Talk:City Lights Bookstore/Archive 1

Archive 1

Landmark Status

I revised this section for accuracy, verifiable content, and NPOV. I linked to the final PDF version of the SF Board of Supervisors ordinance that conferred landmark status. Its language concerning City Lights' role with respect to free speech and First Amendment protection is somewhat more neutral and objective than the language in the (unattributed) quotation originally linked to this section, derived from the article "Poetry Landmark" on Poets.org. It is likely that the latter quotation appeared in one or the other of the preliminary documents that were submitted in support of landmark status, but these are not available online and therefore the final ordinance is more verifiable. --The issues of whether or not City Lights Bookstore is itself an exemplar of free speech, or whether or not they ought to stock books by Oriana Fallaci, are not relevant to the landmark status ordinance, so apart from the NPOV problems with language in the previous versions of the section, if the politics of City Lights Bookstore is to be addressed it should be in a separate section. --David Sewell 21:45, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Shameful

This is the most biased article on Wikipedia that I have ever seen. I am not qualified to work on articles, but I am positive that this article is INSANELY biased! -- —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.255.79.34 (talk) 00:18, 7 February 2007 (UTC).

Copyright violation

I removed the first paragraph because it is a blatant cut and paste from [1] Schabot 02:27, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, there is much more than that. Schabot 02:31, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I am sure there is more material pulled from the City Lights Website, but I don't have time to check it all. I suggest that the page be scraped except for the intro and started again from scratch. Schabot 02:38, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Conflicting Dates

The date that the City Lights building was purchased is given as 2000 and later, 1999. Which is it?

teneriff (talk) 02:54, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

1999 is referenced, although the ref is not available now. I've removed 2000. Ty 12:05, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

publisher needs its own article

i know its a combined business, but the history of their publishing work is significant, and deserves its own article. i am in no way skilled enough to do this, but maybe someone will be inspired. i will watch Mercurywoodrose (talk) 04:07, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on City Lights Bookstore. 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/20080321115758/http://archives.cnn.com:80/2000/books/news/06/27/beat.establishment/ to http://archives.cnn.com/2000/books/news/06/27/beat.establishment/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 22:56, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Neighborhood

I removed the North Beach category and added the Chinatown category. Seems to me the building is actually located within the boundaries of Chinatown, but please ping me if you disagree so we can discuss further. Thanks! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:50, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

It sits at the border of the two communities. Resolved by recognizing Chinatown as its formal location, but recording that it "self-identifies" with North Beach (Its WP:NOTABILITY derives in part from its role in the Beat movement associated with North Beach.) This is in the spirit of MOS:LEGAL NAME and WP:BALANCE. JKPrivett (talk) 18:27, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Self-identification

This is new to me: a non-sentient entity can self-identify? By what means does it accomplish this? Nicmart (talk) 00:04, 4 January 2021 (UTC)