Talk:pioneer generation

RFD discussion: November–December 2017
This is given a very specific Singaporean definition, but just about every place or group that has a definite beginning and a multi-generational history can be spoken of as having a "pioneer generation", with various nuances in the senses of pioneer and generation used, depending on the context. Yes, there are differences in the context of Singapore, but those are for an encyclopedia article, not a dictionary. Chuck Entz (talk) 14:56, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. A lot of these Singaporean English entries make me cringe... And what's the deal with all the accounts? --Barytonesis (talk) 16:01, 6 November 2017 (UTC)


 * I believe it's a class being set homework of creating entries. The teacher popped up last time we had a lot of them. Equinox ◑ 16:25, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see. Thanks for clarifying that. --Barytonesis (talk) 12:15, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete: as with and, I remain unconvinced that these terms are not SoP. — SGconlaw (talk) 17:14, 6 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Deleted. We are getting a lot of Singapore crap recently. SemperBlotto (talk) 06:24, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Although I think "pioneer generation" may have been a good candidate to delete - can I ask, what's the deal with just deleting it without giving other editors who can't check things out every day a chance to vote? Is there some sort of due process, or not? - Sonofcawdrey (talk) 13:54, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * You can still vote on it- entries can be undeleted very easily. I agree, though, that it would have been better to leave it until the vote was done, so people could find out about the vote. I understand why he did it, though: you'd be amazed at the sheer volume of garbage edits we see and deal with every day, and he spends more time than the rest of us dealing with the mess. Chuck Entz (talk) 15:03, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * It's harder to make an informed judgment when you only have the entry name to go by, though. --Barytonesis (talk) 15:08, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Right, if voting is still open then we should be able to see the proposed definition. If the decision has already been made to delete it then voting should not still be open. Mihia (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. I can imagine the amount of utter rubbish that must be getting added - but I feel my imagination must fall short of the reality. Also, I recognise it is a great task that the administrators do and they deserve all praise. I would have liked, however, to see the entry before it was deleted since in the Singapore context the word "pioneer" has a very specific meaning (one imposed by the government, but used throughout the country) that is not captured by the current definitions. So it would have been good to see what had been written even though it was in a transparent compound (i.e. SOP) - Sonofcawdrey (talk) 09:21, 8 November 2017 (UTC)


 * The def was: "A special group of people born on/before 31 Dec 1949 and possess Singapore citizenship on/before 31 Dec 1986, who are given this title to recognise their contributions to Singapore's early development". Equinox ◑ 20:44, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. It looks clearly not SoP, with a decidedly specific meaning, though only understood in defined sense in Singapore. See Pioneer Generation Package.) Pioneer seems as much an includable honorific, IMO, as Her Majesty. DCDuring (talk) 00:55, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I wrote too quickly. Lowercase pioneer is more like millennial. It is in part an honorific and seems to have been defined as an administrative class for purposes of eligibility for certain benefits.
 * pioneer generation is a lot like ''Generation X. DCDuring (talk) 01:18, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I feel that would be going down the slippery slope of having entries like . That's the job of Wikipedia, not the Wiktionary. — SGconlaw (talk) 02:44, 9 November 2017 (UTC)


 * We already cross that line arbitrarily whenever we feel like it. Snow White is a book title. Pecksniff (as defined) is a fictional character. Hundred Years' War is... a war... if we can have a war, I suppose we can have a court. They aren't brands as such (I'm sure the éminences grises are gnashing their teeth and trying to make these things brands). I do suspect we might be too quick to delete apparently-SoP Asian phrases because we (mostly) aren't Asian and they don't mean much to us. &mdash; Sgconlaw excepted of course! Equinox ◑ 02:49, 9 November 2017 (UTC)


 * There is an entry for, but I don't think there is a need for a capitalised proper noun. DonnanZ (talk) 09:45, 10 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Deleted by SemperBlotto. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 10:03, 11 December 2017 (UTC)