Talk:Pink Peacock

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Theleekycauldron (talk) 21:49, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Pink Peacock café

• ... that the co-founder of Pink Peacock (pictured) was charged with a crime after the café displayed a tote bag with the words "fuck the police" on it?
  • ALT1: ... that Pink Peacock's "fuck the police" tote bag sold out after the police seized one as evidence?
  • ALT2: ... that according to its founders, Pink Peacock (pictured) is the only "queer Yiddish anarchist vegan pay-what-you-can cafe" in the world?
  • ALT3: ... that customers at the Jewish anarchist café Pink Peacock (pictured) can pay as much or as little as they want?
  • Reviewed: HMS Racer (1833)
  • Comment: Fingers crossed hard for a usable photo soon. So no need to review yet, unless someone really wants to – I'll get a picture and a QPQ added ASAP Photo and QPQ added, ready for review

Created by Ezlev (talk). Self-nominated at 23:39, 8 March 2022 (UTC).

• This is certainly an unusual article that did its job of attracting an outsider's attention from a list of candidate subjects. It is long enough and was created recently enough. There is a tag for [timeframe] that I personally don't understand, unless it's saying that summer is too vague. You might want to check WP:SEASON as though certainly the British will know what summer is referring to, the southern hemisphere and the tropics will be at a loss. All four hooks check out in sources. Original is fine with BLP as they were quite glad in retrospect to be charged with breach of peace, ALT1 can use profanity as it is a quotation, and ALT2 is clearly attributed. ALT2 is the most wow for me. QPQ done. All images on page are fine as website quite logically not copyrighted. Unknown Temptation (talk) 21:26, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

• Thanks, Unknown Temptation! Your interpretation of the timeframe tag is exactly right. Since no other source is more clear, I've just removed both the word "summer" (which isn't critical for reader understanding) and taken off the tag. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 22:41, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

• Clear for lift off! No problems with this page Unknown Temptation (talk) 23:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

ALT2 to T:DYK/P6 without image

Advert tag?

Hey Eilidhmax, I see that you added {{Advert}} to this page. I'm wondering if you can offer a bit more detail about which part(s) of the article might be promotional or non-neutral? ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 18:17, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Scottish Sun Citation

User Ezlev has suggested that the Scottish Sun article need not be cited due to the Scottish Sun being on the deprecated sources list.

I personally disagree because in this context we are not citing information that the Scottish Sun has posted, but linking to an article that an entire subheading is based around. In my opinion the entire subheading loses credibility without it.

In interest of not driving traffic to the Scottish Sun I would suggest citing an archive.org link (or similar) to the article to transparently share what was said.

Let me know your thoughts! Crabappl.de.ap (talk) 17:35, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

The source currently being used here, Jewish Currents, states the following:

That tote became the center of controversy a few weeks ago, as police—responding to a complaint about its display in the window of the as-yet-unopened café—showed up at the home of Pink Peacock board members and co-founders Morgan Holleb and Joe Isaac, eventually charging Holleb with breach of the peace. The incident followed coverage of Pink Peacock in the right-wing tabloid The Scottish Sun, looking to drum up outrage about the space’s “no cops, no terfs” policy, which prompted vandalism of the storefront.

There's more detail about the vandalism later in the source. Our article currently says this:

In June 2021, Pink Peacock was the subject of reporting in the tabloid The Scottish Sun, which criticised their policy of "no cops, no terfs". Subsequently, the café's storefront was vandalised when a man painted over it. [...] Additionally, the coverage led to a complaint about the café displaying in its window a pink tote bag with the words "fuck the police" in English and Yiddish, which in turn led Police Scotland to visit Holleb and Isaac's home.

So Jewish Currents fully supports the content in our article about The Scottish Sun. Because of that, I don't understand why it would make sense to cite the Sun as well, given that references from The Sun are actively discouraged from being used in any article. Can you elaborate on your reasoning, Crabappl.de.ap? ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 18:01, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

+1 No need to cite the Sun directly. The whole point of source reliability is to cite the most authoritative resource, not the primary source for its own sake. czar 04:21, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The Jewish Currents article currently contains a link to the article (via an archive.org link), as well as providing the quoted text. I'm not super familiar with the policies around this, but would adding a footnote to that article after that claim be enough to satisfy you? --Pokechu22 (talk) 18:02, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

Proposed deletion

Many of the verifiable, reliable sources are press reports on what appear to be largely caper-based/publicity stunt type events. While the article can be seen as earning its place under subject-specific notability guidelines whether it's lived up to founding ideals is moot. The proposal may well be objected to and if so there should be some attempt to make the article more accurately reflect the reasons for closure and various controversies manufactured or otherwise. Neil McDermott (talk) 10:28, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

SUPPORT deletion. It's only notability is the minor controversy surrounding some of the staff members actions. Qcne (talk) 13:39, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, mostly agree. Although I think their 4-way intersectional USP (queer, Yiddish, anarchist, vegan) could have been (and was probably the initial) grounds for notability. However claiming that the cafe truly established itself and was present functionally in each and every one of those spaces is not supported by any of the sources cited in the article, nor is it more generally supported reputationally or by the brevity of the venture's tenure. Neil McDermott (talk) 21:01, 8 June 2023 (UTC)