31:
78:. seriously, if you vote keep it really helps to say something about policy or sourcing. The only arguments based on the relevant policy - N - were for deletion and no effort has been made to counter them so the delete arguments win by default as the only valid policy based arguments put forward. Source it or lose it seems pretty clear.
442:
Click the Google news archive search at the top of the AFD. Read through those summaries. Sounds like this is something notable. The first result, Meriden
Journal - Apr 9, 1963, talks about this fad saying "The symbol of the surfer - bleached hair swept over the forehead- has been adopted by both
408:
This is not significant coverage. I went through all of the sources in the article, and the vast majority do not cover the topic. Most of them mention surfers, some of them even mention hair, but none of them discuss the topic of "surfer hair". Many of them are about a particular surfer, and make
444:
403:
which cover the subject in a significant way have not been produced. The sources provided above by Dr. Blofeld have almost nothing at all to do with surfer hair. The first one is about skin diseases and mentions the effect of exposure to sun, but never relates it to surfers specifically. The
236:
234:
LOL this was eh, one of my less serious articles... I think I reading an article on a skullet so I thought why not have this article. You know I'd say "surfer hair" is actually well covered in fashion and popular culture. And there are numerous reliable sources like
244:
240:
185:
146:
263:
179:
40:
443:
boys and girls." With another paragraph about it that follows. Popular hairstyle for awhile there, and still remains today. The style isn't just for blond people
496:
what is the criterion you are using? It can't be the GNG, & I can't think of any applicable specialized criterion or section of NOT.
221:
378:
339:
312:
17:
542:
343:
413:, however it is a how-to article and arguably not a reliable source. Up to this point, I have not seen any sources which pass
119:
114:
479:
123:
200:
167:
106:
524:
482:
with a short description and leave it at that. There isn't enough coverage of the style to create an entire article.
65:
46:
523:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
296:
64:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
161:
308:
335:
316:
484:
446:, but the hairstyle itself. Isn't there a book about hairstyles, or something for hairdresser to know?
427:
383:
248:
157:
507:
491:
469:
434:
390:
356:
320:
300:
278:
253:
225:
88:
371:
418:
347:
292:
207:
193:
247:. This easily passes requirements, especially now I've added 25 odd solid sources from books... ♦
330:
274:
58:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
422:
351:
447:
288:
110:
414:
483:
426:
382:
400:
173:
410:
406:"However, the Surfer boy's hair style was due far more to status than sexual factors."
536:
503:
270:
85:
79:
140:
102:
94:
329:
Seems like a common term in need of encyclopedic content, which it now has.--
84:
Apparently headcount is more important then stength of argument these days.
498:
417:. It almost seems as if the article was deliberately created with
243:
covering it...In fact google books has picked up over 14,000 hits
517:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
404:
second source is just a google snippet, and the only mention is
25:
367:: The article under discussion here has been flagged for
409:
mention of that surfer's hair. There was one exception,
136:
132:
128:
192:
206:
68:). No further edits should be made to this page.
527:). No further edits should be made to this page.
8:
264:list of Fashion-related deletion discussions
363:
258:
262:: This debate has been included in the
45:For an explanation of the process, see
232:Keep and expand with reliable sources
216:Original research, no sources found.
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
425:the non-notability of the subject.
41:deletion review on 2011 January 30
24:
29:
47:Knowledge (XXG):Deletion review
480:Illustrated list of hairstyles
419:as many references as possible
1:
508:23:18, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
492:18:57, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
470:05:57, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
435:21:15, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
391:21:15, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
357:19:41, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
321:16:01, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
301:13:41, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
279:16:31, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
254:09:47, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
226:02:09, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
89:03:03, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
82:18:08, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
305:Keep. Good job Dr Blofeld
559:
543:Pages at deletion review
520:Please do not modify it.
478:I'd say add an entry at
61:Please do not modify it.
379:Article Rescue Squadron
287:Outstanding work by
224:and a clue-bat •
73:The result was
421:in an attempt to
393:
355:
311:comment added by
281:
267:
53:
52:
39:was subject to a
550:
522:
489:
488:
466:
463:
460:
457:
454:
451:
432:
431:
401:Reliable sources
388:
387:
376:
370:
333:
323:
289:User:Dr. Blofeld
268:
251:
219:
218:Ten Pound Hammer
211:
210:
196:
144:
126:
63:
33:
32:
26:
558:
557:
553:
552:
551:
549:
548:
547:
533:
532:
531:
525:deletion review
518:
486:
464:
461:
458:
455:
452:
449:
429:
385:
374:
368:
306:
249:
217:
153:
117:
101:
98:
66:deletion review
59:
37:This discussion
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
556:
554:
546:
545:
535:
534:
530:
529:
514:
513:
512:
511:
510:
473:
472:
437:
394:
360:
359:
324:
303:
293:Colonel Warden
282:
256:
214:
213:
150:
97:
92:
71:
70:
54:
51:
50:
44:
34:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
555:
544:
541:
540:
538:
528:
526:
521:
515:
509:
505:
501:
500:
495:
494:
493:
490:
481:
477:
476:
475:
474:
471:
468:
467:
445:
441:
438:
436:
433:
424:
420:
416:
412:
407:
402:
398:
395:
392:
389:
380:
373:
366:
362:
361:
358:
353:
349:
345:
341:
337:
332:
328:
325:
322:
318:
314:
310:
304:
302:
298:
294:
290:
286:
283:
280:
276:
272:
265:
261:
257:
255:
252:
246:
242:
238:
233:
230:
229:
228:
227:
223:
209:
205:
202:
199:
195:
191:
187:
184:
181:
178:
175:
172:
169:
166:
163:
159:
156:
155:Find sources:
151:
148:
142:
138:
134:
130:
125:
121:
116:
112:
108:
104:
100:
99:
96:
93:
91:
90:
87:
83:
81:
77:
69:
67:
62:
56:
55:
48:
42:
38:
35:
28:
27:
19:
519:
516:
497:
448:
439:
405:
396:
364:
331:TonyTheTiger
326:
313:2.122.170.27
284:
259:
231:
215:
203:
197:
189:
182:
176:
170:
164:
154:
75:
74:
72:
60:
57:
36:
307:—Preceding
250:Dr. Blofeld
180:free images
103:Surfer hair
95:Surfer hair
348:WP:CHICAGO
291:. Bravo!
222:his otters
271:• Gene93k
537:Category
309:unsigned
147:View log
377:by the
352:WP:FOUR
186:WP refs
174:scholar
120:protect
115:history
86:Spartaz
80:Spartaz
485:Snotty
428:Snotty
415:WP:GNG
397:Delete
384:Snotty
372:rescue
158:Google
124:delete
76:delete
504:talk
465:Focus
201:JSTOR
162:books
141:views
133:watch
129:links
16:<
487:Wong
440:Keep
430:Wong
423:mask
411:here
386:Wong
365:Note
327:Keep
317:talk
297:talk
285:Keep
275:talk
260:Note
245:here
241:this
239:and
237:this
194:FENS
168:news
137:logs
111:talk
107:edit
499:DGG
381:.
344:BIO
269:--
208:TWL
145:– (
539::
506:)
399:-
375:}}
369:{{
354:)
319:)
299:)
277:)
266:.
220:,
188:)
139:|
135:|
131:|
127:|
122:|
118:|
113:|
109:|
43:.
502:(
462:m
459:a
456:e
453:r
450:D
350:/
346:/
342:/
340:C
338:/
336:T
334:(
315:(
295:(
273:(
212:)
204:·
198:·
190:·
183:·
177:·
171:·
165:·
160:(
152:(
149:)
143:)
105:(
49:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.