Talk:Fuddruckers/Archive 1

WPFood assessment
Low importance start, small national chain in the premium burger segment. --Jeremy ( Blah blah... ) 03:22, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Name?
Where does the name come from?203.17.70.161 04:42, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I second that question.


 * In the movie "Idiocracy", the name changes to "Futtbuckers", "Buttruckers", and finally "Butt:Fuckers" as humans become dumber throughout time. I was actually just looking it up to find out if it's a real thing. Well, it's real, but the name still doesn't make sense. 76.64.156.168 (talk) 02:20, 16 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I was absolutely sure the Fuddruckers chain had a different name before it was bought by the owner that named it that in the 80's... something simple like an Italian surname or first name of some sort or maybe my memory betrays me and it was "Norman's" etc., it wasn't that, but I can't remember for the life of me what it was exactly. I know I remember when the name changed I thought "what the heck?". It had the same floor layout and everything, yellow covered entry way, etc. It wasn't just one location changing over, it was several in the Washington state, Oregon state area, which all became "Fuddruckers" at once, maybe it was just that chain in that part of the U.S. that was bought out in it's entirety in the late '80s and turned over to Fuddruckers? Doesn't seem like it though, because when I lived in south Florida around '00-'01 I saw a "Fuddruckers" location, and it had the same layout and orange-ish yellow covered entry way, etc, that this chain in the Pacific Northwest had years before being named "Fuddruckers" in the '80s! 4.255.48.12 (talk) 16:31, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

About the origin of the name, seems just like a silly surname that the owner, not of that surname, thought it would be silly to name the restaurant. The One Fat Hen article has a rhyme with "Fudruckers" (with one d) for example. 4.255.48.12 (talk) 16:34, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

International Operations
Can anyone, perhaps the previous editors, expand on Fuddruckers' operations in countries outside the United States? The official website lists only US stores. I know they had one operation (now defunct) in Australia, and have added this information. -- Andoka 14:15, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

They also had a store in Brisbane at Eagle Street Pier in the "lawyer" district of the CBD around the same time, and that closed down as well. I actually had a burger there and it was huuuge !-- It's all very well to bleat 'citation required' but such information is unlikely to be recorded in any form that can be cited so where does that leave us. I ate there, I know. MichaelGG (talk) 05:38, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Idiocracy reference discussion
This is what jerem43 has to say on the subject; copied from my talk page where he insisted on taking the discussion. This is the same user who added a comment instruction to not include the reference. Only after I asked was I given a reason, which is what I'm reproducing here, so we can discuss it where it belongs. Note that he's speaking to me, CapnZapp.

-- Fudruckers and Idiocracy --

Please read WP:Trivia and Handling trivia.

This Idiocracy/Fuddruckers foolishness is unimportant and has no valid reason for inclusion. The only reason people have included it is because of the "giggle" association with anal sex. There is an ongoing issue of people trying to include the word "buttf*ckers" in the article, the Idiocracy reference is being used as an attempt to legitimize their vandalism. If you had taken the time to look at the history of the article you would have seen this. The request to leave out Idiocracy references is an attempt to make vandals think twice about being stupid, which does work to some extent.

The same thing has happened repeatedly at the Bennigan's article with South Park, again there is no valid reason besides an unimportant, passing remark or gag in a movie or television show.

--Jeremy ( Blah blah... ) 14:52, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments? Do you feel this reference (adding it) is "foolish", "not valid", "unimportant", "passing" or "vandalism"? Myself, I wouldn't even have known there was a chain called Fuddruckers if it weren't for the movie. CapnZapp (talk) 23:30, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Yep. Most people had never even heard of Fuddruckers prior to seeing Idiocracy. It only seems valid that there should be a "In popular culture" reference. Of course, those people who vandalise the article, replacing "Fuddruckers" with "Buttfuckers" should be treated accordingly, but since "Idiocracy" is the one thing that alerted most people to Fuddruckers' mere existence, it is definitely worthy of a small inclusion herein.


 * Please read WP:Civil, comments such as the one you have made are a violation of policy and can and will be deleted. Restoration of these comments can lead to blocks. --Jeremy (blah blah) 17:48, 22 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Agreed. The reference should be included, even if it doesn't specify what the final name of the place is in the movie.  Drego5 (talk) 21:18, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

I also say "Yes" to including a reference to Idiocracy in this article. Does that mean consensus has been established then? I am going to add a reference then, which we can now agree is definitely NOT vandalism or an unconstructive edit, but rather the consensus :-) 41.245.166.168 (talk) 16:00, 24 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Starting a popular culture section is never my favorite thing to see. Along those lines, having only a single blue-link in that section really makes little sense to me. Can't the movie be worked into the article? Lawshoot! 02:16, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

People have tried that, but it keeps getting reverted for no apparent reason. It is off-putting when people keep deleting stuff without explanation, just because they think they know better. 41.245.137.162 (talk) 06:44, 23 March 2009 (UTC)


 * No they have not, they have tried to get the anal sex reference included using Idiocracy as a crutch to support its inclusion. Fuddruckers should be linked to this article from the Idiocracy article as it shows how society had dumbed down over the five centuries the main characters had hibernated, but it really has no point here. Really what does this have to do with the history of the company, its products advertising or business model? I can almost guarantee that that was not product placement, which does warrant inclusion as that is advertising, but parody which does not. --Jeremy (blah blah) 07:15, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Some vandals have added "the anal sex reference" but check the history page, and notice that people have tried to make valid reference to Fuddruckers in Idiocracy, only to get edited out without explanation. As others have pointed out, many peoples' first knowledge of Fuddruckers' existence was through the movie Idiocracy.

I would bet money that you could not possibly "guarantee that that was not product placement". How can you possibly make such an outrageous claim? Also, if Fuddruckers had not consented to the usage of their name in such a context, would they have stood by with indifference? Especially as so many people here seem so deeply offended by the term "Buttfuckers"? I would personally suggest that some short reference to the usage of Fuddruckers as an example of mankind's devolution in the movie Idiocracy be added, and the actual words used be included. Someone should find out if/what connection/knowledge Fuddruckers actually did have to the movie. Rather than just making claims with no factual support.

Unrelated to this I think I know why these vandals keep making the same disruptive edits here..not because they themselves are immature(though they are), but because people seem incapable of using Anglo-Saxon vocabulary. Instead of talking about "giggle factors" or "anal sex references", I'll just say.....'''Could whichever person or people keep adding the word Buttfuckers to the article stop immediately? It was not funny the first time, nor the thousandth.''' 41.245.137.162 (talk) 10:21, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Idiocracy
Should there not be some mention/reference to Fuddruckers being shown in the 2006 movie Idiocracy? Certainly it was through this movie that most people even became aware of Fuddruckers. Certainly it should be included oh yes. Username password retype password (talk) 12:16, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


 * No, there shouldn't. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 15:17, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't see what was wrong with this edit actually, as many wikipedia article have similar "in popular culture" sections. Tarc (talk) 15:54, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes they do, and they all fall under WP:Trivia, that is they should not be included in the article, either as a separate section or as a passing reference, unless there is a compelling reason why they should be there. The "In popular culture" section is just a re-badged trivia section and is usually deleted in short order. This is another example of a single, non-compelling one-shot joke in a individual movie that just plays on the old anal sex reference spoonerism that people have been saying for years. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 20:57, 6 October 2009 (UTC)