Talk:Fad/Archive 1

Archive 1

Untitled

According to the definition of fad on the page, There should not be any current cultural trends listed, because they have not yet declined in popularity, such as Machinima. --24.166.248.251 19:41, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

This article needs to be organized

I'm not trying to be rude, but it would be a little easier if the fads were categorized by era. Example

1970's Fads

1980's Fads

And so on and so on 216.138.20.114 (talk) 05:55, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

• I've composed a graph that I think would play a good role in this article, but it doesn't want to stay in its place when I preview it, it always jumps to the bottom, if anyone can place the graph below onto the article where it sticks that would be cool. I will work on the 1990's next.

216.138.20.114 (talk) 04:18, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Green Day issue

Green Day did spawn a fad in the 2000's as the Necktie, at my school over 20 wear ties with casual clothing. These are referenced to Green Day. 216.138.20.114 (talk) 12:27, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Wiki issues

Someone added a more organized version to this page and then someone deleted it, especially the 1980's subcatergory. It seemed okay by me, it was a fine revision, no vandilism was there... It seems that someone on this article is too protective of the work and won't let other wiki users to contribute. If you haven't noticed this is a WIKI, not owned by any one person. 216.138.20.114 (talk) 23:17, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

• I am so sorry, I didn't know that! To those that thought I was vandalising on account 209.174.137.10 I am deeply sorry. That account is actually owned by my high school and any edit changed by them; there are a lot of computers in my school. Do not take it against one person. I am user:Tigerghost and often contribute on both addresses. So sorry again to those that thought it was vandilism, but some students will do some stupid stuff. I am a student at the high school and also edit on the same account, but never would vandilise on it. I am actually passionate on creating and editing articles. So sorry if it caused trouble, but I still believe the things I edited on this article like MTV and stuff should be revised back to what it was. (Tigerghost 23:43, 5 December 2005 (UTC))

MTV as fad

I disagee that this is a fad and not just a heavily marketed/evangelical tv channel. I think you folk are talking about the phenomena of the pop video. -max rspct 13:16, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

• I believe MTV as a whole is not a fad, but the music videos are. Therefore the music videos should be considered one. 209.174.137.10 (talk) 13:34, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

So when TV programming first came out it was a fad? Music videos havE'nt gone away - how can they be a fad? -max rspct 13:55, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Music videos have kind of lost their punch since the 1980's, when it first came out, everyone loved them, now people are like "Oh thats nothing really new". And besides MTV has kind of tuned down music videos to other programming. 209.174.137.10 (talk) 14:01, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Citing sources

Any 1980's or 1990's fads by me were referenced by the "I Love The" Series on VH1. The 2000 fads are referenced by word of mouth at my school or VH1, MTV, Fuse, G4, and Spike TV. (209.174.137.10 13:50, 12 December 2005 (UTC))

Probably not good enough Wikipedia:Cite sources -max rspct 13:57, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Vandilism issue

Many fads and trends continue to be deleted from the list, they are genuine fads and yet still people delete them from the list. Grunge music for example was a fad in the early 90's, but soon died out, why won't you allow people to contribute, Grunge music was a fad, even if you look in its article here on wikipedia, it states that Grunge music hit it biggest point from 1991 - 1994, then it died down. Do you people like max rspct and snowflake even know what is popular! Revert Tigerghost's edits or else I will report you as vandilizing this article. And please allow others to put in fads, there is way more fads then what is on the list, and the article states "This list is incomplete, you can help by EXPANDING it.

Other fads that are dominant are BRATZ Dolls-2000s, Power Rangers-1990s, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles-1990s, Napolean Dynamyte phrases-2000s(which might I add are still extremely popular), Star Trek:Original Series-1960s, Glow in the dark objects like bracelets/necklaces/lasers/hats-1990s, Atari-1970s, Intellivision-1980s I will add these into the list, I will see how long it takes for vandals to delete them. I will report anything that is deleted... Just to let all know, I am a pop culture historian. (209.174.137.10 13:52, 14 December 2005 (UTC))

I don't believe TV series qualify as fads. TV shows are short-lived by their nature, as is their popularity. I suggest Ninja Turtles, Star Trek and Power Rangers be removed. - LeonWhite 08:33, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

What about Pokemon, Digimon, and Yu-Gi-Oh? Should we remove them too? I'm not saying that we should add anymore tv shows, but these were major big ones in their eras. Ninja Turtles could apply to the toys as well as Power Rangers. And Star Trek: TOS was big as well, but died into reruns till the movies were released in the mid-70's. But maybe Star Trek could be removed, it did survive longer than its era and didn't really fade away (1966 - 1969, 1987 - 2005) long reign. 216.138.20.114 (talk) 20:01, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Pokemon and Digimon are games, not TV shows. But why not include any TV show that had short-lived popularity? Because there are probably hundreds of them. I've removed Star Trek, but I'll leave the others for now. - LeonWhite 00:45, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

So Power Rangers & Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles should stay maybe not because of their tv show status, but toy franchises. (216.138.20.114 20:01, 21 December 2005 (UTC))

• I've done research on this issue, Power Rangers and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles should stay because they hit with everything, video games, toys, lunchboxes , and all the good-stuff. But Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles really should be moved to 1980's, because it came out in 1987, so I will do that. And Pokemon did become a tv show, so did Digimon, this issue is really confusing. (216.138.20.114 03:48, 22 December 2005 (UTC))

Untitled 2

I don't think that the iPod fits the definition of a fad. Just because it is popular and it is a fashion accessory, does not make it a fad. 195.188.152.10 (talk) 22:41, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Pepsi Clear

It is'nt named Pepsi CLear, it's called Crystal Pepsi 80.165.147.125 (talk) 17:27, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. Don't forget that you can fix it yourself. --Mrwojo 05:24, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Removals

Pop princesses (female singers aren't a fad, and the definition of what "pop princesses" are is hazy anyway), and Xbox (games consoles have been around for years, the successful ones have a lifespan of 4-5 years, and the Xbox is unremarkable). - LeonWhite 04:57, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

• I think that Napolean Dynamite, independant film shouldn't be considered a fad, since Napolean Dynamite Phrases are already mentioned... (216.138.20.114 04:38, 6 January 2006 (UTC))

2000s fads & a few questions

• I got started on the VH1 I Love The... series and listed their fads and fashions then got to thinking of the 2000s fads, I am just curious what kind of fads are going around now besides those listed, personally I think the 2000s are pretty boring and dull compared to the 80s or the 90s I relized that the Beyblade toys were really popular early in the decade as well as Yu-Gi-Oh and Pokemon still was pretty strong till about mid 2002 then died. (Tigerghost 05:55, 6 January 2006 (UTC))

References.... The 1990s fads I added to the list were found on I Love The 90's and I Love The 90's: Part Deux on VH1, a major pop culture television network. The Same goes for the 1980s, but their infor was aquired from the I Love the 80s, I Love the 80s: Strikes Back, and I Love The 80's 3D (Tigerghost 05:55, 6 January 2006 (UTC))

OTHER REFERENCES FOR THE PEOPLE THAT WANT TO DELETE THIS PAGE

• [1] Angelfire Fads
• [2] Crazyfads Website
• [3] in the 90s Fads
• [4] in the 80s Fads
• [5] in the 70s Fads
• [6] fifties web
• [7] stuck in the 70s
• [8] yearbook high/history/fads
• [9] misc. other fads
• [10] I Love the 90s
• love_the_90s_part_deux/series.jhtml I Love the 90s: Part Deux
• [11] I Love the 80s
• the_80s_strikes_back/series.jhtml I Love the 80s: Strikes Back
• [12] I Love the 80s: 3D
• [13] I Love the 70s

(Tigerghost 05:40, 10 January 2006 (UTC))

IM as fad

Instant Messangeing isn't a fad... or a least it isn't a 2000s fad. People used IM in the late 1990s too. Sitenl 21:50, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

ugg boots as fad

This style of boots have been around for over 100 years and are only growing in popularity. This style in now considered a category in many USA department stores and shoe stores and is here to stay (Shyets04 20:23, 14 February 2006 (UTC))

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. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tigerghost (talk • contribs) 07:22, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

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. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.16.117.24 (talk • contribs) 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))

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. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.87.181.198 (talk) 20:36, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

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))

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? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.216.70.62 (talk) 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)

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. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.36.49.218 (talk) 03:22, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

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

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)

I think it depends on where you live and which age-groups you know. I "know" (not a fact) that many children between 10 and 12 in Denmark had an N-Gage, and that the product "surely" was a fad amongst them —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.59.232.179 (talk) 12:50, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

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)

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)

Mambo craze

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

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)

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)

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. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaara42 (talk • contribs) 22:54, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

A fad is something that has to do with popular interrest in it over time. A PS2 isn't a fad because it wasn't popular interrest that faded, the PS2 was merely replaced with a more modern version of it; the PS3 (which continues the PS2's previous popularity). The Nintendo DS is still popular as we speak, so only time will tell us if that turns out to be a fad or whether it'll just age and be replaced. IMHO, a technology fad must be still be independant of relative "aging" of the technology at the time it loses popularity; the Tamagotchi springs to mind; at the time it's popularity faded, it wasn't replaced with something of equal popularity or more hi-tech (arguably, it was equally technologically unimpressive when it started as when it stopped being popular). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.159.97.1 (talk) 09:29, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

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. 71.226.52.181 (talk) 04:04, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

With you except for the Rubik's cube. It's still sold today, but at VERY marginal numbers in comparison to it's hey-day. 85.159.97.5 (talk) 09:33, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Proposed fads?

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

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

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

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

And Green Day? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.71.202.54 (talk • contribs) 16:39, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

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)

Pov?

Flagged articial as pov alot of this is little better than personal opinion {Gnevin) 17:43, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

"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)

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)

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)

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)

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

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)

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. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael salcher~enwiki (talk • contribs) 13:40, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

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)

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)

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)

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)

Furbies+Tamagotchis

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

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)

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)

Article, not list

There should be material about what people have said about fads, what makes a fad a fad, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.87.181.198 (talk) 20:36, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

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)

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)

In my opinion it would be considered as a fad or a trend. As for a political movement, since when is wearing skinny jeans and wearing band ts a political movement?--FailureAtDeath (talk) 23:01, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

2008-04-12 Automated pywikipediabot message

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

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)

I think the current page name, "Fads and Trends", is too vague and informal. I think it may be good to add craze to the title, but also to add an academic field of study like history, social studies, or cultural study. Ie. "Study of crazes, fads and trends" Goldenrowley (talk) 16:32, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Focus

I believe that the topic of this article is noteworthy but the article is clearly poorly written, even for a stub.

I would propose:

• Retitle to "fad". The current title is not very encyclopedic. As a general rule a topic should have a concise name and other possible names for the topic should just be described within the lead.
• Providing distinct definitions for the the 3 terms makes no sense. This article should be about 1 topic. I would propose sticking to the concept of a fad and describe these other terms as possible synonyms that may also be used in other ways.
• Discuss the sociology behind fads.

--Mcorazao (talk) 20:01, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Rename

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 01:08, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

---

Fads and trends → Fad — Existing title is not very encyclopedic. A single singular noun phrase is generally the best choice for generic topics such as this. Mcorazao (talk) 03:36, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

• Weak support. Despite a lot of work having been put into it over several years, currently this article is merely three dictionary definitions. Can it ever make a worthwhile article, or even a stub? Let's give it the chance. Andrewa (talk) 15:59, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

• Comment - Note also that trend does not link to this article (but fad does). If the word trend actually belongs in this title then presumably that page should redirect here. I would argue, though, that trend is a much broader word than what is implied by fad. --Mcorazao (talk) 20:54, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
• Support per nomination - a single title ('fad') seems prefered. Regards, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 13:25, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Currently not very good

I found this page and was flabbergasted to find there was no list of fads by decade like the Hula hoop or pet rock. Started to add such a list -- then looked at the talk page. Removed my edit because, clearly, there's some weird sh*t going on here. I can understand that a list of fads might get out of hand, but that's no reason to take it (and all references to a list) out completely. If lists of fads exist elsewhere then there should be well-marked links to them. Michaeld42 (talk) 18:12, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Difference between Fad and Trend

People have a common mind set to confuse trend and fad with classic when they talk about fashion. While trend is a present style and fad is a practice followed for a period (time)), by classic it means something which would be timeless. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lasar 07 (talk • contribs) 13:10, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fad. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110718090458/http://cejsh.icm.edu.pl/cejsh/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?05PLAAAA00421032 to http://cejsh.icm.edu.pl/cejsh/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?05PLAAAA00421032

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:36, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Fads and trends are the same thing

Most of that section is sourced from some blog whose page no longer exists. A fad is a type of trend. Not every trend is a fad. Set / subset relationship. That section should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.207.115.58 (talk) 19:54, 6 June 2017 (UTC)