Talk:History of KFC

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:History of KFC/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Quadell (talk · contribs) 16:00, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
Nominator: Farrtj

This is a very strong nominee; it passes most of our GA criteria right out of the gate. I have a few issues I wanted to mention, just to help get this article in as good a shape as possible.

• I made several copyedits for smoothness of prose. If you disagree with any of my changes, feel free to revert and discuss.

I've seen these and I have no quibbles.Farrtj (talk) 00:09, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

• Be carefully about overlinking. WP:OVERLINKING cautions us not to link "the names of major geographic features and locations; languages; religions; common occupations" as well as "everyday words understood by most readers in context". Look carefully at whether links to tobacco, filling station, pancake, gravy, salad, etc., are actually adding value to the article. Just use your best judgment. The relevant question to ask yourself is this: Is it plausible that a reader of this article might say "I want to know more about 'snacks' in order to fully understand this article, so I'm glad there's a link to the snack article"? If not, then omit the link.

Thanks for the tip. "Filling station" is linked because different words are used to mean the same thing in other English speaking countries. Similarly with "lawyer", "hamburger", "take out", "slider", "pot pie", "corn muffin". I have unlinked tobacco, gravy, bread roll, pancake, salad. Farrtj (talk) 00:09, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

That's fine. You'll want to double-check the infobox (particularly the "Products" section). – Quadell ^(talk) 14:49, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

• Related: both "first quarter" and "financial quarter" link to Fiscal year. Only one link is needed in the article.

Done.Farrtj (talk) 00:25, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

• The lead is a little short. With all the material in the article, it would be better if an additional paragraph's worth of information was included in the lead.

Okay, I've expanded the lead into three paragraphs worth of material now. Farrtj (talk) 00:58, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

That's a great lead. – Quadell ^(talk) 14:49, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

• I have questions about this sentence: "He adopted the distinctive packaging as a favor to Sanders, who had called on behalf of a Denver franchisee who had bought 500 cardboard buckets from a traveling salesman." Does this mean that the Denver franchisee bought buckets that already had distinctive packaging, and Sanders asked Harman to use that for branding? The sentence could be clearer.

Hopefully clearer now. Farrtj (talk) 00:25, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

• There are a few cases where you repeat the same citation several times in a row. (For instance, citation 6 references two sentences in a row, and citation 26 references three sentences in a row.) This isn't necessary; unless there are direct quotes, you can simply have one citation at the end of the material sourced to it.

Unless what I'm doing is actively frowned upon, how it currently is is the way that I prefer to do it. Farrtj (talk) 00:25, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Well, I might frown. But it's not an impediment to GA status, certainly. – Quadell ^(talk) 14:49, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

• There must be a source for the claim that the company moved to Shelbyville in 1959, and for the claim that Novak became CEO of KFC in 1996.

Sorted. Farrtj (talk) 00:34, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

• When you say "from Kentucky to Nashville, Tennessee, which was closer to his home", it isn't clear if you mean Sanders' home or Massey's home.

Sorted.Farrtj (talk) 00:34, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

• Sometimes you spell it "take out", sometimes "take-out", and sometimes "takeout". Sometimes you spell it "US" and sometimes "U.S."

Sorted. Farrtj (talk) 00:34, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

"Take-out" is now standardized, but you still refer to "waned in the US" and "contract for the US franchisees" on the one hand, and "5,000 U.S. outlets" and "returned in the U.S." on the other. – Quadell ^(talk) 14:49, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

• The "Sale to PepsiCo" section, the article's longest, starts to get a little bogged down with details. In my opinion, it would be better if some of the details were trimmed. (There are three different opinions listed about the sale in 1986. There is a long paragraph about whether Pepsi intended to increase soft drink sales, and how competitors reacted. There's a whole paragraph about increased royalty fees, etc.) I don't think this is necessarily an "unnecessary detail" (criterion 3b) issue that has to be resolved for GA status, but I do think it's a place where there is room for improvement through greater concision.

I can see what you mean. Here's my defence: the three comments about the Reynolds era are needed because two are in complete contrast in their opinion. And then the KFC chairman weighs in with a statement that's in the middle, tending towards the negative about Reynolds. The whole soft drinks paragraph is because it's an oft repeated "fact" on the internet that Pepsi bought KFC to increase their drinks sales. I'm curious as to how true that may or may not be. The negative effect of BK and Wendy's switching to rival Coke after the takeover helps explain why Pepsi eventually divested KFC. The American franchisee contract dispute was a major issue for KFC during that period. Farrtj (talk) 00:41, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

• The "Tricon and Yum! Brands" section mentions KFC "once more promoting the cardboard buckets of chicken it had briefly abandoned in the 1990s", but the removal of cardboard buckets had not been previously mentioned.

Sorted. I'm not sure when KFC got rid of the cardboard buckets, so I've removed the statement about their return because it is indeed confusing. Farrtj (talk) 00:42, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

• It seems to be that the article could use a concluding sentence, such as "KFC [is now / remains] the [most / second-most / third-most] [popular restaurant brand / profitable food-chain] in the world." Or, you know, whatever is accurate.

Nice idea. Sorted. Farrtj (talk) 00:49, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Beautiful. – Quadell ^(talk) 14:49, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm putting this nomination on hold. If the issues are addressed in a reasonable period of time, I'm sure it will pass. (I understand you also have a FAC open at the same time, so no rush.) All the best, – Quadell ^(talk) 20:09, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

There are only a few piddling issues remaining: consistent abbreviation of "U.S." vs. "US", and delinking a few common terms in the infobox. I can't in good conscience hold up GA promotion on such trivialities, so I'm going to go ahead and promote this. (This ain't FAC, after all.) But I hope you'll fix the few remaining formatting issues whenever you get a chance. It's been great working with you, and I am truly impressed with the quality of this article. – Quadell ^(talk) 14:49, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on History of KFC. 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/20130921055011/https://s3.amazonaws.com/colcookbook/us/pdf/English_FullBook.pdf to https://s3.amazonaws.com/colcookbook/us/pdf/English_FullBook.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130921055011/https://s3.amazonaws.com/colcookbook/us/pdf/English_FullBook.pdf to https://s3.amazonaws.com/colcookbook/us/pdf/English_FullBook.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130921055011/https://s3.amazonaws.com/colcookbook/us/pdf/English_FullBook.pdf to https://s3.amazonaws.com/colcookbook/us/pdf/English_FullBook.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130921055011/https://s3.amazonaws.com/colcookbook/us/pdf/English_FullBook.pdf to https://s3.amazonaws.com/colcookbook/us/pdf/English_FullBook.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:33, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on History of KFC. 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://archive.is/20140330195145/http://insiderlouisville.com/news/2014/03/11/john-y-brown-jr-colonels-sale-kfc-50-years-ago-changed-restaurant-industry-forever/ to http://insiderlouisville.com/news/2014/03/11/john-y-brown-jr-colonels-sale-kfc-50-years-ago-changed-restaurant-industry-forever/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131114020002/http://www.interbrand.com/en/best-global-brands/2013/KFC to http://www.interbrand.com/en/best-global-brands/2013/KFC

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:46, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

In popular culture

This kind of material certainly does not go into a "History of..." article, and is regularly considered flimsy material otherwise (with some exceptions I suppose). Due to WP:3RR I cannot revert this mess again anytime soon, so I hope other watchers will take a look at this. Stefen Tower_{s among the rest!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 18:53, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

colonel harland

who make kfc 185.244.153.69 (talk) 10:43, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

CORBIN IS NOT BYPASSED BY I-75

Whoever thinks this doesn't understand how Interstates work. Interstates are limited access roads. If a town is truly bypassed by the Interstate then it won't have an exit assigned for it. For example, Lily Kentucky, 10 miles up the road from Corbin, is bypassed by I-75. You have to take the Corbin or London KY exits to travel to it.

Corbin is served by Exits 25 and 29. Sanders cafe is 3 miles from exit 29, far enough away that his business did take a hit when the Interstate opened. As did small town businesses throughout the United States. Restaurants and hotels now cluster along the interstates. Corbin is no different with nearly all its restaurants and hotels on the I-75 exits or along 25-E which is quasi-limited access and runs over to Middlesborough.

Cite a book if you want, I'll cite a map. Any map makes clear that Corbin has two exits in it's city limits. To say it is bypassed is like saying I-40 bypasses Knoxville TN because it's limited access only despite plowing through its downtown.

Learn how interstates work and quit spreading lies based on ignorance of how interstates - or any other limited access freeway - works. OdysseusCipher (talk) 23:03, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

This content is based on the provided source, describing how things were many decades ago. I have reviewed the source, and the content here reflects it. We are not talking about the interstate as of today. Stefen 𝕋ower_{s among the rest!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 02:50, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

At NO TIME has Corbin ever been bypassed by I-75. Exits 25 and 29 were there from the start. But hey, if you want to use a lame excuse to propagate misinformation, you do you. OdysseusCipher (talk) 21:09, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

It's not "me doing me". I'm simply following Wikipedia policy. We don't base articles on anyone's personal opinions. We base them on reliable sources. Stefen 𝕋ower_{s among the rest!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 21:10, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

It is you propagating misinformation. The city is not bypassed. The restaurant is, but not the city. Why do you insist on the lie that the city is bypassed when it clearly is not? Go to Google and get directions to anywhere in Corbin - say 688 US-25W, Corbin, KY 40701. You'll find the route to get there includes I-75 up to exit 29, which is in Corbin city limits. If the Interstate bypassed the city it would not be included.

It is not my opinion. It is a fact that the Interstate has two exits that serve Corbin. To say otherwise is a lie. OdysseusCipher (talk) 21:16, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

I am not doing any such thing. It seems that you want to have a person-to-person argument rather than discuss improving the article, but I will not be engaging in such. Stefen 𝕋ower_{s among the rest!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 21:17, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

Also note that using a map and drawing a conclusion usually is seen as original research. The source text is conveying the idea that his first store was located on a particular road, and because of traffic using the interstate instead of that road, his store got less business (thus it was bypassed). It may sound like a common occurrence, but it's important to note because it spurred the founder of this company to make decisions stemming from that event. It's in the book that is a reliable source. Stefen 𝕋ower_{s among the rest!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 03:02, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

"his store got less business (thus it was bypassed)" - How can you say that and then claim that the town of Corbin is bypassed? Corbin is a city of around 10,000 people - it is not just the first KFC. The Interstate bypassed his BUSINESS - it did not bypass the city. You are making the demonstrably false claim that the Interstate bypasses the city. It does not. OdysseusCipher (talk) 21:11, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

I am not making any claim. The article text is based on a source that I did not have anything to do with. Further, as an aside, I will however proffer that even with exits, the freeway is indeed bypassing for the fact that the traveling roads that came before it are much less utilized due to the freeway's construction, to aid drivers' faster movement through the area. The bottom line though is the article must be based on reliable sources rather than how we personally look at things. Stefen 𝕋ower_{s among the rest!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 21:16, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

I guess in Stefen Tower world Interstates bypass everything and go nowhere important because no one can get on them or off them because they bypass and never take anyone anywhere. You're just too prideful to admit your wrong and digging your heels in grasping for straws at this point. The last time I had a moderator review this two years ago the decision was made to use the phrasing I placed in this article which by the way is the same phrasing used on the main article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:History_of_KFC). So at this point I'm just going to report you. OdysseusCipher (talk) 21:22, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

Report away. The content in question is based on WP:RS and that is considered a HARD GUIDELINE. Also, again interstates by their design are bypasses. The bottom line though is not about you or I being right or wrong. The bottom line is that we follow sources. So basically you are saying the author of the source is too prideful to admit they are wrong, and that doesn't quite make any sense. Last, I do strongly suggest you tone down your very personal language, as it may be adjudged as violating WP:NPA. Chronic violators of this POLICY have been blocked from the Wikipedia. Stefen 𝕋ower_{'s got the power!!1!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 19:49, 24 September 2025 (UTC)