Template:Did you know nominations/Chicken in the Rough


 * The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as |this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by 97198 (talk) 12:06, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Chicken in the Rough

 * ... that Chicken in the Rough, established in 1936, became the first restaurant chain franchise in the United States?


 * Reviewed: Monte Alén National Park

5x expanded by Northamerica1000 (talk). Self-nominated at 04:37, 2 May 2015 (UTC).


 * Symbol confirmed.svg 5x expansion verified. New enough, long enough, well referenced, neutrally written, no close paraphrasing seen. Hook ref verified and cited inline. QPQ done. Good to go. Yoninah (talk) 14:18, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Sorry, but I pulled this from prep for sourcing of the hook. A cookbook isn't a RS for the history of restaurant franchising, and the only other source I could find offhand was the company's own website. EEng (talk) 21:30, 6 June 2015 (UTC)


 * ALT1: ... that Chicken in the Rough, established in 1936, was one of the first restaurant chain franchises in the United States? Northamerica1000 (talk). 23:29, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * , I didn't say anything at the time, but I feel the hook needs more pizzazz. How about:
 * ALT2: ... that Chicken in the Rough expanded its first drive-in restaurant on Route 66 from nine stools and four booths to seating for 1,100? Yoninah (talk) 23:44, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * No offense, but I feel that ALT1 has much more historical significance relative to the history of restaurant franchising in the United States, whereas ALT2 simply discusses a sizable restaurant expansion. North America1000 23:51, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Historical significance, yes. Hookiness, no. But ALT1 is verified by a reliable book source and cited inline. Yoninah (talk) 23:55, 6 June 2015 (UTC)