Template talk:Generations sidebar

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

Generation Jones should be in this sidebar, its omission makes this sidebar out-of-date and inaccurate vis-a-vis current generational thought

[edit]

If you research this, you will see that most actual generations experts now view Generation Jones (born 1954-1965, between the Boomers and Xers) as a bona fide, full generation. The old Baby Boom Generation has become widely discredited among generational scholars, partly because it is based on birth rates, unlike any other generation before or since. Generations stem from shared formative experiences, not head counts. This sidebar is out-of-date with that old 1946-to 1964 birth range. 72.104.125.35 (talk) 20:53, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Generation Jones is considered a cusp generation. It's in the sidebar in "Cusp groups". Dan Bloch (talk) 22:09, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Generation Jones is absolutely not considered a cusp generation by most actual experts. I urge you to do the research, see what serious academics, sociologists, et al say about Generation Jones. It is clearly considered a full generation between Boomers and Xers. That ridiculous 1946-1964 Boomer definition is considered a joke by actual experts. 19 years is way too long for a generation these days, and the front and back ends of that 19 year period are dramatically different. Yes, there are lazy uninformed members of the media who still use that old 1946-1964 definition for Boomers, but hardly any real experts still use it. The more common delineation these days is Boomers born approximately 1942 to 1953, and Generation Jones born approximately 1954 to 1965. Wikipedia should keep up with current professional thinking and this sidebar should be edited to include Generation Jones. 75.223.191.26 (talk) 18:05, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]