Talk:Grubhub

Incorrect to rename old article rather than creating a new article for the new company
This article should not have been renamed GrubHub Seamless - there should have been a new article by that name, to preserve the history of GrubHub. Seamless (company) is still there. Then the intra-Wiki linking would have made sense. If I have time, I'll see what I can do to fix this.Timtempleton (talk) 20:12, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Just a useful source I happened to read, if anyone wants to use it
New York vs. Grubhub (New York Times). &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 17:10, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Altered wording of assembly bill 5
the bill 5 lawsuit included irrelevant name-dropping of other plaintiffs in the suit as well as weasel words "and more." The wording of the Assembly Bill 5 section also downplayed the fact that AB5 was passed as a law in California in November of 2019, suggesting somehow "the courts" were still debating it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:130A:FB:31AD:802B:8469:151B (talk) 22:42, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
 * It was unsourced. I've removed it. NE Ent 16:55, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Remove Overview section?
It seems like the Overview section is unnecessary and redundant, as most of the information is repeated elsewhere in the article, and the lead section already serves as an overview - WP:MOSLEAD. So I propose removing the Overview section, and moving any important info from the Overview section into the lead section instead. Does anyone have any objections? Stonkaments (talk) 04:07, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Easiest to just make the best edits you can, as if someone objects they can improve or revert them. NE Ent 16:57, 1 May 2020 (UTC)