Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zippies

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. howcheng {chat} 17:11, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Zippies

See NY Times Op-Ed "Meet the Zippies" It would appear that Wikipedia's Zippie was created as a prank and a sophisticated form of vandalism,,,Ariele 05:47, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

• Should rewrite to reflect the correct usage of the term. Jamie ^{(talk/contribs)} 05:54, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
• Comment I got 547 Google hits for "Fraser Clark" in connection to "Zippies," including a Wired.com article. Let's not rush to judgment. This is probably a cleanup project. Durova 06:14, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Following up It's too late at night for me to dig into this properly. Here's the Wired.com article citing Fraser Clark and his use of the term. Apparently his use goes back to 1987. According to [ http://rdues.uce.ac.uk/neologisms.shtml Research and Development Unit for English Studies, UCE Birmingham] Zippies were also a quasi-political faction led by Tom Forcade that broke off from the hippies. Top Google hits for Zippies now refer to young technical professionals from India. Somebody else revise this, please. Durova 06:27, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep and cleanup. I had heard of the hippies in the 60's. There is this sense as in Wired and there is the Indian tech movement which Tom Friedman has written about. Capitalistroadster 06:57, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep and cleanup. Definitely a real term that was a buzzword in the British media for 15 minutes or so in the early 90s. IIRC, Fraser Clark also established the Megatripolis club night which was like a festival in a nightclub, and which was documented on a 3 CD set. Part of the new age/techno hippy movement of that time. --kingboyk 14:51, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep title, obliterate content. The text is complete nonsense, but the term is real, Thomas "Tin-earred Neologism Machine" Friedman notwithstanding: I remember the embarassing Wired magazine cover and their attempt at surfing the zeitgeist. I may even have a copy in a box somewhere.
  • Wait, of course it's online. --Calton | Talk 02:32, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
    • Takes me back a bit! Anyway, there's the evidence I say :-) --kingboyk 10:18, 20 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.