Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/In-N-Out

In-N-Out
I would like to nominate In-N-Out as a featured article. This article is one of the most comprehensive works on this restaurant that I have ever seen. Anything you would like to know about this place has been added to this article. There are plenty of references to prove factuality. The article is stable; there hasn’t been any major revision for a while. This article is surprising well written and is actually compelling to read. Since it is just a burger place it can’t be too controversial of an article. It has been written in appropriate Wikipedia style standards. The article contains a lot of images in appropriate places. Even though the article is comprehensive it is not too long. Topics are divided into different section and stay on topic. SenorAnderson 23:04, 27 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Neutral Oppose. I previously put this article on peer review, but I do not think that all of the comments that were posted there have been applied yet. There still seems to be a lot of lists on the article. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 03:10, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Also, the copyright status of Image:IN-N-OUT BURGER MENU BOARD.JPG (which I raised on its talk page) still has not been addressed yet. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 05:57, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
 * And another thing: The history section looks like it still needs work. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 06:07, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

I'll probably be back to add more comments. From the WikiProject on business, "each article should have a section discussing the company's business model, which intimately tied to how a company is put together and one of the major factors usually shaping a companies history" and "management philosophy, vision, and values is also a major element of coporations and their behaviour which often go under-reported". I think you do a pretty good job of outlining both but any enhancements would be welcome. Good luck with the nomination. Cedars 03:47, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Object, due to the following:
 * "just-in-time" isn't really a business model, its an inventory strategy and it hyperlinks to the wrong article. Maybe it might be better to just say the food is "made-to-order"?
 * "locations's" is grammatically incorrect.
 * "food preparation area (where the tomatoes, onions," is an incomplete sentence.
 * Dedicated "mechanical/electrical rooms" strike me as unusual for small fast-food outlets. Please elaborate.
 * "employee locker rooms" are important to understanding the corporate culture, are these just a set of lockers or are they part of a set of employee facilities. Please elaborate.
 * "concrete tables and benches" sound awfully uncomfortable, are they really concrete or are they just set in a paved area?
 * The "two-box" design could use something visual to aid understanding (either a diagram or a photograph).
 * "larger restaurant site, newer restaurants" - the first noun is singular, the second is plural.
 * "the Snyders" are introduced in Advertising without any mention of who they are.
 * The list for the "secret" menu is a bit overwhelming - maybe you could move it to a new article?
 * Link 666x666 in Trivia to the Number of the Beast (numerology), non-Christians might otherwise be baffled by the reference.
 * Details of store numbers would be appreciated.
 * The History could be a bit more detailed.
 * The menu photograph should be relabelled as being in the public domain.
 * Actually, "the Snyders" are introduced in the history section: In-N-Out's first location was opened in October 1948 by Harry and Esther Snyder Zzyzx11 (Talk) 06:07, 29 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Object
 * The copyright status of Image:IN-N-OUT BURGER MENU BOARD.JPG needs to be clarified. Is it GFDL as implied by the upload comment, public domain/no rights reserved as implied by the rights summary, or "fair use" as implied by the discussion page?
 * The "trivia" section should be worked into the prose or removed.
 * There seems to be too much emphasis on the menu.
 * --Carnildo 07:34, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * This one's a little overboard. A guy drove up and took a picture of the menu board. In-N-Out may be abe to trademark the menu board, but as a photo of a menu board I don't think there's much claim for copyright of the photo. Now a transcription of the text they may, but not the photo this user took. Besides the template on that image page is wrong. It claims no source information, while the user clearly claims he took the photo. - Taxman Talk 20:05, August 29, 2005 (UTC)
 * There are three conflicting statements as to the copyright status of the image. Before the article can be considered to be of featured status, this needs to be straightened out, or the image needs to be removed from the article.  I don't see what's "overboard" about that. --Carnildo 21:08, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Agree with removal, especially since this photo can be easily retaken and properly tagged by any number of people. -- Norvy (talk) 22:41, 29 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Oppose featured article candidacy. Except for the recent notation, this is one of the most boring articles on Wiki. It looks like someone dumped their Business 101 weekend writing assignment on here.  --Noitall 06:48, August 31, 2005 (UTC)


 * Oppose Sorry but I must agree..... it's unbelivably, unreadably dull. --PopUpPirate 23:21, August 31, 2005 (UTC)


 * Comment: I concur with all those who say this article is boring to read. I liked it better when it was a stub. :)   [  +t,  +c ,  +m  ] 08:18, September 2, 2005 (UTC)