Someone should make this an actual article instead of a rambling opinion piece... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:A000:F70F:9F00:21BD:533D:41C7:5E0F (talk) 23:39, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This attempt to deliberately mislead readers will not work, because truth is truth, and I (and others) will make sure truth will prevail. Please read my other comments on this page to understand the actual usage of the term "Baby Busters". After I posted those comments and wrote an accurate Buster article yesterday, "Piecraft" immediately went and reverted to the blatantly incorrect prior Buster article. So disrespectful to those of us that care about the credibilty of Wikipedia. If this continues, I will take all the appropriate steps to have "Piecraft" (and any other potential accomplice vandals) barred from this site, and make sure an accurate Buster article stays up here.

Again, the actual usage/meaning of the term "Baby Buster" is synonomous with Generation X (ie. those born approximately 1965-1980). If "Piecraft" can provide any evidence that the term is used to mean the lost generation between Boomers and Xers (ie. those born mid/late 1950's to mid/late 1960's), then provide that evidence. I have spent more of my time researching this today, and cannot find any evidence of this alleged usage anywhere.

What I did find what was what I commented about earlier on this page: "Baby Buster" is consistently used interchangably with "Generation X". I found four books written about "Baby Busters"--all four of them use this "same as GenX definition": http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/customer-reviews/1881273199 http://www.amazon.com/Reckless-Hope-Understanding-Reaching-Busters/dp/0801090180 http://www.amazon.ca/Inside-Soul-New-Generation-Strategies/dp/product-description/0310205948 http://www.amazon.com/Complete-Cross-Referenced-Generations-Collective-Unconscious/dp/1572973358/sr=8-1/qid=1171905699/ref=sr_1_1/102-3045707-9084912?ie=UTF8&s=books

I went through a bunch more Google hits from "Baby Busters", and ALL of them use this term as synonmous with GenX. NOT ONE media outlet anywhere uses the Buster term to mean between Boomers and Xers. Below are the links from the first few pages from Google's "Baby Buster" results. Included are articles from malor media (e.g. Time Magazine), encyclopedias, Universities, etc. ALL equate Buster with Xer:

http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:pYhygqidjHQJ:www.thefreedictionary.com/Baby%2BBusters+%22Baby+Busters%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=7&gl=us http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/5871/busters_and_boomlets.html http://www.brennerbooks.com/sellgen2.html http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=BarnaUpdate&BarnaUpdateID=84 http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/mcb/077/2000/00000017/00000006/art00002 http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3092/is_n10_v31/ai_12313341 http://www.allbusiness.com/specialty-businesses/non-profit-businesses/166461-1.html http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,146033,00.html http://people.bu.edu/wwildman/WeirdWildWeb/courses/thth/projects/thth_projects_01.htm http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:DMjAgn8bfsIJ:www.canadianencyclopedia.ca/index.cfm%3FPgNm%3DTCE%26Params%3DA1ARTA0000437+%22Baby+Busters%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=22&gl=us http://www.cflri.ca/eng/lifestyle/1997/young_90.php http://ctlibrary.com/14418 http://openweb.tvnews.vanderbilt.edu/1993-2/1993-02-25-NBC-15.html http://www.sbishere.com/demographics-baby-boomers-planning-coach/ http://www.pastors.com/article.asp?ArtID=4863 http://www.pma-online.org/scripts/shownews.cfm?id=382 http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3092/is_n20_v32/ai_14279537 http://encyclopedia.adoption.com/entry/baby-shortage/54/1.html http://192.80.61.73/view/1994/view1194.htm http://www.newhope.bc.ca/98-02-01.htm http://www.cflri.ca/pdf/e/pip18.pdf http://www.haworthpress.com/store/ArticleAbstract.asp?sid=N9S3GVJDT5JQ8GBT17NKA730XC54A50E&ID=23541 http://www.baylor.edu/lariat/news.php?action=story&story=9044

There are many more thousands of links to sites,publications, etc. who all use Baby Busters the same way as these links above.

Piecraft (and anyone else, for that matter): If you can provide evidence that the real usage of the term "Baby Buster" is different from all these citations, then provide that evidence. Otherwise, please do not change this article with any more dishonest representations. 21st century Susan 19:25, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I changed this page to reflect the true meaning of the term Baby Busters. This page was a particularly good example of how Wikipedia can be manipulated by a user with an agenda that doesn't coinicide with truth, and is a reminder to all of us who care about the continuing viability and credibility of Wikipedia to be vigilant in exposing bogus entries. The term "Baby Buster" has been commonly used interchangably with the terms "Generation X" and "13th Generation", to describe those born between approximately 1965 to 1980 (although these birth years have varied, starting as early as 1960, ending as late as 1983). Many major media outlets have used the term "Baby Busters" this way, for over 15 years. Here's one example, from Time Magazine: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,146033,00.html Google "Baby Buster", and you'll see that is almost always how this term is defined.

With one exception. One person decided he wanted to change the meaning of "Baby Busters" from its common abovementioned usage, to a new use: to describe the lost generation (in his view, born 1958-1968) between the Baby Boomers and the Xers/Busters/13ers. He put up a web site with this new usage, and went on message boards urging people to use the Buster term in this new way. Unfortunately for him, he was not able to enlist any support for this new use for the term. However on Wikipedia, he found a way to pretend that this term was being used this way, simply by writing an entry to that effect. He defined Baby Busters as being born 1958-1968, even though no one else uses the term to mean that. In turn, a bunch of other websites, like Anwers.com, Reference.com, etc., then automatically reproduce the Wikipedia entry, and all of a sudden, it might appear to a casual reader, that that really is the way the term Baby Busters is used.

But it's not. I spent a bunch of time going through the many hits on Google with this term, and I couldn't find even one article, from any publication, big or small, that uses Baby Buster this way. Every single writer I found uses the term Baby Buster as a synonym for Generation X, except for this one guy. Said differently, the only use of Baby Buster this way (ie. as a lost generation, born 1958-1968) is on this one guy's website, and (before I corrected it) on Wikipedia (and the sites that duplicate Wikipedia content).

Now this guy has every right to personally use this term, and any other term, any way he wants. But to write a Wikipedia entry pretending that others are using the term his way, when they clearly are not, is wrong. He apparently hoped it would fall through the cracks and no one would notice, since anyone doing research on this would quickly discover the actual way the term is used. I understand that he may feel disappointed that he wasn't able to generate interest or support for his proposed change of the meaning of the term, but just because you can't get any writers, pundits, demographers, etc. to agree with you, and use the term the way you want them to, doesn't make it OK to then turn that disappointment into a dishonest attempt to fool people.

Sorry to go on so long about this, but it really frustrates me when people undermine Wikipedia this way. I urge all of you who care about the future of Wikipedia to please look for this type of false article, and to do the proper research, and delete dishonest entries, while helping to write accurate ones. 21st century Susan 00:45, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm reading this years after you responded but I can provide answer for you. I remember learning about the Baby Boom in 6th grade. I had a great history teacher and she made the subject interesting. I was taught that the Baby Boom ended in 1955. Born in 1960, I was not in it. I remember the use of the term Baby Buster to refer to the 10 span between 1955 and 1965 and although I've looked for it online all you get is Baby Boom. Laziness, lets merge them in with a generation that had a completely different life experience because it's convenient. Booming economy? Home interests rates were in the mid teens when I graduated from college and the mid 80's market crash happened while I was getting my MBA. I'm sorry you can't find a reference on line, but trust me the terms did exist and it was more accurate than Boomer. 67.173.166.250 (talk) 20:33, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The term baby busters is also used in Canada. Is it used elsewhere, i.e. in Europe? The stats are all American, but it's not an American-only term. That should be made clear in the article. moink 17:44, 26 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Some may classify Jeffrey Dahmer as a "", but I sure wouldn't. RedWolf 03:51, Apr 6, 2004 (UTC)

Why label Nicole Brown Simpson as murdered and Gus Farace not?

Constabile? John wesley 20:19, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the people in the Baby Busters Generation are really http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_Jones. There's not enough references to Generation Jones in the article itself.Ruth_E 1 November 2006

@21st century Susan "Again, the actual usage/meaning of the term "Baby Buster" is synonomous with Generation X (ie. those born approximately 1965-1980)." - I agree. "Baby Buster" was the original designation for the group now commonly referred to as Generation X. (I don't know why this was done; the "Baby Buster" designation seems the better descriptive to me; "Generation X" is just edgier.) When I say "I agree", I mean that this is my experience and recollection. I recall a time before anybody had ever heard of "Generation X", and this group, the children of the "Baby Boomers", were known as the "Baby Busters". Drsruli (talk) 22:52, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Refer to[edit]

Baby Busters

Generation_Jones

Date Range for Baby Busters[edit]

Baby Busters were born between 1966 and 1971. http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/2011-census/index.html --Eday 2010 (talk) 13:11, 29 May 2012 (UTC) eday_2010[reply]

I have to agree here with the Busters being those born between the Boomers and Xers. I was always instructed that this was the case all through my schooling and had never been told that Xers and Busters were considered the same until fairly recently (in the last 10 years). Perhaps this term has changed? I was always proud to be a buster and not so proud of those considered Xers. They seemed misdirected and demanding where as those of us born in the 60's still seemed to understand the need for hard work and life planning. Im not sure when the term seems to have changed but at least from what I remember, It sure has. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.16.25.236 (talk) 21:42, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@204.16.25.236 I think that rather the opposite occurred. The "Baby Buster" designation is the original term for that era (How can a "generation" be just 5 years?), Generation X was retro'd to usurp the designation. Drsruli (talk) 22:57, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Aw, Crap[edit]

Thanks, Susan. Thanks, Piecraft. I've been a GenXer since Douglas Coupland's book Generation X came out. Coupland was born 8.5 years before me. And now I'm potentially a Baby Buster but NOT a GenXer? That's some nerve, you two. You ruined Christmas. 174.23.146.76 (talk) 22:47, 10 April 2019 (UTC)@reverendted[reply]

Late to the party[edit]

This is interesting because I was told [growing up] that being born in 1958 meant I was part of the buster generation. I was told by my parents and family that mid 50s to mid 60s was the busters. I think it was probably changed about the time the internet was getting big in the 90s. The reason there's little proof IMHO is that the change was pre-internet so by the time gen [##] s were set up online it was already moved. Just my $0.02 By egadgetguy