Talk:Manhattan (cocktail): Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Hayford Peirce
imported>Robert W King
Line 15: Line 15:


:I stuck it in because it's prominently featured in the Wikipedia article and I tried tracking down a source for it.  Couldn't find any: it seems to be an Internet thingee that got itself into Wikipedia, from which it has spread like a weed.  But you think it ought to be removed? [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 14:52, 15 June 2007 (CDT)
:I stuck it in because it's prominently featured in the Wikipedia article and I tried tracking down a source for it.  Couldn't find any: it seems to be an Internet thingee that got itself into Wikipedia, from which it has spread like a weed.  But you think it ought to be removed? [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 14:52, 15 June 2007 (CDT)
::I think it should get the axe, because it's speculation.  If there was some written lore or something to indicate this, it would be a different story.  But given Wikipedia's history of questionable accuracy I wouldn't rely on it and pull it.  Plus, it really seems like opinion.  It seems like one of those things where a guy worked it into the article because he was called a sissy for drinking one.  I think there's an unwritten drinking rule that the more fruity a drink is, the less "masculine" it is. --[[User:Robert W King|Robert W King]] 14:57, 15 June 2007 (CDT)

Revision as of 14:57, 15 June 2007


Article Checklist for "Manhattan (cocktail)"
Workgroup category or categories Food Science Workgroup [Please add or review categories]
Article status Developing article: beyond a stub, but incomplete
Underlinked article? Yes
Basic cleanup done? Yes
Checklist last edited by Hayford Peirce 14:37, 15 June 2007 (CDT)

To learn how to fill out this checklist, please see CZ:The Article Checklist.





"Drinking Man's Cocktail"

Last I heard, the Manhattan isn't really a "man's" drink. I'm not sure I'd put this claim on there unless one could substiantiate it. --Robert W King 14:42, 15 June 2007 (CDT)

I stuck it in because it's prominently featured in the Wikipedia article and I tried tracking down a source for it. Couldn't find any: it seems to be an Internet thingee that got itself into Wikipedia, from which it has spread like a weed. But you think it ought to be removed? Hayford Peirce 14:52, 15 June 2007 (CDT)
I think it should get the axe, because it's speculation. If there was some written lore or something to indicate this, it would be a different story. But given Wikipedia's history of questionable accuracy I wouldn't rely on it and pull it. Plus, it really seems like opinion. It seems like one of those things where a guy worked it into the article because he was called a sissy for drinking one. I think there's an unwritten drinking rule that the more fruity a drink is, the less "masculine" it is. --Robert W King 14:57, 15 June 2007 (CDT)