Talk:Imagination age
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | It is requested that an image or photograph be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
Sources edit
I have my doubts about this article and have therefore tagged it for cleanup. My particular concern is the lack of good sources to verify that this term is not just a neologism. A Google search doesn't seem to reveal much in the way of reliable sources. Astronaut (talk) 21:19, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
I have since added three more sources, from different domains. As for reliable sources this is a bit strange. Imagination Age is a term used by some people for talking about the economy and the future, its not a mineral or a state in Africa but a term. A Google search should only show the the term is in fact being used or not and if so is it being used in line with the entry.
I acutally held off for about a year to make this entry until enough references to the term proved to me that it was a an emerging concept and not just a buzz word. I would ask you not speed this to delete over the upcoming holidays when I shall not have the hours to figure out Wikipeida reference rules and to collect more solid references.
--Rober1236jua (talk) 21:19, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
I have extended the references to this article including references to published books and Fortune Magazine and therefore feel confident to remove the sources. I actually believe it is a neologism but fail to see how in something like Wikipedia this is really a problem.
Rober1236jua (talk) 13:57, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
It is now been almost a year since I produced this article and the term's use, as part of Google search I admit, is increasing. Over 7,000 sources last I checked. I think the neologism tag can be taken down. Though I leave that to the judgment of others.
Rober1236jua (talk) 10:48, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
This article provides a variety of references and is well written to understand the topics depths. It was easy to access links to the references and I found it worthwhile to visit original sources just to dive a little deeper.
The neutrality of the article was will presented as it offered an equilibrium of different opinions, yet remained balanced as a whole. I personally enjoyed reading about what other people have thought throughout the years and found it extremely beneficial to my understanding of the Imagination Age. Tmercado98 (talk) 04:18, 5 April 2018 (UTC)tmercado98
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion edit
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:54, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
