Talk:Popular culture studies

Popular culture studies was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
September 26, 2005	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
March 22, 2007	Good article nominee	Listed
July 22, 2008	Good article reassessment	Delisted

Current status: Delisted good article

This article was nominated for deletion on 5 May 2022. The result of the discussion was keep and stubbify.

Popular culture (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Popular culture, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Popular cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Popular cultureTemplate:WikiProject Popular culturePopular culture articles

Sociology Mid‑importance

	Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Kinda new

Hi, I'm kinda new to Wikipedia so I don't really know what the procedure is here. I found this added at the bottom of this article

"If someone has a culture graph write back on this page because i rele need one. on popular and folk culture....thanx bye bye help!!!!!!!!!!!!! I NEED A GRAPH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

I wasn't really sure how important this request was, but I know enough about Wikipedia to realize that those kinds of things are what the talk page is for. So, I moved it here. Quixoto 19:53, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Original Research/POV

This article is full of original research, and some pretty tendentious summaries of the various schools of thought. For example, the word "monolithic" is used throughout as an obvious shibboleth. The Frankfurt School's orientation is at one point described as "traditional," as if it were some kind of rustic folkway. I'm flagging it.--WadeMcR 20:33, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. It launches it into premature criticisms of the subject without first giving an overview of the subject itself. This could maybe be remedied with a little reorganization. Otherwise it reads like someone has a axe to grind. 92.78.99.41 (talk) 08:10, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image

The choice of a Superman comic to illustrate this article was dodgy at best. More to the point, fair use images could suffice. I recommend any of the following.

An image of a living prominant popular culture scholar
An image of the library of popular culture at Bowling Green, or a similar archive
An image from the annual PCA/ACA conference.

Any of these would work very well here. Phil Sandifer 22:05, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where can this be studied?

Anyone have a list of what universities have pop culture departments? Bowling Green does, but that's all I know. Rkaufman13 19:31, 19 July 2007 (UTC) Bowling Green State University is the only University in the United States that offers a stand alone BA and MA in popular culture studies —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thesupermikey (talk • contribs) 21:07, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dodgy claim

I've removed this from the intro:

Academic discussions on popular culture started as soon as contemporary mass society formed itself and the views on popular culture that were developed then still influence contemporary popular culture studies.

Apart from being terribly vague (mass society formed itself when, exactly?), I'm not sure it's true. Which academics? Since when has popular culture been identical with mass society (Shakespeare? commedia? folk?) DionysosProteus 04:04, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The theory of culture industry paragraph

The 'theory of culture industry' section definitely needs citations. I don't agree that it is opposed the Gramscian concept of Cultural Hegemony; it would probably be better described as a development of Gramscian thought. The importance of the superstructure; the institutions of civil society (e.g. the culture industry) is at the core of Gramscian and neo-Gramscian thought. The only difference this theory appears to have with the Gramscian perspective is the argument that the ruling class is no longer under direct control of the state apparatus - that the system created over the course of the last 200 years by previous ruling classes is now the ruler itself and not controlled by any class. This does not oppose the Gramscian conception of hegemony. I would argue its adapting the concept to its modern context. This is my understanding of the theory. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.148.81.202 (talk) 19:35, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Popular culture studies. 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:

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) 03:32, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Stubbified

This has been drastically reduced in length due to WP:OR/WP:V concerns. See AfD discussion. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:03, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]