Talk:Cheer cheese

Ongoing Protest against cheese name - notable updates
I notice that a certain name was removed and replaced by another. The original name is back in the news again, as since the grandstand that he was fighting against is now being demolished for rebuilding, he intends to take up the cheese cudgel again.

Coon cheese next on anti-racism hit-list

September 26, 2008, 1:01 pm

http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/latest/5042301/coon-cheese-antiracism-hitlist/

I'll also comment that there has been a large amount of vandalism against this page, I expect more in future.

FoolesTroupe (talk) 13:37, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Coon Patent for cheese ripening Number 1579196 03/30/1926
Process for ripening cheese.

Document Type and Number:. United States Patent 1579196.

Inventors:. William, Coon Edward.

Publication Date:. 03/30/1926

www.freepatentsonline.com/1579196.html

FoolesTroupe (talk) 13:55, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Racism allegation
It is notable that the official history of Coon cheese says that the brandname was used in America as early as 1870. This weakens the argument that it was named after Edward Coon and destroys the argument that American uses of "coon" are irrelevant. As to the inventor, the history makes the strange comment that he was not an academic which seems to be correcting an earlier company legend...

Right or wrong, the allegation should be fairly dealt with and not dismissed vehemently as it is here.--Jack Upland (talk) 09:45, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

It should be noted that both the "C" and "N" words, while apparently of common American usage, were rarely if ever used in Australia, several other words (which I won't mention here, as they were often used derogatively) being the norm (I am a Mature Age Australian Citizen). The Australian Courts have rejected several previous approaches against both the Cheese (C word), and name of a Grandstand (N word) in Toowoomba.

FoolesTroupe (talk) 08:29, 1 October 2008 (UTC)


 * In my experience, you're correct about the use of "nigger" in middle 20th-century slang (I never heard it used), but I'm not sure why you include "coon" in that statement. I grew up during that time and "coon" was commonly used in slang by working-class people.  It wasn't polite, but it certainly wasn't hate-filled either, much like "pom" is used today.


 * It's curious why "abo" has become pejorative; after all, it's merely a contraction of "aborigine" and contractions are something for which Australians are well known. In fact, my father still uses it to demonstrate his curmudgeonliness and contempt for "PC gone mad", as he puts it.—

maturin (talk) 02:16, 17 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, Fooles Troupe, if you read what I said before responding to it, you'd realise that Coon Cheese originates in America. Anyway, "coon" was used outside America, for example in the British novel Scoop by Evelyn Waugh. And by the way, "nigger" was as well, for example in Joseph Conrad's short-story "Nigger of the Narcissus".--Jack Upland (talk) 12:04, 11 October 2008 (UTC)


 * PS. And of course "Nigger Brown" is a pun which illustrates the word was used in Australia, anyway...--Jack Upland (talk) 00:31, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Wrong Name attributed - error or vandalism?
Note: "The case was brought to court by Stephen Hagan, an ATSIC regional councillor from Toowoomba, west of Brisbane, who has also campaigned unsuccessfully for a ban on the name Coon cheese." from the link http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/03/19/1016519809826.html

I don't know where the name "Sir Tomas Jackson" came from except blatant (humourous) vandalism - the name seems obviously a joke to me (Aussie) as very few such Commissioners would have been Knighted! Indeed part of a significant area of complaint was that such individuals were often excluded from 'normal society'.

I note that a Google of that name reveals http://au.messages.yahoo.com/news/top-stories/1256880?p=last which has been deleted - nothing else relvant. A search of Wiki under both Sir Tomas Jackson & Sir Thomas Jackson reveals nothing relevant to the time period.

I will replace the name if no other comments and/or supporting verification are made.

FoolesTroupe (talk) 08:43, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Correction re court case
There hasn't actually been a court case regarding Coon cheese yet - the Age article says that Stephen Hagan 'campaigned' about the name but only brought a court case against the 'Nigger Brown' sign.

BedeWilson (talk) 14:13, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Existence of Edward Coon
I found this scan of a page from a 1923 edition of The Journal & Republican, Lowville, NY which has an article announcing that E.W. Coon of Philadelphia, maker & shipper of cheese, sold 5 milk plants to the Dairyman's League Co-operative Association. This strikes me as a pretty strong rebuttal to Stephen Hagan's assertion. I'm not sure how to work it into the article so I'm leaving that to soemone else. http://fultonhistory.com/Process%20small/Newspapers/Lowvile%20Ny%20Rebulican/1923/Newspaper%20Lowville%20NY%20Journal%20Republican%201923%20-%20%28294%29.PDF —Preceding unsigned comment added by The axel (talk • contribs) 01:27, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

In case someone should delete it, I have added the following information on the Coon family, which is from John Harvey Treat, The Treat family: a genealogy of Trott, Tratt, and Treat for fifteen generations, and four hundred and fifty years in England and America (1893), pp. 319-320 online here, and the Official Gazette of the United States Patent Office, vol. 181‎ (1912), p. 535. Moonraker2 (talk) 07:16, 14 January 2010 (UTC)


 * That seems pretty conclusive. It remains unanswered, however, whether the Coon business used a stereotypical image of a black man's face on their packaging, as Hagan claims. Given this evidence, this would have been a pun (like Birdseye) rather than the origin of the name.--Jack Upland (talk) 19:16, 14 January 2010 (UTC)


 * The most relevant fact in all of this is that there is a patent for a type of cheese processing called Cooning by a guy called Coon. On that basis alone the supposed racist aspect is invalid and makes me question the relevance of including a section on disagreement by Hagan. I note that he didn't really win the argument over the E. S. “Nigger” Brown Stand; rather the name went away when the stand was demolished and replaced. Efficacious (talk) 08:09, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

No, you're wrong. You simply cannot say, "On that basis alone the supposed racist aspect is invalid". Just because the name had no racist origin you cannot conclude there is no racist aspect. Did the company make a pun on the name as was the case with "Birdseye" or "Greenseas". Did they really produce packaging with a stereotypical grinning "nigger"? As for your comparison with the "Nigger" Brown controversy, you have really defeated your own argument. E S Brown wasn't dark-skinned. He was called "Nigger" as a joke based on his surname. If the epithet "Nigger" is now considered racist, the making puns about coons/racoons/blackface is all the more. Either the joke was made, or it wasn't. Let's be honest.--Jack Upland (talk) 11:05, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

OR/Primary
This article is making business history claims based on original research, there are few secondary sources. 60.242.186.80 (talk) 13:33, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

William or Willie
The article gives EW Coon's middle name as both William and Willie. Which is it?


 * Coon cheese is named after its American creator, Edward William Coon (1871–1934) of Philadelphia, who patented a method, subsequently known as the Cooning process, for fast maturation of cheese via high temperature and humidity.[1][2][3][4][5] Former manufacturer Kraft, and later Dairy Farmers and National Foods, have vigorously defended the trademark.


 * ''"E. W. Coon was the grandson of Amherst Coon (1795–1877), a farmer born in Russia, New York, who married Sally Betsey Treat in 1822. His sons Mattison (b. 1823) and Ephraim Coon (b. 1832) were described in 1893 as having been in the butter and cheese business together at 29 South Water Street, Philadelphia, for more than thirty years. Ephraim's son Edward Willie Coon was born on 30 July 1871, and had taken out at least one cheese patent by 1912.

''

-- PaulxSA (talk) 19:54, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Article issues
There are several issues with this article
 * 1) coon.com.au is too closely connected to the subject to be used as a primary source, especially when there is a plethora of newspaper accounts of Edward W. Coon.
 * 2) The article reads like a biography of Edward W. Coon, not an article on 'coon cheese'
 * 3) There is no explanation of how 'coon cheese' was exported to Australia (or if it ever was). I can find that Edward W. Coon exported his product to England before a fire destroyed one of his factories. This led to a legal battle with the fire insurance company which ended just a few years before Coon's death. In 1923 he sold number of his plants" around Cape Vincent, New York to a local dairy co-operative. What (if any) connection does Edward W. Coon have to Australian 'coon cheese'?
 * 4) There appears to be an edit war over the accusations of racism by Stephen Hagan.

—Brian Halvorsen (talk) 01:52, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
 * What do you think of the page as it is currently? Regards, 220  of  ßorg 02:39, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Coon cheese. 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/20130904174054/http://www.coon.com.au/story.html to http://www.coon.com.au/story.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:39, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

COON vs Coon
I think you'll find the it was ALL CAPS, because that's how it's usually written, as "COON" and will be, "CHEER". See "Introducing CHEER heese", for example. Regards, 220  of  ßorg 11:27, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi . MOS:TM and MOS:TMCAPS suggest that upper/lower should be used if so designated in most reliable independent sources, regardless of the trademark owner's use, and the source I was looking at didn't upper-case the words. However I haven't looked extensively, but happy to change if we find a majority of different sources representing the words like that (i.e. not the same syndicated article in multiple papers). I'll have another look tomorrow, or will take your word for it if you report back with findings! Laterthanyouthink (talk) 11:47, 13 January 2021 (UTC)


 * I looked back all the way back to the very birth of this most important article about a revered Australian Icon. It's been COON, always. I think every source I looked at today had it all caps. >;-( 220  of  ßorg 12:03, 13 January 2021 (UTC) ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 * Per the rules I've stated, and every source I've just found on the first few hits: BBC, The Age, 9News, News.com.au, and again, uses upper/lower. (And I had no idea it was a "revered Australian icon" - it's a brand of cheese!) Laterthanyouthink (talk) 05:51, 14 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Cheese just CHEESE?? "It's not a matter of life or death, it's much more important than that" said soccer player Bill Shankly once. ;-) … Actually I think I had Vegemite on my mind for some reason … . :-\
 * Writing it as COON probably brings too much attention to the word, like all caps on blogs etc is regards as shouting. IMHO that might be why the news outlets are using letter case. • Someone has added "stylised as COON " to the lede. - 220  of  ßorg 10:25, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Lol. Yes, I'm happy with that wording, I've seen similar in other articles. And there's a redirect from the shouty version, which is good. :-) Laterthanyouthink (talk) 10:38, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 13 January 2021

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: Not moved per WP:SNOW. Please wait to file another move request until after the change in branding has been done and, more importantly, picked up by reliable secondary sources. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  00:02, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Coon cheese → Cheer cheese – In line with the change of brand name effective July 2021 this page will require moving to the new name. As per usual move practices a redirect will be automatically created from the current name. This notice is posted in discussion for the reason that a move may not be appropriate until this time, and that this move may be considered controversial by some users. Matthew5of9 (talk) 13:41, 13 January 2021 (UTC) Matthew5of9 (talk) 13:41, 13 January 2021 (UTC)


 * This is one of the most unusual first edits I have ever seen. A move is NOT appropriate at this time. There is no reason for this request for over 6 months. • I'd also argue the page should be moved to CHEER cheese. 220  of  ßorg 14:48, 13 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose temporarily per WP:SUSTAINED until the cheese brand is actually renamed in 2021. Renaming it right now would be jumping the gun, as the rename has only been announced.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 16:54, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment: In keeping with naming conventions, the article should temporarily be renamed Coon (cheese) and then Cheer (cheese) once the rebranding takes place. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 23:36, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment: The capitalisation as CHEER Cheese would not be in line with naming conventions "Follow standard English text formatting and capitalization practices, even if the trademark owner considers nonstandard formatting "official", as long as this is a style already in widespread use, rather than inventing a new one: "—→ MOS:TMRULES. Matthew5of9 (talk) 02:01, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes,, I agree about the lowercasing (see previous section). Laterthanyouthink (talk) 05:53, 14 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose – There is no such thing, yet. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 04:09, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose – too early. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 05:53, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose – the new name will become active once the product is formally renamed in July. AussieWikiDan (talk) 12:44, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Too soon. Wait until it's actually changed. Rreagan007 (talk) 20:11, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Wording issue
Hi. No worries about making further changes - I had not yet fully completed reviewing mine (I needed to return with fresh eyes), and I also had reservations about how or whether to express the past history of the company website. The company has since withdrawn its story, though, so I'm not sure that it's correct to quote it without a rider of some time - perhaps a footnote? But did you mean to remove the citation at the end of the first para. in the Naming controversy section? As I understand it, each paragraph (at least) needs a citation, according to WP:CITE. Two other things though, which I'll post here for comment and perhaps other editors could offer their opinions and suggestions?
 * I changed the sentence "Amid Australian involvement in 2020 Black Lives Matter protests, on 24 July 2020 Saputo Inc. announced the name would be changed." to "In the wake of the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests in Australia, on 24 July 2020 Saputo Inc. announced the name would be changed." because I thought it expresses the chronology better. The Australian protests (on the streets) were early June, and discussion followed in the media, but there were no significant further protests through to the end of July, and "amid" makes it sound a bit like a chaotic scenario in which Saputo made the decision. That's just my opinion and how I read it though - happy to hear from others.
 * The other thing I was going to post here as a Split suggestion, is to create a separate article for Edward Coon, as it appears that he is not intrinsically connected to the subject, and as his patent and process has been described in some detail, may as well be put into a separate article. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 01:44, 17 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Hey there, you have added a lot of great information and obviously done a lot of research. The only trouble with editing in a sort of draft way is that in the interim it will be seen by the general public. I would recommend you use your sandbox first until you are happy with your additions. A large sweep of changes to the entire article can be harder for other editors to fully vet. I think some of the edits which may have been lost were due to us both editing at the same time, unfortunately. I don't have an issue with the above changes you mention. Anyway, once again thanks and I hope you don't take my actions as anything but slight tweaks to your helpful contributions. Cheers, AussieWikiDan (talk) 03:01, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Sure,, and thanks for your contributions and response to my note. One of the problems with the sandbox method, especially with an article likely to be viewed and edited because of a current spotlight in the media, is that other editors may change something in the interim and then it becomes a major exercise in trying to untangle it all... I did try to only save versions that were more or less complete in themselves, but I inevitably find things to improve when I come back to them. I would also like to to a better overall sweep to make it more WP:LEADFOLLOWSBODY, but that is unlikely to be today.
 * I'll pop those changes I mentioned above back in, but will await other comments before splitting Edward Coon into another article, in case there are objections. (Or maybe add a Split template tomorrow.) Laterthanyouthink (talk) 03:22, 17 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Re 'split', see Draft:Edward William Coon. Regards, 220  of  ßorg 07:01, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that, . It seems as if someone else has had the same idea already. I'll come back to that one. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 07:54, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Same editor that requested the page move. 220  of  ßorg 08:04, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the information and listening to my feedback. All the best with the additions and it looks good about the new draft. AussieWikiDan (talk) 15:12, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Hagan's book
See recent reverts. IMO it is relevant and notable that Hagan, an academic and one of the main protagonists in the debate, has published a book. It is not being used as a source (although I would imagine that it provides more relevant information), is mentioned in multiple sources - mainly paywalled unfortunately - and is clearly an indicator of the strength of feeling as well as the fact that there is research to indicate the lack of relationship of Coon to the cheese. I would like to hear from other editors on this. As always, happy to accept consensus view. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 03:14, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * The "Naming controversy" is a significant part of this article, and an even more notable event in Australia. If the instigator of that controversy publishes a book on that subject, it ought to be mentioned in that section. The release of that book has been mentioned in several parts of Australian mainstream media. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 03:32, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * If there is "research to indicate the lack of relationship of Coon to the cheese", then that actual research should be added sourced to independent reliable sources, rather than name-dropping a self-published book to make that implication. If secondary sources mention Hagan's research from the book, then that could be added and simply attributed to Hagan where necessary. Paywalls shouldn't matter, as sources do not need to be freely accessible to be considered reliable. The book's publication is relevant to the author's article, but I'm not seeing how the simple publication of a book means "it ought to be mentioned" in an article about the company just because there is a controversy that the book discusses. Under that criteria, many articles about notable events could mention the name of numerous published books, even hundreds of books listed simply for the fact that they were published. – wallyfromdilbert (talk) 03:59, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I only mentioned that they were paywalled because I don't have access to them. If any editor has access to The Australian, Herald Sun or any number of other Murdoch sources, the information may be easily extracted. Also,, re wp:primary sources, there is no problem with using an historical document such as a patent: "Unless restricted by another policy, primary sources that have been reputably published may be used in Wikipedia,... A primary source may be used on Wikipedia only to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge". It seems clear that the actual patent is the best descriptor of the process. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 05:05, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * , if you want to discuss a topic other than the book by Hagan and Rogers, I think it would be better to start a new section or else it will get too difficult to follow. I did not remove the cite to the patent website, but I did remove information I felt was WP:UNDUE and excessively detailed, and added a tag that a secondary source should be found as those are preferable. Regarding paywalled sources, if you do not have access to certain sources, then I am not sure how you know what is in them. – wallyfromdilbert (talk) 05:15, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * . Sure - I have no argument with the excessive detail, just that the details of the patent (date, etc.) are unlikely to be found elsewhere. My view of the paywalled sources was from the Google previews. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 08:27, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Back to this section's subject. If one examines the earliest history of this article, it seems that without Stephen Hagan's advocacy, there might not be an article. Any web search for "Coon cheese" is overwhelmed by the name controversy. Now that Hagan has published a book on the matter which has received some coverage, it would be amiss of Wikipedia not to mention it in the section "Naming controversy". Laterthanyouthink's edit from ought to be re-instated. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 03:42, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I added the book name to the existing sentence from Rogers's article about their research, although it is still sourced to a primary source written by one of the book's authors., if a web search turns up so many sources about the book's research, then you should add those sources to the article. The only independent source in the edit you linked to mentions the book once and does not discuss the book's research. – wallyfromdilbert (talk) 05:38, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

"Cooning"
I'm making this note on the talk page because I think it needs to be noted somewhere, as so many secondary and tertiary sources keep regurgitating this term. (I had added it as a footnote to the article, but it was removed, with some justification, but I thought it worthwhile noting for future reference.)
 * Reference to Coon's patented method as "cooning" appears to arise only from Australian sources, all of which used the history previously published and since removed article on the Kraft Coon website (or an earlier version of the Wikipedia article, or mirrored version of it). It does not appear in US newspaper sources between 1916 and 1935, nor in Google/Google Scholar searches excluding this topic, nor JSTOR. If anyone can find other references to this term, please add to the article and cite accordingly.