Talk:Real Canadian Superstore/Archives/2014

Unions
Some information on their union busting techniques would be beneficial.--Fmaack 14:10, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

haha yeah right. You are automatically enrolled in the Union when you become an employee.

In fact, Loblaws is known to close down stores where there are employees with many decades experience who make upwards of $12-15/hr and then open a new RCSS and offer them the same position they previously held for $7-8/hr. They take their plays right out of the Wal-Mart play book.--Fmaack 02:36, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Correct me if I'm wrong (I can't immediately find a source), but my understanding is that this was specifically agreed to in Loblaw's last deal with the UFCW in order to compete with Wal-Mart, and employees who don't want the reduced rate are free to transfer to another non-Superstore location. &mdash; stickguy (:^›)&mdash; || talk || 14:09, 21 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I am not currently an employee of Loblaws but I did hear that when a local Your Independent Grocer store (which are owned by Loblaws) was closed that full-time staff who had worked there for many years were offered a job at the new Real Canadian Superstore at a starting wage of $7 or $8. It would actually be quite impossible for all those employees to find jobs at other Loblaws stores as they are now being phased out and replaced with RCS stores. Another store in Kanata was just closed and replaced with an RCS store. I have friends and family who work for both Loblaws and RCSS and I'm hearing that there is talk of a province-wide strike for both stores so contract negotations can't be going *too* well.--Fmaack 06:22, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * It's quite bad in the west here, though different. I'm an employee at Superstore down west.  Similar things are happening here, though stores aren't closing.  One Superstore will offer employees more money than another superstore, usually about 5 minutes away.  As such, I am making less money after 3 years at my store than someone just starting off the street at the new stores.  Similar thing, and it's wrong.  I personally don't like the way the management is leading this company, and i have my reasons, but i won't share them on here. --Anithira 09:32, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Dominick's division in Chicago, IL had a division called Omni Superstore that looked remarkably similar to the design, signage, and layout of the Real Canadian Superstore. This divison was eliminated when Safeway bought out Dominick's in 1997.

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging
This article talk page was automatically added with WikiProject Food and drink banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here. Maximum and careful attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories, but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns, please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 23:38, 3 July 2008 (UTC)


 * (Do I feel silly replying to a bot?) It's probably an incorrect tag, but we can let the WikiProject people worry about it. The tag is only here for their use. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 02:11, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

List of stores
A question came up about whether stores should be listed. I don't see a reason not to; the argument that the Starbucks article doesn't do it, therefore there must be some rule against it, seems illogical. If you think there is a rule against it, find it and quote it. Also, there is no list of stores (with street addresses), just cities where stores are located. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 02:07, 13 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I didn't mean to suggest there is (or should be) a rule against listing individual stores. I meant that it doesn't make sense. I used Starbucks as an extreme example because of the sheer number of (non-notable) locations. A list of Superstore locations is not encyclopedic. A list of Superstore locations is not verifiable. A list of Superstore locations will quickly become out of date -- if indeed it was ever correct -- and does nothing to enhance the article. Elving (talk) 02:29, 13 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree that a list of Starbucks locations would be overly large. But I don't see anything wrong with making a list here.  As for it doing nothing to enhance the article, I do think it gives a good idea of its provincial coverage.  The stores first opened in Western Canada, and have now spread to the rest of the country.  The list shows how they have spread out.  It can also be used to show how the stores are apportioned to small towns vs. big cities.  As for verifiability, I'm sure lists of stores exist, and the source of a list can be referenced.  After all, the person who inserted the list got it from somewhere.  It does not have to be an online source.  Why not post a message to the talk page of the user who added this information, asking them to insert a reference to the source they used? --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 00:49, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Before making a controversial major change to an article, a proposal should be posted on the talk page. Removing the list of locations is controversial, because editors have been updating the list as stores open or close. Also, the subject has been discussed before on this talk page, so re-opening the discussion and stating new reasons for wanting to remove the list, or revisiting old reasons, would have been appropriate. I have restored the list, which can be verified at any time against the company's website. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 14:10, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

A couple of things
To explain some recent changes I've made... For years there have been suggestions that all Loblaws stores are eventually being turned into Superstores, or all future stores will be branded Loblaws Superstore, or that it is the company's practice to open new stores as Loblaws Superstore for a few years, and then change them to just Superstore, or that other brands will be turned into Superstores eventually. In practice, there is no real recurring pattern, and all of these theories are just speculation, so I've removed them. If the company ever makes an official statement on their intentions, by all means include it.

I also changed a recent edit about stores being unionized. The edit hinted that some stores might not be part of the UFCW union. If this is true, can we be more explicit about which stores this might involve? Since the edit was vague, I essentially reverted it with a rewording, but another change may be necessary if some stores are indeed non-union, or belong to a different union.

If anyone has any questions or objections about changes I've made, don't hesitate to ask about it. This is the kind of article that needs to be revised frequently. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 17:48, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

SuperValu
SuperValu still exists, at least in BC. Coquitlam has two Real Cdn Superstores and at least one SuperValu that has been there at least 20 years. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.189.192.6 (talk) 03:27, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
 * There is an article for SuperValu (Canada) which I've wikilinked into the Superstore article, and it says they have many stores in B.C. The articles should be in sync now, and I've fixed some outdated history. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 09:35, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Superstore vs. Loblaws Superstore
A recent edit removed the break-down of Superstore vs. Loblaws Superstore with this reason in the edit summary: "Superstore's website no longer allows you to differentiate between which stores are Real Canadian and which stores are Loblaws, therefore making it pointless to seperate the two". I don't believe anything has changed. If you go to any store, you will see the appropriate banner at the top. That's the way it used to work.

I have to say, navigation at their website is terrible! They no longer have a link to go back to the "store locator" page to pick another store, and they have a "cookies" system that forces you to stay at one store, once you pick one. The only way to pick another store is to delete some cookies! Even worse, I couldn't get into any of the Loblaws Superstores, when any of them are selected. I tried on two different browsers, on two different computers. One says "URL redirection limit exceeded" in a pop-up box; the other (IE) gives me the standard "could not access page" screen. Amusingly, I can tell which stores are the Loblaws Superstores because they are the ones that can't be accessed!

Anyway, getting back to the editing issue, there is no point in removing some information about which stores are which just because their website doesn't make it easy to look it up. We already have the breakdown for Ontario, and if it were impossible to find out the other locations (which it isn't), we should at least keep what we've got. The distinction is important to the employees because they have different union representation, for example. The article also talks about trends to use one name or the other, and the whole discussion doesn't make much sense without stating which stores are which currently.

If the website can't provide the information, there must be other ways to find out. Someone could enquire directly to the company for a list. Or we could look up addresses of their stores in a phone directory. You can't just say that the easiest method doesn't work, so I'm giving up. That's not good research! Please leave the page as it is for now, with the Ontario breakdown intact, until someone can check into this further. And even if that doesn't happen, let's keep what we've got. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 01:23, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Follow-up: I can get into the other stores now, so maybe it was just a server-down problem. I also found you can reset the store choice by going to "other links" (opens new page in reduced size window) and clicking on "our stores -> Real Canadian Superstore" (which resets the other page back to the store locator). Still a bad system! But I can see what the editor is saying: all stores show the same banner. Even so, the stores are branded differently, and the article is about the stores, not the website. It's possible the common banner is being used because it's a special Christmas Holidays banner (aw, I shouldn't poke fun, they do play distinctly "Christmas" music over the PA) and maybe it will change back to the two store types in January. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 08:16, 3 December 2008 (UTC)


 * (11/5/08)*The reason why I kept trying to combine the two types of Superstores, is because when you click on more store information for stores that we specifically knew were Loblaw Superstores, it does not say anywhere anymore whether they are Loblaw or Real Canadian. You do not see the appropriate banner at the top anymore, you see both banners. As well, the recent stores that opened in Oshawa and Windsor for one week had their flyers with the banner Loblaw Superstore on it, now every flyer has both banners listed on it. Had I not extensively looked at that, during that specific week, we'd have never known what types of stores these were since every store's flyer is now listed as both banners. As well, the store in Windsor has neither Real Canadian nor Loblaw on its actual signage.... however it released its first week flyer as saying Loblaw Superstore. Now it lists both banners on its flyers, just as the Real Canadian store does as well. You could be right about this combination for the holidays specifically, however you do need to take into account that either Loblaws is now creating a 3rd type of superstore, without anything in front of it, or it's trying to eliminate the consumer confusion it caused by having two different types, and now is combining them all to just simply say "Superstore"


 * I understand completely what you're saying. But I'd like to see more than seasonal flyers and website banners as proof that the company has actually changed its branding.  It's okay to note these developments, but too soon to draw conclusions when no announcement has been made.  I know some news-minded Wikipedians want to be the first to spread news, but you can't do it before it happens, or take rumours and hints and turn them into news of a press release that hasn't been made.  It's like those who wanted to spread the news yesterday and today that the Canadian coalition government was a done deal before it happened, and now it isn't happening.  Let's wait for more before jumping the gun. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 19:02, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

There have been recent edits to the article to state that the store name has changed, based on flyers and the website. As I've said before, over the last five years or so, various stores in Ontario have changed from Loblaw / RC Superstore to just RC Superstore, while others have changed in the other direction. And every time that happens, speculation is posted on this article that Loblaw is considering changing the entire chain. This is the same situation as before. Has there been an official announcement? If so, we can use it as a citation. But "this is true because I say it is" is never an acceptable rationale for changing a Wikipedia article. The article, as it stands, states the fact that the logo on the flyer has changed, and uses the website as a citation to show the website has changed, so it adequately covers what has happened so far. When (and if) Loblaw decides to make the change official, I'm sure there will be a press announcement. It's not proper for us to make it for them, based on speculation. The article already has too much speculation, but we'll let it stand for the time being, and remove it if nothing happens in a little while. (We've done all this before!)

In addition, I have pointed out that the change which keeps getting put back has spelling and grammar problems. The addition of "and their website" is poorly inserted, making for poor grammar (and as stated before, it's not necessary). and we keep seeing "Building's" inserted instead of "buidings" (no capital letter, no apostrophe). Also, we have separate lists of which stores in Ontario are Loblaw / Superstore, and which are just Superstore, and someone wants to change the headings of one, instead of combining the lists, so we have two lists of the same thing! Last year, someone combined the lists, and we decided that change was wrong, and reverted it. Please don't change it again; it will just get reverted.

I have no objection to changing the article if the name change becomes real. If you have more information about the change, or just want to talk about it, feel free to post on this page. Use the talk pages to get consensus for changes before making them, instead of edit warring. Thanks! --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 07:15, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Western Ontario uses the 2005 Logo while Ontario RCSS Dont Anymore
Western Ontario uses the 2005 Logo while Ontario RCSS Dont Anymore

I jsut stating that rcss in Ontario are being renamed

Loblaw Real Canadian Superstore

the reason for this is loblaw what to put there cooperate name in there

(removing email address, not allowed at Wikipedia)

check the difference between the Western Stores and Ontario on there websites

http://www.superstore.ca/west/default.aspx http://www.superstore.ca/ontario/oneStop.aspx

Loblaw is adding there name

Check out those links

(01:21, 4 February 2009 (UTC)) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.224.112.64 (talk)


 * A private email is not a citable source, and I doubt you have obtained info such as this from an email, when the company has made no public announcements about a name change. What stores have you seen change the logo on their signage?  (I know the answer: none.)  The reason for the double-use logo was explained to you on your talk page by others, and it matches what the article says.  You can't just change the article to say what you think is happening.  Everything on Wikipedia must come from citable sources. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 03:09, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Follow-up: You are still changing the article without coming back to this talk page. I removed a duplicate post you made, and you put it back (and I took it out again), so I'm not sure if you have read this reply. The edit summary for your latest change says you restored your changes to say ALL of Ontario is changing, based on one store in Kanata, which is improper, and I'm not sure I believe it since you are located in Toronto. It is not proper to keep changing the article when there is a disagreement. We should use the talk page. If a store really changed its name, there should be some kind of announcement in the media. Can you find one? (I looked at Google News and couldn't find it.) Where did you learn this? Please don't change the article again, until this is resolved. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 13:39, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Protected
I protected this page, for the next four weeks. Please discuss it, and work it out here, or else the next protection could be even longer. rootology ( C )( T ) 02:14, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Logo discussion, April 2009
Opening a new section to discuss the wording of the "new" logo's application again. Details will follow once the discussion begins. I posted a notice on the other user's talk page, but we should be discussing it here. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 20:12, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

I removed the mention that the new logo that features 'Superstore' followed by Loblaws and Real Canadian to the side, is used for only advertising purposes. The recently converted Zehrs store in Windsor last year, still features 'Superstore' as its logo, without mention to Loblaw or Real Canadian. The sign matches with the logo used in advertising, minus the words Loblaw and Real Canadian preceding it.

Logo discussion, May 2010
Currently, the article has 2 short paragraphs at the end of the history section:
 * New Ontario locations began to open under the name Loblaw Superstore in late 2007. Since December 2008, Ontario stores have used common flyers displaying a combined "Superstore: Loblaw / Real Canadian" logo. However, Loblaw has not yet said whether one banner will eventually replace the other. In March 2009, the Real Canadian Superstore in Oakville became The Loblaw Superstore with new signage and colour scheme, along with the Weston location in Summer 2009.  In Fall 2009, the Weston location had again reverted to Real Canadian Superstore banner.

There is a citation to the store's official website, to "prove" a new logo is used in advertising, but that's really not how citations should be used. While I understand the desire to document changes to the company's history, it does not appear that they are moving forward with a name change at any great pace. The whole section quoted above appears to be WP:CRYSTAL or crystal ball gazing, speculative with no citations to news sources stating the company is considering changing its name. If no name change is in the works, all these slight changes to signage, and reverts thereof, are probably non-notable. Can I have someone second a proposal to remove these sentences as unencyclopedic? Or at least, reduce it to one sentence with non-notable examples removed? --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 20:11, 6 May 2010 (UTC)