Talk:Richard Nixon mask

"The masks are generally worn by folks raising both arms with hands extended in form of the peace sign reciting Nixon's phrase "I am not a crook""

This statement seems flawed. I mean, if someone is wearing the mask for more than a few seconds they are certainly not usually standing in that pose. Is there a way of re-phrasing this that is true, yet doesn't sound like "a fun thing to do when wearing the Nixon mask is to make the V-sign with both hands and say "I am not a crook""? (And can I point out that he wasn't in that pose when he said those words? Not that it matters). -R. fiend 03:54, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)

• Could just be for photo shoots. Those are generally the two things Nixon is (physically) remembered for. -Litefantastic 00:36, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • I agree, which is why I didn't simply delete it. I still think it needs to be rewritten because it just sounds bad the way it's stated now. -R. fiend 01:02, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
    • You could just take that one line out. -Litefantastic 11:48, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

---

from VfD:

Nonsense. Lots of famous people have had masks made of them. Every Halloween there are lots of them. Does every person need an article if they've ever had a mask made of them? And the list is very incomplete. RickK 00:22, Nov 26, 2004 (UTC)

Comment: True, but this one appears to be particularly timeless and notable. —[[User:Radman1|RaD Man (talk)]] 07:03, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

• Nixon masks are a bit of a special case, but unless something more can be said about them than this, still delete. --fvw* 00:38, 2004 Nov 26 (UTC)
• Delete. The most I could find to say about Richard Nixon masks was that they're popular in the USA at Halloween and there's apparently a weird scene in a 1997 movie called The Ice Storm where Christina Ricci makes out with a guy while wearing one. --Minority Report (entropy rim riot) 00:56, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • There's also an episode of That 70s Show where what's-his-name streaks while wearing a Nixon mask while Ford is visiting. I think that's one of maybe three episodes I've actually seen of that show, but that doesn't seem like enough to write an article on either. - RedWordSmith 02:26, Nov 26, 2004 (UTC)
• Perhaps this deserves a sentence at Richard Nixon. Delete. --L33tminion | (talk) 02:24, Nov 26, 2004 (UTC)
  • I agree. Also, wasn't there a movie where a bunch of cheerleaders robbed a bank while wearing Nixon masks? -Sean Curtin 03:22, Nov 26, 2004 (UTC)
    • That's Sugar & Spice, but they were "Betty Doll" masks - Nunh-huh 06:38, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
    • In the dream I had, it was former Presidents dressed as cheerleaders. I still wake up screaming. --Minority Report
      • And that's some seriously disrupted dreaming there!<g>. Point Break interrupted by football halftime and an undigested bit of beef, a blot of mustard, a crumb of cheese, a fragment of an underdone potato? - Nunh-huh 06:38, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
• Delete: Trivia beyond trivia. The Nixon mask was used as a cultural identifier, as left wingers and counter-culture folks liked to make statements by wearing it, but that's meaningless. Geogre 03:05, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. The Nixon mask is famous, instantly recognizable to most Americans. It wouldn't have been for no reason that Christina Ricci wore one while making out with a guy in that movie, now would it? It's a symbol. Everyking 05:57, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
• No vote. Haven't made up my mind. I'm inclined to delete it as it is, but the concept is worth exploring as a phenomenon. I'm not an expert, but it seems like the "Nixon mask" basically started the trend of (or at least widely popularized in the U.S.) latex masks of famous living figures, which has become widespread as something we assume always sort of existed. As a form of subversive social protest, it's somewhat interesting as thing unto itself and possibly worth a decent article eventually. Certainly it has become almost universal (there were many Clinton masks, for example), but the Nixon mask itself has remained as a nearly iconic representation of the genre of protest against his administration (sort of like Laugh-In), as well as the prototype for this kind of mask as a whole. The scene in The Ice Storm was f-ing creepy to anyone who remembers that era. -- Decumanus 06:25, 2004 Nov 26 (UTC)
• Light delete. It could be fleshed out into a decent article, but it would be very unlikely that that would happen. -Cookiemobsta 06:29, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
• Delete: I don't see how the article could become more than it is and, as it is, it isn't very useful. DCEdwards1966 06:35, Nov 26, 2004 (UTC)
• Redirect to Richard Nixon. Wile E. Heresiarch 20:07, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. The Nixon mask is special -- you don't see people wearing LBJ or Ike masks on Halloween. Creepy is right. Hey, is it just coincidence that "Committee to Reelect the President" is CREEP ? Wile E. Heresiarch 00:27, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. Iconic, ironic and oddly beloved of heisters, boosters and jackers everywhere. [1] [2] [3] chocolateboy 13:16, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
• Keep - because what kind of Wikipedian won't stand up behind his own creations? -Litefantastic 23:20, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
• Keep it. —[[User:Radman1|RaD Man (talk)]] 07:03, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. Willing to reconsider, but this is worthless as is. All it says is "They make latex masks out of Nixon and they show up in movies sometimes." Gamaliel 07:34, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)
• Suggestion: merge into a larger article on latex masks of famous living figures or some such, especially if Decumanus is correct and Nixon is the first instance of this (now fairly common) practice. -leigh 12:50, Nov 29, 2004 (UTC)
  • If/when that larger article is written, Nixon masks will deserve brief mention. In the meantime, this orphan article can be deleted as self-evident from the title. (The only non-obvious section - fictional characters who have worn one - I consider to be trivia below the level discussed in an encyclopedia.) Rossami (talk) 17:35, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. Intrigue 20:45, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. hehe --Rebroad 23:42, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. Unless some content is added to the article explaining its historical or symbolic significance it should be deleted, it offers no scholarly content.Cari0028 01:53, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. I initially thought not, but a brief Google search convinced me that this subject does have symbolic significance, if only from an American-centric point of view. That this significance is not yet explained in the article is irrelevant because perfection is not required. [[User:GeorgeStepanek|George\^talk ]] 02:52, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. The Nixon mask is well known and a part of Americana. --ShaunMacPherson 07:34, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Delete or merge. Come on guys. If no-one's been able to expand the article over the last week it's been on here, t's gotta go. Non-notable. The Land 17:38, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Marginal keep. [[User:GRider|GRider\^talk]] 18:15, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. If this mask is of cultural significance, it could possibly be the lead in an article regarding political masks. On it's own it is of very little value. John Vedral 03:08, Dec 2, 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. A very minor fad for a very small period. I see no reason why this should be an article. Indrian 03:47, Dec 2, 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. Certainly a more popular important fad than the latest Pokéwhatever, and more likely to develop into a well-written fleshed-out article. [[User:Livajo|力伟|☺]] 13:31, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. RickK is really out of touch with popular culture. -- Chaz

end moved discussion

this topic

seems totally useless?

Picture?

looks like there is one now —Pengo 05:31, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Two things that should be mentioned

1.) The prevalence of Nixon masks as a disguise among robbers

2.) The frequent and odd association between Nixon masks and sexual acts —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.149.181.145 (talk) 05:08, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Richard Nixon mask. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051208114058/http://www.harpers.org/HarpersIndex2002-10.html to http://www.harpers.org/HarpersIndex2002-10.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:55, 25 December 2017 (UTC)