Talk:Burger King/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 → Archive 7

Burger King HotSpot info

All of the burger kings I have been to now offer free wifi for an hour when you buy something there. When you buy something, you ask the cashier for use of the hotspot and they print off a ticket for you to login on. Anyway, google shows up the usual war driving results when you look up "burger king wifi" So there's not much else I can add. 207.81.213.37 11:17, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

changes needed

Burger King has made a comeback in Poland. So the flag should be added as well as info, however I can't do it as editing is disabled for me. Today (7 feb. 2007) Amrest (the polish operater of Pizza Hut / KFC) has started Burger King's second expansion in Poland with a restaurant in the new Zlote Tarasy shopping center in Warsaw.


That's true, but as for today (18.02.07) that Burger King restaurant is still closed - there is even no logo on walls, that covers still not opened restaurant... We can check that this will be a Burger King only by looking onto information boards with plans. Mibars

The Burger King restaurant in Zlote Tarasy has opened a couple of days ago (around May 7th 2007 or so). Somebody please update the list of countries (add Poland).

I'm a Bulgarian and have never heard that there is Burger King in Bulgaria. Please, check it, because it must be hidden somewhere /i live in Sofia and Varna - the two cities with biggest chances of having BK) (82.199.193.217 17:04, 22 May 2007 (UTC)yavor)

Vandalism

Someone vandalised the page seapreating half of the page and putting things like Yucky and Poop in the middle of the page. I say we fix this up before it gets worse if it dose I say we disable editing.Sonic34 19:15, 13 November 2006 (UTC)Sonic 34

The edit history makes it clear who the "someone" was. Please don't do it again, as other editors just have to follow you about and undo what you did. Same goes for your edit] to Phone. Tonywalton  | Talk 19:19, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
This article has been subject to a lot of vandalism recently. Just a few moments ago, the entire article was replaced by a juvenile and irrelevant narrative paragraph. Perhaps if this continues, this article should be locked. Eaghassi 09:57, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
I agree, I have done a ton of work on it and am removing vandalism on a daily basis. It has been replaced several times with moronic attempts at humor. Jerem43 18:11, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I have seen the same for far too long. I've lodged a semi-protection request. thewinchester 01:20, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Semi-protection request was declined. Advice is to keep on the watchlist and revert changes accordingly. I'll still be monitoring and if it gets out of hand again i'll re-lodge the request. thewinchester 01:32, 5 February 2007 (UTC)Overturned by same admin, page now has semi-protected status. thewinchester 01:46, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
The article is now off semi-protection, and hopefully they'll be no further problems. thewinchester 11:15, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Please reinstate the partial lock. There have been at least 5-6 instances of vandalism since it was removed. Jerem43 02:28, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I've taken a look at the recent issues, and have re-requested protection. thewinchester 16:00, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Who removed the protection again? The fools are massing again and defacing this page. Can we please just leave it locked? Jerem43 14:57, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

  • The last semi-protection was granted for 30 days only. I now concur that the levels of vandalism now warrant re-visting WP:RFPP, and I have just opened a case there on the matter. Thewinchester (talk) 05:53, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Advertising

This entire section has now been removed from the article as it was becomming an exact copy of the article Burger King advertising and causing this one to become way too long. thewinchester 01:38, 5 February 2007 (UTC)


Facts and figures

Someone really needs to clean this up. The facts and figures section states that they did $11bn in sales and sell 2.4bn burgers a year? What? A quick serach will tell you that their revenue is less than a fifth of that, which also means the outrageous figure of 2.4 billion is useless.

No, the figures are correct. System-wide sales is different from company revenue. $11b is system-wide sales and represents the value of sales at all Burger King restaurants. Revenue consists of sales at company owned restaurants, franchisee royalty payments and property income. This, as you rightly point out, is a little less than a fifth of $11b.

Burger King in Iraq

The information that BK Restaurants have been targeted by Insurgents is unnecssairy. This part is unbalanced and poltical. Many Western (and non-Western) targets have been attacked in Iraq, and across the world Burger-King and other Fast Food Restaurants have been attacked, vandalised etc. for various reasons. So I see no need to emphasize this. Burger King is still present in Iraq and Halal, which is the only relevant information, unless we start to include all attacks on BKs for the other countries.

Sallah —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.153.112.217 (talk) 04:57, 3 January 2007 (UTC).

BK Security Breach

On January 15th, an individual broke into the Burger King Corporation headquarters in Miami, Florida, and removed seven laptops computers. Some of these laptops may have had personal information about employees which include and is not limited to employee names, addresses, Social Security numbers, dependents, and their Social Security numbers.

-Undated entry from January 2007

BK Opening Hours

Came across name removed as a resource that has link removed...you can do a search for any city and it shows you what's open there - including Burger Kings. Nconada 07:24, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Please do not add commercial links, either in the article or in the talk page. LDHan 10:06, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

BK Controversies

There should be a BK controversies section added. I once saw a program that was stating how BK was the most unclean fast-food restaurant overall in the state of California (or the nation?). There are also other controversies that I know not about but are likely there. Somebody do some research, please? --Eiyuu Kou 18:26, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Do you have any information or details which could assist anyone wanting to research into this matter? Names of newspapers, article titles, TV stations who carried the reports? Thewinchester (talk) 06:32, 3 May 2007 (UTC)\
This is based upon one "gotcha" article that NBC's Dateline NBC did a couple of years ago. It is one article, it would be like using the incident that happened in a NYC KFC earlier this year where rats overran the place to describe all KFC restaurants. BK has a very rigorous sanitation program that is overseen by an outside company, EcoSure.
The BK Franchise I worked at for 20 years never once had a critical health violation by the local BoH, at that is more common than not.
Jerem43 19:09, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
The article was a hoax? I guess I might of missed the "gotcha" part. If it is true, however, it should be added because I know not all restaurants are perfect, like, once again, the NYC KFC incident. --Eiyuu Kou 16:29, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Burger King Logo.svg

Image:Burger King Logo.svg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 15:59, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Logo design

The current Burger King logo was designed by Ian Brignell, ianbrignell.com

Indonesia's Burger King

I think the map and the article on this page should accommodate the fact that Burger King's premier outlet has opened in April in Jakarta's Senayan City mall. According to this source (Newspaper in Indonesian) it is Burger King's biggest outlet in Southeast Asia (600m2). Btw Burger King has already entered Indonesian markets in late 1980s but was unsuccessful and withdrew (it is said in the article as well). 58.178.214.121 10:53, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Environmental report

This is an inappropriate addition to article, the information is not about about BK specifically, further more BK is not even mention in the cited article. The Fast Food article would be a more appropriate article for this data, since the article cites 'all restaurant chains, not just BK.

Furthermore it does not warrant its own section, so even if it were specific related to BK, it should be under the /* Corporate Profile */ section as a sub-header called Controversies.

Jerem43 22:05, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

The survey checks for 56 companies, of which many are other sectors' companies (e.g. Nike, Toshiba). Also, it only checks for what that company's policies in its USA company, not necessary its mother company. As I pointed out in your talk page, the reasons for your revert doesn't hold much ground because my edits don't qualify for soapbox. Next time please avoid shoot-now-and-ask-later as it can offend others. OhanaUnitedTalk page 17:07, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
I was not trying to offend you but your edits appeared to be soapboxing. I was not the only person who removed your entries and other editors quoted the same reason, their inappropriateness in the article, for removing them. I took the time to explain why they were removed and was not doing so in "shoot-now-and-ask-later" manner as you quoted. The data you provided was from one small environmental group, and had no corroborating evidence from other reputable environmental groups to support it.
In addition, the information did not warrant its own entry, and the way you listed it in this and other articles lacked conformity and was factually incorrect in some cases. You copied and pasted the entries without proof reading and as such there were numerous mistakes (wrong name used in an article, the same ranking appeared several times etc).
As you go forward you will probably find that further entries of this nature will also be deleted for the reasons I have quoted in this response.
Jerem43 18:52, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
If you really took the time to read the report, there're a total of 6 companies that got 0 mark and 2 companies got 1 mark (they are listed on page 2) so of course, same mark = same ranking. If a well known environmental group publishes these data I will gladly use it as a substitute to this one, BUT there aren't such reports from these groups. You claimed that other editors removed the report as well, but the history shows that you're the person removing it.[1][2][3][4][5]OhanaUnitedTalk page 05:16, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

There were four other articles that (as I recall) that other editors removed your entries from, I did the others. If I had not, someone else would have. Once another organization verifies the data and confirms the accuracy of the survey, I will gladly help you put it back. Again they were not NPOV, not because of the tone and content but because they were a subjective rating of the environmental policies of many influential businesses.

I did read the article, and the cited article is not a neutral source but a Climate Counts press conference covered by Reuters. It basically a press release by an organization trying to force change in corporate environmental policy by embarrassing certain companies; it is a tactic that has worked before for other groups seeking to change public opinion and force change.

I had serious issues with their conclusions in the survey which further gave me pause in allowing the entries to stay; here are some of problems I found with the research:

  1. The group who released the survey, Climate Counts, is not a neutral, disinterested source- they were founded by and are wholly funded by an organic food company, Stonyfield Farm, who benefits from this kind of publicity. Several of its board members are also members of Stonyfield's executive team.
  2. They gave their funders extremely high marks in the survey, this appears to be a serious conflict of interest.
  3. The conclusions drawn, as stated in the article, were not based upon an in depth research but instead from conjecture based on publicly available data. On the Climate Counts web site, one of their stated criteria (#21) used in compiling the report is whether the companies being studied is publicly releasing its data- if the company being researched is not releasing said data, how do they compile the ratings for that company? They didn't, the companies that did not respond to their survey or that did not have publicly available data, such as BK, were given bad or failing marks; in fact they made no attempt to see if the companies they gave low or failing marks to actually had environmentally sound policies on the books, they just failed them- that isn't true, verifiable research.
  4. The conclusions reached by Climate Counts are violations of the WP:NPOV standard because the group was created to specifically espouse a pro-environmental point of view in the business community.

These various reasons are why I found you entries to be inappropriate, and helped contribute to why I (and others) deleted them.

I am not saying that the info you seek to include is bunk or the subject of environmental protection is worthless, just that your entries did not have a NPOV and the source has serious conflict-of-interest issues.

Jerem43 07:34, 24 June 2007 (UTC), amended 09:30, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Ukraine?

Does anyone know the fate of Ukraine? It's on the map of countries with Burger Kings, but I don't believe this is (or ever has been) a BK in Ukraine.

Poland

It says in the article a new BK opened in Warsaw shopping mall, so should in be on the list with Countries with a BK? -GD1223

Unclear

In the history section, the sentence "In 1997, Grand Metropolitan merged with Guinness to form a company called Diageo" should be clarified. What is "Grand Metropolitan"? Why is it important to mention their merger with Guinness? //Knuckles 06:29, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

GMG was a British company that purchased BK as part of Pillsbury. GMG (Diageo) began divesting non-drinks based businesses to focus on beer and spirits. BK was sold by Diageo to a private equity group leg by Texas Pacific Group. The time line explains it but the history text does not. Celliot2 23:45, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Naming of Burger King

The article is about the restaurant chain Burger King for which the proper name of the chain is Burger King; It's parent company is Burger King Brands' in the US and Canada and Burger King Corporation internationally. This is stated in the article and in the info box. The changes made by User:Rbyrd8100 are factually incorrect.


Bulgaria

There is no Burger King restaurant in Bulgaria (Not only it is not listed on burgerking.com but I am pretty sure we do not have one here)

It could be on a US military base. Some locations listed here are only in US military bases. They mostly clearly specify but IMHO it doesn't make sense to list countries where they are only located at US military bases and we should specify seperarely in a US military base section. Alternatively, perhaps it's at an airport? Nil Einne 09:53, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

I am pretty sure it is not on any of the major airports, as for the restaurant being on a US miltary base: it is a possibility but just like you say it is a bit pointless to list it even if thats the case. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Krasko (talk • contribs) 22:42:26, August 19, 2007 (UTC).

BK in Indonesia

there is currently only 1 BK in Indonesia it it in Senayan City, Jakarta please update the location world map. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.130.242.203 (talk) 11:00, August 30, 2007 (UTC)

Stop the vandalism!

Do you think that this article has been enough time for vandalism?--Cokepepsi 01:41, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

That would be a no...
The reason why the protection was made permanent was that as soon as the temporary protection was lifted, it was vandalized almost immediately in a consistent and and repetitive way.
Jerem43 03:11, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Unsourced statement

The following statement was removed because it was un-sourced and I could not find one. I placed here so if any one can properly cite it it can be put back into the main article - (Jerem43 05:20, 29 September 2007 (UTC))

In a trademark settlement with San Antonio local chain Whopper Burger, Burger King was not allowed to open locations within two counties of the city. The chain was ultimately bought out in the mid 1980s, opening the way for San Antonio Burger King locations.

— main article excision

Assessment

There was a request to take a look at this article at WikiProject Food and Drink by Jerem43, so here are some of my thoughts.

  • I feel the opening is way too large for an article of this size. It should state less facts and should be a simple summary of what the reader is about to look at. Look at some other GA of this size and try to emulate those openings for size and general content.
I cut about 6-8 sentences out of the opening. (17:27, 30 September 2007 (UTC))
  • "The new owners, through several new CEOs, have moved to revitalize and reorganize the company, the first major move was to re-name the BK parent as Burger King Brands. Although the investment group initially planned to take BK public within the two years of the acquisition, this was delayed until 2006. On February 1, 2006, CEO Greg Brenneman announced TPG's plans to turn Burger King into a publicly traded company by issuing an Initial Public Offering. On February 16, the company announced it had filed its registration for the IPO with the Securities and Exchange Commission. On May 18, 2006, Burger King began trading on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol BKC."
Un-sourced This is a large block of information under history which is un-cited and needs to be as it makes some important statements.
I sourced the statements(17:27, 30 September 2007 (UTC))
  • "Burger King is one of the few companies that does not accept communication via email."
Another un-sourced statement under history
I removed the un-sourced statement (00:54, 29 September 2007 (UTC))
  • *Gene and Betty Hoots owned an ice cream shop in the city of Mittoon; due to the success of the store, in 1957 they expanded it with an additional shop next to the original location. In keeping with the name of the ice cream shop, Frigid Queen, they named their burger stand Burger King and registered their trademark with the state of Illinois in 1959."
Un-sourced
Source is provided earlier in paragraph, I restated it so it is easier to associate with the rest of the paragraph. (00:54, 29 September 2007 (UTC))
  • "A similar situation also occurred when Australian franchisee Jack Cowin tried to open stores in Australia."
Un-sourced
Source is provided in the 'For more information link, I will restate it
  • "In a trademark settlement with San Antonio local chain Whopper Burger, Burger King was not allowed to open locations within two counties of the city. The chain was ultimately bought out in the mid 1980s, opening the way for San Antonio Burger King locations."
Un-sourced
Removed un-sourced statement and reference to it (05:24, 29 September 2007 (UTC))
  • "and the Spanish government, have accused BK and other fast food restaurant chains for failing to provide healthier alternatives and contribution the ongoing obesity epidemic in the West."
Un-sourced
Source is provided earlier in paragraph, I restated it so it is easier to associate with the rest of the paragraph. (00:54, 29 September 2007 (UTC))
  • Charitable contributions and services
    "Unlike McDonald's Ronald McDonald House charities, Burger King does not have it own in-house charitable organization; instead it has affiliated it self with the United Way on a national level and several regional groups supporting various programs. Additionally, there is an optional literacy program that partners individual restaurants with community schools in the US."
    In the Boston region BK has affiliated itself with the Boston Red Sox Jimmy Fund. This charity supports juvenile cancer research at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston.
Un-sourced section and should be expanded, also lingering one line paragraphs are not appropriate.
Sourced section and expanded second half (04:27, 29 September 2007 (UTC))
  • Hungry Jack's Profile
    When Burger King decided to expand its operations into Australia, it found that its business name was already trademarked by a man running a small takeaway food shop. As a result, Burger King provided the Australian franchisee, Jack Cowin, with a list of possible alternative names that the Australian Burger King restaurants could be branded as. The names were derived from pre-existing trademarks already registered by Burger King and then corporate parent Pillsbury. Cowin selected the 'Hungry Jack' brand name, one of Pillsbury's US pancake mixture products, changing the name to a possessive form by adding an apostrophe 's' and forming the new name Hungry Jack's. Accordingly, the first Australian franchise of the Burger King Corporation, established in Perth in 1971, was branded as Hungry Jack's.
Completely un-sourced statement
Sourced section and copyedited (18:23, 29 September 2007 (UTC))
  • In 1986, Hungry Jack's purchased 11 failing Australian Wendy's Hamburgers locations and re-branded them under the Hungry Jack's name.
Lingering sentence.
Eliminated lingering sentence (00:54, 29 September 2007 (UTC))
  • One final attempt was made by Burger King to appeal the decision to the High Court of Australia[36]; however, this appeal was dismissed.
Un-sourced statement on the appeal dismissal.
Source is provided earlier in paragraph, I restated it so it is easier to associate with the rest of the paragraph. (00:54, 29 September 2007 (UTC))
  • Expand the product summary section
Expanded with a brief history. (17:27, 30 September 2007 (UTC))

Alright, I'm not going to keep going because my statements are going to continue about un-sourced statements and single line sentences. These two things are very important for a properly written article and should be addressed before submission for GA status. The article reads very well though, has a lot of information and is pretty broad in its scope. I think if you clear up the sourcing, lingering sentences and shorten the opening summary, you'd have a good article here.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 19:18, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Although sources are stated earlier, you need to make sure that you place citations on each place that you state something. One source can be used 50 times, but it needs to be placed next to each instance of using it so that you are not accused of original research and also people like myself who like to look up facts can see where you got that fact from (I don't do it to prove people right or wrong, I read the source to learn more as I am into research).--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 05:41, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
That is what I did, I just went through it and left myself a note to show what I did - basically a summary of the work I did to correct the issue you identified.
About the length of the opening, remember that the article is really one article split into three parts: BK, BK products and BK advertising. these three articles form one large article that is now over 125 KB long. - Jeremy (Jerem43 18:23, 29 September 2007 (UTC))
Right, but the opening should be a brief summary about what you are going to tell the reader, it doesn't need to contain as much detail as it does. My best example would be to send you to French cuisine which is quite a large article, but the content is very briefly summarized in the opening with three small paragraphs. Saffron and Chocolate are other good examples as well. If some of the detailed information is not in the body of the article, it should be moved there. I like to think of the opening of an article sorta s like the first paragraph or two of a paper I am writing, just a touch of what the reader is about to find out. --Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 22:31, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
How does it look now? - Jeremy (Jerem43 17:29, 30 September 2007 (UTC))
Better now I've made the intro a bit 'punchier' :-)) It could carry another sentence or two, perhaps describing what differentiates BK's offer from McDogs and others, but it really shouldn't be more than 3-4 sentences at most, and shouldn't include detailed stats etc. I've just moved the 'fat' to act as intros to the respective sections, they could probably do with a bit of copy editing to merge them in fully.
Another thought, as a casual reader I find it hard to believe that the 300 Hungry Jacks out of 11,000 BK's really merit such a large proportion of the BK article, and could perhaps be splintered out? FlagSteward 17:50, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Crack! Flag steward, please see a doctor about that broken arm! Patting one self on the back can really hurt... Thanks for the cleanup. I think they fit fine, summarizing the sections where they are, but really does it look good enough to warrant a GA nomination?
The reason the HJ data is in the opening is because that is the only example in the world where BK does not do business under its own name.

Hungry Jack's move

Hello,

The user Michaelbeckham recently made a unilateral decision to excise a large section of the Burger King article, delete the redirect from Hungry Jack's to the BK page and place all about HJ information from the BK article on to the former redirect page. This edit was done without consulting any other editors and see if there was consensus about doing this. He also failed to properly note the move and the reasons for the move in the edit log and failed to correct any redirect errors that were created as a result of the move. I have reinstated the text and am asking that Michael please refrain from doing this again without first posting an appropriate discussion on this page about this type of move.

If you would like to move section to a new article, please take the following steps:

  1. Tag the section with the {{splitsection}} template
  2. Create the discussion on the proper talk page
  3. Wait for consensus

While understand his reasoning for the move, from personal experience I know that an editor must follow the Wikipedia guidelines when making major changes to the structure of an existing article so that other contributors work can be properly credited, that the changes are done following accepted consensus and why doing something like this improperly can cause issues (like on the BK products section move in April of this year).

- Jeremy (Jerem43 07:06, 1 October 2007 (UTC))

Consensus is fine in some cases, but there is enough material to move to its own article. It is notable and a separate entity. I am puzzled why its part of the BK article in the first place seeing as they have separate ownerships. - Mike Beckham 08:32, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

All of the international operations have separate ownership, because all international BK restaurants are a licensed franchisees of BKC. (In fact 90% of all BK restaurants are separately owned.) BK has sells the international expansion rights for its name and products to companies who in turn either own and operate or sub-license with in those regions. Another example similar to HJ is in the Middle East where a company called Hama Foods runs all the Burger Kings, except in Israel where BK is run by a company called Rikamor, Ltd. The reason it is listed separately is because Australia is the only place in the world where BK does business under a different name due to trademark issues. Each BK is given some leeway in running the company in regards to advertising and menu, but they are all BKs, even Hungry Jack's.

-Jeremy (Jerem43 16:59, 1 October 2007 (UTC))

Hungry Jacks is different enough, has enough content and is notable enough for its own article. Not a section on this. I see no GOOD reason to not move it. Unless you can get a consensus against it, I think it is time for it be moved. - Mike Beckham 03:22, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

The consensus must be for the move, not against it. Since you request it, I will put forth a split request. Dems da rules. - Jeremy (Jerem43 04:55, 3 October 2007 (UTC))

There is no consensus or even any interest either way. Your the only one contesting a move. - Mike Beckham 04:58, 3 October 2007 (UTC)


Split proposal

It has been proposed that the Hungry Jack's section of this article be moved into its own article by Mike Beckham. Please take this time to comment on the proposal. Please remember that there must be a consensus for the move, not against it. - Jeremy (Jerem43 05:02, 3 October 2007 (UTC))

  • Against - HJ is just BK, but under under a different name due to a trademark issue and some legal issues, each international location is its own company similar to HJ and is no different. -Jeremy (Jerem43 05:02, 3 October 2007 (UTC))
    • Grumble, gripe, bitch, groan - split the damn article. I looked at the size and it is at 49 KB and if I continue the citations, expansions and corrections I am planning, it will just get bigger. Logical place to split it, I will be watching you with googly eyes.  :-P - Jeremy (Jerem43 07:25, 3 October 2007 (UTC))
  • Split, firstly it isn't "just BK". It has entirely different ownership in Australia. Burger King is owned Burger King Holdings Inc. HJ is owned by Hungry Jack's Pty. Ltd. It has nothing to do with franchises. HJ has rights to products and trademarks but is not owned by BK Holdings. Burger King existed in Australia but sold the stores to BK when exiting the country a few years ago. International variants are different to this situation as they owned by BK Holdings, HJ is a separate entity. - Mike Beckham 06:05, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Split I hate to disagree with you Jeremy because I consider you a Wikipedia friend but you should see this as a compliment to your work. You have shown that Hungry Jack's has it's own separate culture which has fed off from BK but it has gone in a different direction. As with many larger articles it is better to take another notable topic inside of t and let it grow and give a summary for it in the parent article. I would like to hear a lot more about Hungry Jack's eventually and perhaps having the second article would promote that. I honestly do not think that the topic should be expanded on here though, and should have a summary with a direct to a "main article." This is just an attestation to your work Jeremy.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 06:34, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Burger King Semi Auto Peer Review

Please check out this review to help improve this article. SriMesh | talk 03:56, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

The issues

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

  • Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.[?]
Where was this issue?
  • Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 4 pound, use 4 pound, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 4 pound.[?]
  • There are a few sections that are too short and that should be either expanded or merged.
  • Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
    • Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
  • As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2][?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, SriMesh | talk 03:54, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Failed GA

You have an expand template on your article... fix that before renominating. --Rschen7754 (T C) 05:00, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

it was leftover from earlier and I had forgotten to remove it. I had expanded the section from two sentences to two paragraphs and added appropriate citations. - Jeremy (Jerem43 06:42, 21 October 2007 (UTC))

Last edit revert

Hello,

I reverted the last edit by Maestrosync because it undid the edits required by the WP:MoS section for lead sections. This article is under consideration for WP:GA and this edit would have partially disqualified it for GA status.

- Jeremy (Jerem43 03:51, 22 October 2007 (UTC))

Failed "good article" nomination

Upon its review on October 23, 2007, this good article nomination was quick-failed because it:

contains cleanup banners including, but not limited to, {{cleanup}}, {{wikify}}, {{NPOV}}, {{unreferenced}}, etc, or large numbers of {{fact}}, {{clarifyme}}, {{huh}}, or similar tags

thus making it ineligible for good article consideration.

This article did not receive a thorough review, and may not meet other parts of the good article criteria. Galleries are not permitted in articles under Wikipedia policy. I encourage you to remedy this problem (and any others) and resubmit it for consideration. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to have it reassessed. Thank you for your work so far.--Esprit15d 20:49, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

There isn't a single one of those tags anywhere in the article, what are you referring to? - Jeremy (Jerem43 20:54, 23 October 2007 (UTC))

Stupid gallery. its gone. - Jeremy (Jerem43 00:46, 24 October 2007 (UTC))

Renominate it, and I'll give it a thorough once over.--Esprit15d 02:47, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
It has been renominated. - Jeremy (Jerem43 05:04, 24 October 2007 (UTC))

Failed "good article" nomination

This article failed good article nomination. This is how the article, as of October 24, 2007, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?:
  • "and more complex" - odd word choice. diverse is probably more appropriate
  • "addition to the menu by Mr. McLamore's" - should be "addition to the menu by founder McLamore" (reasons? Just his last name is sufficient, the possession is grammatically wrong, and the reader at this point has no clue who he is, so "founder" gives some context)
  • too many examples of failed products in the lead. One will suffice, if any need be mentioned at all.
  • "menu for localized tastes in", say regional, localized isn't exactly right
  • "suburb of Miami, Florida, USA" - drop USA
  • "being able to sense potential" - wordy, say "sensing potential"
  • "About this time, Messrs McLamore and Edgerton decided" - who is Messrs McLamore?
  • "when Pillsbury began BK's global expansion with its first international restaurant in Canada in 1969" - redundant and a misplaced modifier; instead, say "when Pillsbury opened BK's first restaurant in Canada in 1969"
  • "Other international locations followed soon after: Oceania in 1971 with Hungry Jack's and the first European restaurant located in Madrid, Spain, in 1975." - Parallelism issues, instead say "Other international locations followed soon after: Oceania in 1971 with Hungry Jack's and Europe in 1975 with a restaurant in Madrid, Spain.
  • "BK's Central and South American operation started in Mexico in date.[9]" - Huh?
  • "acquire BK, the relationship between Chart House and the Trotters began to sour" - this sounds like the Trotters and Charter House weren't getting along. Change to: "acquire BK, BK's relationship with Chart House and the Trotters began to sour"
  • "issuing an Initial Public Offering. On" put IPO in parenthesis after Initial Public Offering
  • "symbol BKC and generating $425 million in revenue" - change to: "symbol BKC and generated $425 million in revenue"
  • "open new franchised locations in" - change to "open new franchise locations in"
  • reference tags always go after punctuation; see references #17, 18, 19 & 20 and any others
  • Under key dates, either make all the facts complete sentences for unity
  • "company of Burger King, in the US it" - change that comma to a semi-colon or a period
  • The facts a figures section should probably be eliminated. Here's why (1) it breaks up the flow of the article; (2) a lot of it is redundant with information that is elsewhere in the article (like the fact that it is publicly traded and who it's owned by); (3) it is doing the job that the lead section should actually be doing - summarizing the article and the information about BK. Merge new information into the body of the text and put redundant info in the lead or delete it. This is the main reason I failed the article, since this will probably take some time to do well.
  • Controversies, disputes and legal issues should be it's own section. That is not strictly information about the company profile
  • Delete this note: Further information: Hungry Jack's
  • The Hungry Jack's section should probably go under Corporate profile, or at least directly under it
  • "and programs; the first is the Have" - change semi-colon to a period
  • "the animals it uses in the production its products" - redundant. Change to: "the animals it uses in its production."
    I changed it so it reads better.
  • " products, e.g. eggs and pork-based products, to " - change commas to parentheses
  • " portion size[30], amounts of unhealthy " - change to " portion size[30], and amounts of unhealthy"
  • "food restaurant chains for failing to provide " - change to "food restaurant chains of failing to provide "
  • "children under 12, promote Kids Meals" - change to "children under 12, and promote Kids Meals "
    this edit would be grammatically incorrect because this is the second item in a three item list separated by commas. Additionally it is a statement by BKC and to change it would be inappropriate.
  • (1) It's not a quote, so changing it for grammatical purposes is appropriate, (2) It really is wrong; its current reading suggests that BK will only advertise to kids that are under 12 and licensed to third party characters. Read it again out loud. b - I have read the sentence several times to honestly try to understand its actual meaning, and, I (humbly!) think you will agree that the sentence would read:

As part of this new initiative, BKC has stated that it will restrict advertising that is designed for children under 12 and that uses third-party-licensed characters to Kids Meals that meet its Nutrition Guidelines, refrain from advertising...

Yeah I agree, the sentence really sucks - but it is taken directly from the press release exactly how BK presented it. Here is a direct cut and paste from the release:


Burger King Corp, BURGER KING CORPORATION JOINS COUNCIL OF BETTER BUSINESS BUREAUS’ CHILDREN’S FOOD AND BEVERAGE ADVERTISING INITIATIVE; AGREES TO RESTRICT ADVERTISING TO CHILDREN UNDER 12- September 12, 2007
Should the section be re-worded to show that it is a direct quote from the press release? - Jeremy (Jerem43 16:59, 26 October 2007 (UTC))
Absolutely, or it's actually a copyright violation. Quotation marks around the quoted text (with the already added citation) would suffice. Additionally, since the original portion was in bullets, I'm going to go ahead and blockquote it.--Esprit15d 15:12, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
  • "statement by BKC the new " - put a comma after BKC
  • Merge the religious and Islam paragraphs
  • "the Coalition of Immokalee Workers, abbreviated CIW," - it is sufficient to put CIW in parentheses after Coalition of Immokalee Workers
  • "In the Boston region BK has " - comma after region
  • "TPF subsequently renamed the remaining BK locations to HJ," - in most cases the abbreviations would be sufficient, but here it isn't, since you are referring to the actual name. Try "TPF subsequently changed all the BK locations to HJs" or, to me better "TPF subsequently renamed the remaining BK locations Hungry Jack" (notice I also removed the "to")
  • "operating them for four more years when it chose to exit Australia and sell its operations to Cowin's company" - run on sentence. Change to "operating that way for four more years before choosing to exit Australia and sell its operations to Cowin's company
  • "This 1/4%nbsp;pound" - it would be better to say quarter-pounder
  • "many non-hamburger sandwiches including chicken, fish, desserts" - change to: "many non-hamburger sandwiches (including chicken and fish), desserts"
    bad grammar, see Bracket#Parentheses_.28_.29
  • "as French Toast Sticks" - should be lowercase
    changed the "T" and "S" to "t" and "s", Wikipedia article names the product as French toast with "F".
  • "BK has also 'tinkered' with its menu, modifying items like the Whopper into many "standard" varieties." - the paragraph has already said they tinkled with the menu in various ways. Just say "BK has also modified its larger items like the Whopper into alternate "standard" sizes like the Whopper, Jr."
    That is not what the sentence means. I will rewrite it for better clarity.
  • "natural cheeses such as cheddar and pepper jack" - put "cheddar and pepper jack" in parenthesis
    bad grammar, see Bracket#Parentheses_.28_.29
  • "to the more adult palate" - change to "to a more adult palate"
  • references #73, 74 & 75 need to be put at the end of the end of the sentence, as they are too disruptive in the middle
  • "These viral campaigns coupled several other new advertisement campaigns[73]and the new product introductions" - wordy, say "These viral ad campaigns, coupled with other new campaigns and product introductions"
2. Factually accurate?:
Your references look really good. There are tons everywhere, and they are generally well formatted. As this is a GA nom, the standards aren't as high, but if you ever wanted to make this an FA, then they would all have to be formatted correctly. All website references should look like reference #6. Also, one thing you should probably do now is format the dates according to WP:DATE. Basically, this: (2007-05-05) should look like this: [[2007-05-05]], which will render like this: 2007-05-05. Additionally, I was a little concerned that the West Bank controversy only had one source. With topics like that, it's good to get multiple references. The logo section could also use another reference or two, mostly to verify when or how the logos were replaced.
3. Broad in coverage?:
*The lead section elaborates too much on failed products and advertising, and mentions nothing at all about the controversies, legal disputes, Hungry Jack fiasco or their charitable activities. You might also include a brief mention of how they have traded hands several times. A lead section should summarize the article. See WP:LEAD.
4. Neutral point of view?: Overall, nicely done. However:
  • "Beginning in the early 1980s, its advertising began to lose focus and became ineffectual;" this opinion is too pointed. Saying it was less effective is sufficient
5. Article stability? Good here.
6. Images?: The images all look good, although I would increase the resolution to probably 300px, since they aren't very clear while so small.

When these issues are addressed, the article can be renominated. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to a Good article reassessment. Thank you for your work so far. — Esprit15d 16:00, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

GA Nominee

This article's Good Article promotion has been put on hold. During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write. This is how the article, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written: Some editions need here to be boarded by the manual of the style: Words to Avoid

2. Broad in coverage: The article is well broad in coverage

3. Neutral point of view: The article counts on a very good neutral point of view.

4. Stability of the article? Not the subject of any recent or on-going edit wars.

5. Images: The deficiency of images is not a step/criteria of fall. Anyway, the images have a very good quality.

Please address these matters soon and then leave a note below showing how they have been resolved. After 48 hours the article should be reviewed again. If these issues are not addressed within 7 days, the article may be failed without further notice. Thank you for your work so far. Macys123. 19:54, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

GA review by goodfriend100

Well written! I don't see anything wrong with it. However, I do want to suggest that you expand the "global locations" section, perhaps how burger king is doing in other countries? I think you could have some more pictures, but its pretty good now. I think this article deserves GA status. Good friend100 22:57, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

That will come with the FA work I intend to do once I finally get the GA status. - Jeremy (Jerem43 01:15, 8 November 2007 (UTC))

Note that good articles are great articles. Although we do have lower standards that FA reviewers, it is not ok to lower the quality of the article. We still check for completeness, whether you are planning to take the article to FA status or not. Good friend100 02:05, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Listed Revenue

Is the amount of annual revenue listed correct? If so then that would make Burger King the #1 burger joint in the world by annual revenue, as this exceeds that of McDonalds! 74.65.39.59 18:40, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

ah,it's now been corrected to $2.4 billion. Ok then! 74.65.39.59 18:50, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

minor questions to address before GA

  • if 90% of the franchises restaurants are privately owned and operated, are the employees of these franchises really employees of the Burger King corp? If not, then the statement about the number of Burger King employees should be revised.
Fixed, some one else had that number, proper number is 37,000
  • if the business was established in 1954, then why does the lead describe the menu as having evolved since 1955?
Fixed, typo
  • "Chart House, owner of 350 restaurants" - Burger King restaurants or restaurants in general?
Fixed, clarified
  • "Burger King had fallen to a near tie for second place with Wendy's in the US market" - 2nd place in what specifically ( for example, 2nd place in sales among franchise fast food burger restaurants)
Fixed, clarified

ike9898 22:44, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

I fixed it again, please no more I beg of you....

whimper

- Jeremy (Jerem43 01:39, 11 November 2007 (UTC))

Promoted article to GA after several rounds of critism above were addressed. Keep improving this article and try for FA! ike9898 15:37, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Infobox layout

(This comment was moved from the AfD discussion on the Burger King product articles)

Do you mean the company template at the bottom? The colored lines are a function of the template itself and are in all similar template boxes. - Jeremy (Jerem43 (talk) 02:16, 8 December 2007 (UTC))

Trademark Disputes typo

"The Hootses were granted exclusive rights to the Burger King trade mark in 20 mile (32 km) of their original location in Mattoon." IN is usually used for a place name of a place that is large enough to be inside (like a city or a country). I think WITHIN would be more appropriate since we are talking about a range unless a word indicating range is used: within 20 miles (32 km) in a 20 mile (32 km) radius

I assume this is a typo, and believe that within 20 miles is the most appropriate correction. --Hydenobuyuki (talk) 07:14, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Need image of headquoter building?

Hi, I live in Miami, FL. I see that in the article, there aren't any image of the headquoter building of Burger King. If you need, I could go take a picture of it. They are very close to the Miami International Airport, and I've passed by it a couple of times. I guess I'm going to have to do it for free, but its great if someone can help me pay for the gas :) --Mitchipr (talk) 14:42, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Burger_King/Archive_3&oldid=1136583647"