Talk:List of casual dining restaurant chains

message: It is my understanding that a "fast-casual" restaurant necessarily does NOT offer table service. Yes, some elements of table service may exist, but no specific waiter and no expectation of a table tip (though tipping at the register may be appropriate and proper, in America). That is the appeal - dining there is fast and informal. This article's definition contradicts the spirit of my understanding, which is also the definition on the wiki page for Fast casual restaurant (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fast_casual_restaurant). This ought to be fixed. Applebees is not a fast casual restaurant. This list has been constructed and is defined by an incorrect standard.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pickleops (talk • contribs) 19:37, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition 

message: Are any of the following restaurants allowed to be in the list?: Benihana, Bennigan's, Big Boy, BJ's Restaurant, Bob Evans, Buffalo Wild Wings, Carabba's Italian Grill, Cheddar's, The Cheesecake Factory, Cracker Barrel, Denny's, Eat'n Park, Famous Dave's, Frisch's, Golden Corral, Hard Rock Cafe, Hooters, Hot Chicken Takeover, IHOP, Logan's, LongHorn Steakhouse, O'Charley's, Olive Garden, P.F. Chang's, PizzaRev, Rainforest Cafe, Red Lobster, Red Robin, Steak n' Shake, Texas Roadhouse, Uno Chicago Grill, Zaxby's. Ssjhowarthisawesome (talk) 13:11, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing restaurants that were in the list 

message: This list is very large and is quickly getting larger. Should defunct restaurant chains be included in this list? Or is it about time to have the defunct restaurant chains be split-off to form its own list since there have been quite a few fast casual restaurant chains that have closed in the past 50 years that also have Wikipedia articles that have yet to be added to the current list. -- 50.195.200.161 (talk) 02:32, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should defunct restaurants be removed from this list and be split off to form a new list for defunct restaurants? 

message: All the fast casual restaurants should be deleted and put in a seperate list. ----  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2606:6000:FECD:1400:65F2:52C3:7F71:D060 (talk) 03:07, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I absolutely agree with this – fast casual chains should be moved to a newly created list. In the food service business fast casual is considered a distinct category that is up and coming. It is replacing traditional casual restaurants because of costs, especially sky-rocketing land value. (And I see issues of this list becoming too long otherwise.) Splitting off fast casual would be a constructive move. — βox73 (৳alk) 18:29, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fast Casual 

message: We need to address how this column is used. Sometimes the number represents the current number of units, sometimes the peak number of units of defunct chains, sometimes the peak of existing chains, and sometimes both numbers are given. Notations in the column are at the whim of the editor and the need for them should be resolved. Would a better solution be to have historic peak numbers listed in parentheses, which would include any number given for defunct chains. If Shoney's had 1000 units max, and 350 now, it would list as 350 (1000). Even that isn't ideal but better than the current mix. Peaks could have its own column but that further crowds the table. (Take a look at the list on your cell phone.) Perhaps peaks belong in the notes column.
If we can limit it to a single number, then changing the heading "Number of locations" to "No. of units" would shrink the column width, allowing more space for the other columns, thereby improving the look and feel of the list. (Again, take a look at the list on your cell phone.) This is an appropriate situation for the abbreviation. I'm assuming most readers understand units means locations/restaurants/stores.
I strongly propose moving all defunct casual chains to a new list. Optionally placing a list of defunct chains below the list of active chains might be considered, invoking IAR/common sense if it is necessary to have them on the same page. But IMO, as this list grows, the usefulness is compromised by mixing active and defunct chains. — βox73 (৳alk) 19:34, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no disagreement in principle to what is suggested by Box73. Lard Almighty (talk) 21:24, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

text: Some of the location counts are wildly exaggerated: one company whose entry reported 5000 locations had fewer than ten, according to its website. Are flacks editing fake numbers into this table?  Also, does it make sense for a company with two locations to be included?  Perhaps some criterion of minimum locations could be added to knock a few dozen entries of merely local interest off the list. Bistropha (talk) 07:05, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improving "Number of locations" column / moving defunct chains 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of casual dining restaurant chains. 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/20111020224013/http://investor.dardenrestaurants.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=609120 to http://investor.dardenrestaurants.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=609120
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) 05:27, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Chick-fil-A is fast food. It's not even fast-casual. 
This list needs some serious pruning.
2606:6000:FECD:1400:5099:2196:A8BF:1742 (talk) 17:38, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: They do bring the order to the table, so maybe they qualify as fast casual. Bistropha (talk) 03:05, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chick-fil-A!? 

message: Seems like a lot of restaurants that aren't casual dining have suddenly been added? --valereee (talk) 00:22, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why have so many not-casual-dining restaurants been added? 

message: At what point does a struggling chain is considered defunct? When the chain is reduced to a single location, the company may still be active but the concept of it being an "active chain" becomes meaningless.
For the purpose of this list, should these companies still remain on the "Casual" list, like what is currently being done with Don Pablo's, Howard Johnson's, Sambo's, T-Rex (restaurant), The Brothers Three, and York Steak House? Or move to the "Former casual restaurants" list, like what is currently being done with Peachy Keens?
Or should we start a new "Almost dead" category for companies that were much larger in the past but have been reduced to a solitary location? Companies such as Don Pablo's, Howard Johnson's, Sambo's, and York Steak House had over 100 locations in the past and were market leaders at one time. Comments?
-- 68.50.32.85 (talk) 02:56, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  At what point does a chain becomes defunct 

message: Dominoes has more locations than Pizza Hut (to my knowledge). They are owned by Bain Capital, I do not know if that is why it is on the list? Wyattflash (talk) 01:04, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dominos Pizza Should Be #1, they are Owned by Bain Capital Though