Talk:Cocooning (behaviour)

Sociology Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Internet Low‑importance

	Internet portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet 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.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE.

BC1278 (talk · contribs) has been paid by Faith Popcorn on their behalf. Their editing has included contributions to this article.

Need a separate article on cocooning of aircraft

As done to protect from weather/corrosion when laid up - as in De_Havilland_Comet, and [1] and then disambiguate between these two and Cocooning_(immunization) - Rod57 (talk) 20:44, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

http://ezinearticles.com/?Taking-Advantage-of-Trends:-Cocooning&id=3431
Triggered by \bezinearticles\.com\b on the global blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 17:29, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion of New Draft

As part of a discussion to possibly merge this article into Faith Popcorn, I created a new, much expanded proposed draft of this article as an alternative. I have a WP:COI as a paid consultant to Faith Popcorn, so cannot make any changes without the review of other editors. The following discussion with the editor who proposed the merger, from the user space for the draft, requests some modifications, which I made, and gives me approval to publish the modified draft here, instead of the merger.BC1278 (talk) 15:40, 19 September 2016 (UTC)BC1278 ---[reply]

This looks like a good article and I am content for you to publish it as-is. However, I do have some thoughts which you may wish to consider, or I am happy to edit here or in article namespace:

Most of the discussion and references seem to assume that cocooning is something one does at home, but the introduction doesn't even mention the home.
The "Popcorn Report" section has no citations. And have restaurant sales actually declined?
The focus on dictionary usage seems a bit defensive to me and is anyway not the primary issue in establishing WP:NEO. IMHO it would be better to drop the section.
I'm not sure that Success Intelligence counts as a reliable source.

Regards, Vectro (talk) 20:01, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Home now mentioned in intro.
Added citation to book. Rephrased one sentence to make clear that she was citing declining restaurant sales from the vantage point of her 1991 book. She cites the stats in the book. But I think it's outside the scope of this article to figure out what happened in the 25 years since. However, I do cite the author who in his book says in 1997 she was wrong because outdoor activities had grown substantially.
Removed dictionary section. Added just a bit of it to the History.
Removed sentence about Success Intelligence, but left it as a source in the lead to support the idea that cocooning concept is used in self-help (source should be acceptable in this usage because it is used only to establish itself, not to establish other facts.)

Best, BC1278 (talk) 20:41, 17 September 2016 (UTC)BC1278[reply]

Looks good to me, deploy at will. BTW it looks like your original search queries are showing up in your Google Books links — not a problem from my perspective, but I thought you'd like to know. Vectro (talk)

No source for coinage date

In researching this term, there seems to be no clear support for 1981 as the coinage date, as stated in this article. Faith Popcorn's website states "Faith Popcorn’s TrendBank captured the imagination of clients, consumers and the press when Faith coined the term Cocooning to describe the cultural current she saw emerging in the late 1980s." (https://www.faithpopcorn.com/about-us/trendbank.html) The earliest publication seems to be 1986 (New Yorker article in the references), and Merriam-Webster online also cites the earliest use as 1986. If the date of 1981 is correct, it would be great to have a source to corroborate it. The Raven's Librarian (talk) 18:54, 23 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The 1981 date is in the USA Today article cited as the source. [2] ----BC1278

Oxford and several other dictionaries say that use to describe a kind of stay-at-home-behaviour, is solely a US usage. Using the term in the more general sense, to mean wrapped up in a comfortable or metaphorically protective layer, is as old as the hills and presumably the root for this usage. Pincrete (talk) 14:54, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]