Talk:Coastie

Sources

• I'd like to comment that all info in this article (as of 02.08.06) has been taken from the two articles provided in the external links. Please read these thoroughly before you consider changing any info in the article.--Hraefen 22:12, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

• This info is almost word-for-word the definition in Urban Dictionary (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=coastie&defid=1615910, at the time of this posting it's Definition #3). So if this definition was taken by Urban Dictionary, that's one thing (and it might be useful to note that here, just to clear up any confusion)--but if this is just a copy of the pre-existing definition, then please a) rephrase and b) cite appropriately. Therealcaro (talk) 05:09, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

• If you look at the timestamp of that entry, you can see the definition at Urban Dictionary was clearly taken off of Wikipedia --Gameshints (talk) 20:39, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Cleanup

• This article is in serious need of attention; it could do with rewriting for style, expansion (especially background), and further documentation (one of the two external links is broken). As it stands now, it probably wouldn't survive WP:AFD, but I think it deserves a chance to live. --CComMack 11:14, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

• I removed the cleanup tag because 1) the info is almost all documented by the one external link 2) the writing is not the best, but hardly in need of "serious attention." The part about the Mendota Beacon is all true, but the op-ed is no longer archived at The Mendota Beacon website. If someone wishes to remove mention of the Beacon because of this, go ahead I guess. But the rest of the article is verifialbe by reading the WSJ link.--Hraefen ^Talk 17:55, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

• I removed the Notability tag because I re-fixed the WSJ link and cleaned up/added a couple more references. --Gameshints (talk) 21:26, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Notable?

As a student at a University in the Midwest who had not heard the term until today, I have to ask if the term really widespread enough to be notable? One of the links given does not include the term "coastie" and the other is from several years ago.Lord Manwe (talk) 18:32, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

• I'm not all that familiar with Wikipedia standards of inclusion for words, slang, nonce words etc. But this term has been around at UW-Madison for over a decade and various articles about the term/phenomenon have appeared in large run Wisconsin-based newspapers (as well as being treated often in student newpapers here here). Based on just these two things, I would think that it is notable enough, but I wouldn't be opposed to seeing it put to a vote. If you do, though, try to include people that have experience voting on words, slang, nonce words etc. (otherwise, I think people might be inclined to just vote for delete because they've probably never heard the word because, like you, they don't live in a city where it is commonplace). Also, check out this post at Mr. Verb, a linguistics blog that is written by some UW linguists and frequented by many U.S. linguists. Also, a student folklore paper is in process. If a folklore professor thinks it's a real phenomenon worthy of study, maybe there is something to it beyond being included at UrbanDictionary. - - Hraefen ^Talk 03:09, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

• I believe that the article should at least be changed so that it only refers to UW, rather than the Midwest as a whole, since all of the articles cited so far have been either from Wisconsin publications or have referenced it as a UW phenomenon. It would also be useful to have references that aren't written by students that use the term. Lord Manwe (talk) 06:47, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

• The phrase originated at UW Madison, but has grown. It's also a well-used term at MATC. If you look at the comments for this student music video, one sees that other Midwest campuses do use the term as well. It's mostly a Madison thing, but it's not ONLY a Madison thing. ARSchmitz (talk) 06:11, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
• I just added, for the second time, a reference to a Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel article of 12/16/09 describing the term, its ties to UW-Madison, the controversy over anti-Semitic interpretations, and the YouTube video. Contrary to what some other contributor has stated when rolling back my earlier edits, the article is highly relevent to the term and its place in modern vernacular. --Brookfield53045 (talk) 17:26, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

• Sorry, I rolled back a little too far. The source to the article is appropriate, but I feel the link to the video/song is not. I just cited an AP article which has a linguistics professor estimating the term originated about 15 years ago. The several additions which mention the video always seem to claim that the artists of the song created the term, which clearly they have not. I don't know if it is underground marketing or a legitimate feeling that the song is important, but it should only be added 1) In that context that the song has added an anti-semitic definition to the term that was previously not there 2) Some sort of "in popular culture" section. --Gameshints (talk) 21:21, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

• I think that including a link to the video is important, because it is directly addressed by the NYT and MJS newspaper articles. I think being addressed in the NYT is good enough to establish relevance, don't you? But, that does not mean that the video should be treated as a reliable primary source for claims about the word's meaning. After all, it is just a video made by a couple of students, not a paper in a peer-reviewed article. So, I think it should be included because the NYT article establishes its relevance to the debate, but any claims about what the song/video "mean" or "say" should be based on secondary sources i.e. the newspaper articles.

As for whether the term itself is anti-Semitic: I think it's clear that the term coastie can have Jewish connotations (notice I didn't say anti-Semitic - acknowledging that you know someone is Jewish is not the same as being anti-Semitic), but it's definitely more of a fashion-based term. It just happens that there is a huge overlap between Jewish girls on campus and girls on campus that dress like a "coastie," so the conflation is not hard to understand. And truth be told, I don't think there is a lot of anti-Semitism on campus. But it just so happens that MN and WI (where most UW students are from) does not have a large Jewish population. So when the Midwestern students and the "coasties" have a cultural clash (for entirely non-religion based reasons), they reach for ways to label and caricature each other. I think this is the real problem here. Whether or not the term 'coastie' is anti-Semitic is interesting and worth debating, but the touchy nature of the subject tends to sweep the issue of the Sconnie/coastie divide (the real issue) under the rug.

Gameshints, as to your #2: I don't think that the song has added an anti-Semitic definition to the term, but I think that it may have perpetuated the idea that the term is inherently anti-Semitic (something that I personally disagree with). Hopefully we can eventually find a reputable source to support this.

I realize that everything I just said in those last two paragraphs are not backed up by any sources, so please don't waste time telling me about it. It's just my impression based on 10+ years of being involved in the UW community.

Above all else, we need to keep this article sourced. Right now it probably ranks around a B- in that department.--Hraefen ^Talk 06:21, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Whether or not the article is sourced, WP:NAD still applies. Even moreso for slang terms. --joeOnSunset (talk) 05:23, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

There are still no references in the article to this term being used outside of UW. I understand that the comments on the youtube video may say that, but that is hardly a credible source. The song itself could have caused the term to be used temporarily on those campuses. I have removed the "From Bloomingdales to Bloomington" source, since it does not contain the term "coastie" and was being used to support the definition. The url is http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122057234017401625.html, if someone can find a place where it would be appropriate. I can personally attest for the fact that it is not a common term on the Indiana University campus, given that I have only heard one person use it (and that was after seeing the youtube video). I still have questions about notability and the WP:NAD policy concerning this article. Lord Manwe 18:54, 15 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lordmanwe (talk • contribs)

Deletion

I have proposed this article for deletion because of WP:NOT#DICT. If this term is truly notable, perhaps it can be merged into the article for UW-Madison. However, I am not convinced that it is. rdude (talk) 23:18, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Coastie. 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/20150919215007/http://www.jewishchronicle.org/article.php?article_id=11902 to http://www.jewishchronicle.org/article.php?article_id=11902
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110616082644/http://www3.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=370655 to http://www3.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=370655

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) 03:20, 16 January 2018 (UTC)