Template:Peacock term/doc

This is a documentation subpage for Peacock term. It contains usage information, categories, and other content that is not part of the original template.

Inline tag for promotional or laudatory wording presented as fact: praise, superlatives, and reputation claims that the wiki has not attributed to a source.

Sits alongside {{Editorialising}} (editor voice generally) and {{Original research}} (synthesis or interpretation not in sources). Peacock term is specifically for praise.

Usage

Pini is widely regarded as the most legendary landrace of the western Himalaya.{{Peacock term}}

Renders: Pini is widely regarded as the most legendary landrace of the western Himalaya.^{[peacock term]}

With a date:

{{Peacock term|date=May 2026}}

Parameters

date: optional. Free text, conventionally "Month YYYY". Surfaces in the rendered tag as a muted suffix.

Behaviour

Mainspace pages tagged with this template are added to Category:Pages with peacock terms.
Pages outside mainspace are not categorised.

What to look for

Common patterns that warrant the tag:

Reputation claims without attribution: "renowned", "celebrated", "acclaimed", "famed", "legendary", "iconic", "venerable", "world-famous", "highly regarded".
Hedged consensus phrases that smuggle praise in: "widely regarded as", "considered by many to be", "universally recognised as".
Superlative adjectives applied to landraces, breeders or regions: "exceptional", "outstanding", "remarkable", "magnificent", "stunning", "definitive".
Commercial marketing language carried over from seed-bank or strain-review copy: "premium", "elite", "top-shelf", "connoisseur-grade", "killer", "fire".
Aesthetic praise as fact: "beautiful structure", "elegant phenotype", "spectacular trichome coverage".

Many of these are imported wholesale from cannabis marketing or strain-review writing. Cutting them rarely loses factual content.

When not to use

The wording is editor-voice opinion rather than praise specifically: use {{Editorialising}}.
The sentence makes a claim not supported by sources: use {{Original research}}.
The wording is vague rather than promotional: use {{Clarify}}.
A specific factual claim is missing a source: use {{Citation needed}}.
The praise is attributed to a named source. "Watson and Clarke describe the population as exceptional" is attributed praise, not a peacock term.

How to resolve a tagged claim

In order of preference:

Rewrite in neutral voice. Drop the praise and report what the sources say. "Pini is the most legendary landrace of the western Himalaya" becomes "Pini is documented in the western Himalaya since the 1970s" or similar, depending on what the sources actually attest.
Attribute the praise to whoever holds the view, with the source cited inline. "Watson regards Pini as a definitive expression of the western Himalayan type".
Cut entirely. Most peacock language carries no information and can be removed without restructuring the sentence.