Talk:Dead-end job

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dead-end job article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Business High‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles 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.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Economics Low‑importance

	Business and economics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics 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.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Occupations (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Occupations, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.OccupationsWikipedia:WikiProject OccupationsTemplate:WikiProject OccupationsOccupations articles

Organized Labour Low‑importance

	Organized Labour portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organized Labour, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Organized Labour 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.Organized LabourWikipedia:WikiProject Organized LabourTemplate:WikiProject Organized Labourorganized labour articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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.

This article was nominated for deletion on 18 October 2013 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

Other languages? / Dead-end radiostations

How is Dead-end job call'd in other languages, such as Dutch, French, German, Italian, etcetera... (?). I want to see a Dutch equivalent of this article. Is the topic of the extremely boring tiny playlists of daily heard "feelgood" music (music without swing or jazz) above the workfloor also mentioned somewhere? Is there a name for it? (I remember a very interesting documentary from Sundance Channel about a certain sort of radiostations and their daily repeated small playlists of "feelgood" music which sound extremely boring because you hear it every day above the workfloor) (Dead-end radiostations). DannyCaes (talk) 08:24, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Typical characteristics of Dead-end radiostations are:

Their music is like drinking a pint of lukewarm beer without foam, or like staring at a grey bucket without water and a dry grey floorcloth hanging on the bucket's rim (a dead-end experience).
There is absolutely no joy in their music, no electricity, no swing or "schwung", no spirit, no wit. It doesn't activate the brain.
It's as if they put a spoon in the ocean of popular music and only play the content of the spoon, nothing else, and this day after day, week after week, month after month, year after year (0.0000000001 percent of popular music, the other 99.9999999999 percent of popular music doesn't seem to exist).
After about three or four days of listening to the radio (to a dead-end radiostation) you get te impression that they have access to something like one hundred songs. No more. None of the artists seem to have recorded more than one or two songs. Almost all songs are sung by singers in midlife crisis or something related (weak heartbroken men without a sturdy spine to carry on in life) (these are typical examples of the tell-me-how-am-I-supposed-to-live-without-you syndrome). FACE LIFE!, as Charles Chaplin yell'd at the wealthy drunken man at the point when he wanted to commit suicide, in the movie City Lights.
They want to see the people of the working class like a flock of mindless sheep.
Listening to such daily repeated music is like living on a tiny island on which the tiny population knows only themselves, they have no idea of populations on other islands or in other continents far beyond their surrounding horizon.
If you ask your colleagues on the workfloor about the quality of the music, they say: I almost fall asleep, or: It's every day the same, and also: It sucks!

DannyCaes (talk) 08:03, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

'Dead End Job' is not in the dictionary. Prove me wrong by sending me a link showing us that it is. --Priceless Fturue (talk) 21:33, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find many movies, video games or bands listed here on Wikipedia in the dictionaries either. What's your point? --85.131.105.89 (talk) 14:39, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Biased description

Why does this page include only lower paying low status jobs. It could also be argued that there are high paying dead end jobs, too. Hollywood is full of actors that make a lot of money but don't go anywhere. Consider, too, that the President of the United States, the highest office in the land is limited to only two terms. Where do you go from there that's higher? lol — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.232.177.237 (talk) 00:06, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

After President, one can easily make far more than the $400,000/year salary by becoming a professional speaker or an author. --2001:4898:80E8:ED31:0:0:0:5 (talk) 23:24, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting topic! In some way it reminds me the dead-end experiences of several Apollo astronauts after their years at NASA and their lunar missions. The to-be-filled-in years after the moon, to try to pick up "normal" daily life on Earth (the Post-Apollo Syndrome). DannyCaes (talk) 10:39, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Editing to Page

I will be making it a point to update this page and add more content to it. It will be a project that I will be modifying frequently over the course of a month for a final project within one of my business courses. --ThePerryKid (talk) 00:57, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have completed a rough draft. I understand there are misspelling and such. I will be proofreading this page a couple times within the next week to fine-tune any blemishes that I may have introduced. Thank you kindly to those who have helped me fix some spelling errors. ThePerryKid (talk) 01:31, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@ThePerryKid: - the article certainly needs cleaning up. Are you planning to address all the guff about "negative vibes"?--Gronk Oz (talk) 15:02, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Gronk Oz: - Besides the guff about "negative vibes", what else within the article do you suggest needs cleaning up? I believe the article is in a much better state then what it previously was. ThePerryKid (talk) 00:53, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @ThePerryKid: I looked at the history - you have already expanded this article considerably. I applaud you for that, and I have a couple of thoughts that would improve it further. Firstly, large chunks of the article are just lists of thoughts that would be better presented as prose. A longer list of "possible signs" is not better, we should try to add value by summarizing the most important aspects of the published literature. This is highlighted when there is no reliable source behind the information: many of those are just general-interest articles that don't have academic or editorial rigour. Speaking of sources, the second issue is that all four of the sources I tried to look up did not link to the actual sources. Instead, they linked to paywall portals such as EBSChost and UMass Dartmouth. This means it is impossible for anybody outside that particular university to follow up those references. Most of the article should be based on high quality sources, and news media reporting should come from well-established news outlets that are generally considered to be reliable for statements of fact. When taking information from opinion content, the identity of the author may help determine reliability, so it is important to establish their credentials as specialists and recognized experts in the subject. If the statement is not authoritative, be clear that it is just the opinion of that author in the text of the article and do not represent it as fact - if it is worth including at all. For example, the definition of "dead-end job" used from the start is open to debate, yet the only source given for it can't be checked. Even so, it comes from a work called "Vibrant Life" which does not appear to be a peer-reviewed academic journal and leads me to wonder how authoritative it is. --Gronk Oz (talk) 03:07, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Gronk Oz:, thank you for the detail behind your suggestions. This is my first Wikipedia page edit so I am not experienced with this at all. This is a class project and I thought journal articles would provide the most reliable data for the page. Give me some time and I will look into your suggestions and make the appropriate changes. ThePerryKid (talk) 01:24, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that context, @ThePerryKid: sorry if my comments were a bit abrupt before. Popular magazines can certainly be used, but they should not normally be the main source for an article. We want most of the article to be based on sources with solid editorial review (or a peer review process in the case of academic journals), so the reader knows how much confidence they can have in it. Of course, many articles don't live up to this ideal - but still we try! --Gronk Oz (talk) 06:38, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Good evening @Gronk Oz:, I spent some time going through all my references in the Dead-End Job page and have fixed all the links and confirmed that they all open myself. Feel free to let me know if you experience any other issues with them and thank you for letting me know about the broken links! ThePerryKid (talk) 01:51, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved by NuclearWarfare (talk · contribs) (non-admin housekeeping closure). Jenks24 (talk) 22:03, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dead end job → Dead-end job –

In all varieties of English, this is hyphenated. Required also by WP:MOS. $Tony (talk)$ 01:51, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support per proposer's rationale. Deor (talk) 12:25, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Nearly always hyphenated in reliable sources. Jenks24 (talk) 15:03, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support. To accord with WP:MOS and with common practice. Noetica^Tea? 21:36, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Better examples of dead-end jobs

How about some better examples of dead-end jobs?

Oops. Marc Bago (talk) 18:04, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There's plenty of dead-end jobs. If you have a dead-end job, try to fill in the break with your own explorations in science etcetera. Read books or explore online sites full of science, for example: Wikipedia. DannyCaes (talk) 10:58, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]