decade it would go in. 59.167.140.150 08:15, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia amogst the 200s fads?

I wonder whether it's not a joke that it's there. The definition of fad says that they "become popular in a culture relatively quickly, but loses popularity dramatically". So, tell me when Wikipedia lost its popularity dramatically. I didn't delete it from the list because I'm not sure. Maybe, those things (goods, commodities...) that gain popularity quickly are also considered gags, even though they remain popular for a long period of time.--Pfc432 05:24, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I think what I said is almost the same as what is written in "Reconsider what is a trend and what is not" in this same page.--Pfc432 05:26, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Changed Wikipedia --> wiki Q5 den 22:00, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seasonal fads?

How is the Super Bowl a fad in any sense? Likewise for the Academy Awards and Olympics. If we're going to use that loose of a definition, then any event that happens and is then over can be called a fad. For instance, would we call skiing a fad since people stop when the snow melts? What about migratory birds? Do we call wars fads because they start and then end? Seasonal events are not fads. I've removed the seasonal fads section at the end. If you disagree with this, I'd be glad to discuss it. I feel that the events in the section did not meet the loosest definition of a fad. Originalbigj 21:04, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Criticsm of fads

I have removed the "Criticsm of fads" paragraph as it firstly does not describe a fad and secondly sounds like rubbish and lowers the overall standard of this article.

Why list them again here

...when we have separate articles for each decade? We should try to improve the individual decade articles rather than trying to maintain two separate lists. I think this article should be moved to Fads and trends and describe fads/trends in general and contain links to the articles for each decade. The lists should be removed as it is confusing to have them in two places. --musicpvm 19:33, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Now that there is an article for each decade, this list should be split and merged into those articles. Then, if an article gets above the 30K recommended limit, its list should again be spun off to a companion article. That's the usual procedure for these instances. --maf 18:29, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I'm not sure where to begin with the merge though. I think almost all of the information in the lists at this page is already included in the subpages in a more organized format. I will copy these lists to the talk pages of each subpage though in case anybody feels that any of the info needs to be merged. --musicpvm 21:58, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of days ago I created an article called Trendiness, and it has a short list of current trends and fads happenning right now, as of 2006. I have a proposal. Keep my article separate from fads and trends, with a periodically updated short list of current things, while THIS ARTICLE (fads and trends) has its entire list removed.

In addition, the articles corresponding to each decade (this one, and this one) should be cut down considerably. They are cluttered with things that are not fads or trends, but are simply things that are popular. A good 70 percent of each list is junk. All of the entries on the list that document jokes as being fads should also be taken out. I'm pretty sure a joke does not count.

Anyways, my Support is also up for cleaning up this article, and I hope you'll consider my proposal.

Mk623SC20K 17:38, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Furbies+Tamagotchis

Added Furbies and Tamagotchis. - Xvall —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.253.36.46 (talk) 04:55, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

The only way we can stop this edit war, is to make up a policy for what CAN go on this page, and what CAN'T. My inital guideline, should be to try finding reliable sources for all of the stuff on this list, AND cite it. ViperSnake151 14:27, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think that what u said is going a bit far, but I say that a trend or fad has to do with clothing, music, genera things like that. NOT ARTIST'S!!! Who put Soulja Boy on the list. He's gone out with most kids like me and that's not a fad.DLWDWFreek (talk) 04:14, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article, not list

There should be material about what people have said about fads, what makes a fad a fad, etc. -Unsigned

Emo

Question. Would emo fall under fad, trend, or political movement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.129.42.179 (talk) 03:06, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2008-04-12 Automated pywikipediabot message

This page has been transwikied to Wiktionary.
The article has content that is useful at Wiktionary. Therefore the article can be found at either here or here (logs 1 logs 2.)
Note: This means that the article has been copied to the Wiktionary Transwiki namespace for evaluation and formatting. It does not mean that the article is in the Wiktionary main namespace, or that it has been removed from Wikipedia's. Furthermore, the Wiktionarians might delete the article from Wiktionary if they do not find it to be appropriate for the Wiktionary.
Removing this tag will usually trigger CopyToWiktionaryBot to re-transwiki the entry. This article should have been removed from Category:Copy to Wiktionary and should not be re-added there.

--CopyToWiktionaryBot (talk) 11:43, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Interestingness

Nowadays this article is not interesting enough, back in 2006 it was much better even when the lists were not so well integrated. Sometimes the thing about taking out the 'superficial' like in the genocide 'trivia' movement, forgets totally: wikipedia is for all humanity, from other perspectives information seeming nonsense is quite interesting for people like me of other cultural environments. It is also for other times, like now the article does not says nothing about this time to the future, lacks historic perspective. The so calles lists -branching out- does not exists. Now is just laconic, and the significant information is not available other than the article memory... do not fix what is not broken. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Geape (talk • contribs) 14:21, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Add crazes to title?

Current craze redirects to this article and is mentioned alongside the two other terms (fads and trends) which compose it. Shouldn't crazes be part of the title? In this case, following alphabetization: Crazes, fads and trends. That, or rather than successively just adding names to similar words which are covered by the article, is there a term which inclusive of all of these that can be used instead? Note: see the first section of the talk page for when 'trends' was added. Tyciol (talk) 22:02, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]