Talk:List of casual dining restaurant chains

Definition
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)

Missing restaurants that were in the list
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)

Burgers and Shakes and the bigger picture
Big Boy Restaurants International conceived Burgers and Shakes as a chain and is now selling Burgers and Shakes franchises. I didn't add this until the franchising began.

Given that "one restaurant does not a chain make", it might be a good idea not to list the current number of stores when that number is one, such as with HoJo's. (Yes, I know they once had ~1000 stores.) — βox73 (৳alk) 15:22, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Apart from the fact that there is only one store so it is not yet a chain, there is also no separate article for Burgers and Shakes. These lists are designed to point people to existing articles on, in this case, casual dining restaurants that are (or were at one time) chains. If and when Burgers and Shakes becomes notable enough for its own article it can be listed here. Lard Almighty (talk) 16:45, 5 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your response. We may be splitting hairs between a restaurant chain and a chain restaurant but I appreciate your view. I could add the three Big Boy chains and group B&S with the Michigan group.


 * I might also add Big Boy Japan which has many more stores, and is distinct by menu and ownership, and wl it to the Japanese Wikipedia article; otherwise it would have to link to a section in the English Big Boy article.


 * Is PDF Chicken PDQ Chicken an example of the notablility you refer to? — βox73 (৳alk) 18:21, 13 November 2017 (UTC) / βox73 (৳alk) 00:22, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * It's really very simple. If a restaurant is or has been a chain, and has a separate article on English Wikipedia, it can be listed here. I have removed PDQ chicken. Lard Almighty (talk) 09:11, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Should defunct restaurants be removed from this list and be split off to form a new list for defunct restaurants?
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)

Fast Casual
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)


 * 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)

I don’t see the difference between Subway, Pizza Hut (fast casual) and Wendys (fast food). They all make food in a hurry & make it to go. And it doesn’t taste as good as an actual restaurant. Theaveng (talk) 19:29, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Improving "Number of locations" column / moving defunct chains
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)
 * I have no disagreement in principle to what is suggested by Box73. Lard Almighty (talk) 21:24, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
 * 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)

External links modified
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)

Chick-fil-A!?
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)
 * They do bring the order to the table, so maybe they qualify as fast casual. Bistropha (talk) 03:05, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

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

At what point does a chain becomes defunct
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)

Dominos Pizza Should Be #1, they are Owned by Bain Capital Though
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)