Talk:Cracker Barrel

FA checkup

We're coming up on ten years of this article being FA, and I think it needs

• The "early company history" section feels like it could be fleshed out more. Only one paragraph covers the entirety of the 1960s-80s. Said section also hits a lot of vagueness. "Eventually" they got rid of gas stations. Okay, when? Did any other notable events happen early in the company's history? When was their 10th, 20th, 50th location? Any prototypes? Anything about that odd one in a mall in Cookeville? Surely there's more interesting stuff about the early years.
• Far too many sentences follow the structure "in [year], X happened. In [year], Y happened." Also a lot of one-sentence paragraphs that could be integrated elsewhere.
• "Fans" section seems unnecessary and could be integrated elsewhere.
• "Leadership" section feels overly split up. "Executives" is only one sentence and could be combined elsewhere.
• "Controversies" seems to be an WP:UNDUE catchall with a ton of one-sentence paragraphs about non-notable events. This section also seems to challenge the article's neutrality.
• Many sources are incomplete, such as "CBRL 10-K", whatever that is. Also a couple of dead links.

I would like to see these issues addressed so that the article does not go to WP:FAR.

Paging

1. REDIRECT Template:Reply to

Template:Redirect category shell,

1. REDIRECT Template:Reply to

Template:Redirect category shell,

1. REDIRECT Template:Reply to

Template:Redirect category shell,

1. REDIRECT Template:Reply to

Template:Redirect category shell. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 17:52, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

I must admit, this a very curious message, unlike any message I've seen in my 16 years of editing on Wikipedia, a message where one editor "orders" another group of editors to perform maintenance on an article. Stranger still, Ten Pound Hammer doesn't appear to have a declared COI, so ostensibly they would be free to edit the article as they saw fit.

Of course, this CB talk page is the place to discuss improvements to the CB article, and editors wishing to draw a wider range of informed, but uninvolved editors to a discussion are always welcome to place messages here asking for their assistance. However, seeing as how many of the recipients cc'd in the message above are involved due to their COI's, I would be remiss for failing to point out that these types of communications run the risk of appearing like WP:CANVASSING, and that the talk page would then not be the place for those types of conversations. Regards,  Spintendo  18:00, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Talk pages aren't always monitored, so I pinged them in hopes that they'd see the message. Everything else above is in line with step 1 of WP:FAR, which dictates Template:Tq While retail is an area of expertise, I don't often deal with high-visibility articles like this (meaning I'm not as confident on what can be pruned or added), which is why I asked other interested editors to pitch in too. If you look at the talk page of any other article currently or recently at FAR, you'll find messages very much like mine (even down to pinging/notifying involved editors, which meets the Template:Tq portion). Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 18:18, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Correct; this is a standard WP:FARGIVEN-style notice, quite like all others. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 07:18, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Template:Replyto Thanks for bringing this up! I would like to help however I can with the improvements you've suggested. Happy to draft changes and propose them here for others to implement. My availability is limited over the next couple of weeks, so it might be a bit before I come back with updates to suggest. Thanks again! CB JessicaM (talk) 21:30, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Article clean up

Hello, Jessica from Cracker Barrel here. I thought the suggestions TenPoundHammer brought up in the discussion above were good ideas, and I've been going through the article and looking for opportunities to clean it up. For starters, I've got some thoughts on improving the History section to make it easier to navigate, and move around some content there for flow. Here are my thoughts:

Extended content

Replace current subheadings with chronological subheadings: Change First location and early company history to Founding–1979 I think this is shorter and easier to navigate since it gives precise dates. Add a subheading titled 1980–1996 after the sentence "These early locations all featured gas pumps on-site; during gasoline shortages in the mid to late 1970s, the firm began to build restaurants without pumps." This period includes early growth of the company and its IPO. Remove New markets and refocus subheading This subheading reads a bit more like something that would suit a corporate affairs-type section. I think removing this will aid article navigation. Add a subheading titled 1997–2010 Continues the chronological flow. Remove Operations subheading This also seems like something that would fit better elsewhere, and I'll suggest below some content moves. Move the following content: Move "The number of combined restaurants and stores owned by Cracker Barrel increased between 1997 and 2000, to more than 420 locations. In 2000 and 2001, the company addressed staffing and infrastructure issues related to this rapid growth by implementing a more rigorous recruitment strategy and introducing new technology, including an order-placement system. From the late 1990s to the mid-2000s, the company focused on opening new locations in residential areas to attract local residents and workers as customers." to just after the sentence that reads "The company's president, Ron Magruder, stated that the chain was concentrating on strengthening its core theme, offering traditional foods and retail in a country store setting, with good service and country music." Puts this in a chronologically appropriate spot. Move "It updated its marketing in 2006 to encourage new customers, changing the design of its highway billboard advertisements to include images of menu items. Previously the signs had featured only the company's logo." to follow the sentence ending "...with trips to the Country Music Association Awards and rocking chairs among the prizes." Puts this in a chronologically appropriate spot, too.

Okay, this seems like plenty to start with so I'll leave it there for now. I'll suggest more changes after addressing these. I have a COI so I do not make direct changes to the article myself, but invite editors to review and make appropriate changes on my behalf.

1. REDIRECT Template:Reply to

Template:Redirect category shell tagging the two of you here since you were pinged in Ten Pound Hammer's post above.

Thanks! CB JessicaM (talk) 14:52, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

I'll be able to take a closer look at the suggested changes this upcoming weekend. From a cursory glance, I don't see anything objectionable. So, unless anyone else has any concerns, I'll probably implement the changes this weekend. Silverseren^C 23:02, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

Okay, I've finished implementing those initial changes, CB JessicaM. I also split a paragraph or two and recombined it with some following text to not have singular giant paragraphs happening in that section along with short two line ones. Silverseren^C 21:37, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Template:Reply to Thank you so much for making the changes! I've posted my next round of suggestions for the article below, if you're interested in checking them out. Thanks again, CB JessicaM (talk) 18:42, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Part 2: History content changes

Hello, with the changes made to the structure and reorganization of the History section, I'd like to make a few content suggestions:

Extended content

TenPoundHammer Added a tag about missing information from the 1970s and 1980s. I looked through the company's history and really didn't see anything significant that wasn't already covered here. News during that period was quite routine. There's Bill Holley's creation of the logo, but I'm not sure if that qualifies. If editors agree, I think the tag could be removed. Remove "Into the early 1980s, the company reduced the number of gas stations on-site, eventually phasing them out altogether as the company focused on its restaurant and gift sales revenues." from 1980–1996. Reason: There's a "when" tag, which prompted me to look for the source. I could not locate it, nor an alternative source to verify this information. Move the following from Community involvement into 1997–2010: In 1997, the company purchased the Mitchell House in Lebanon, Tennessee. The house had been the elementary dormitory and school for Castle Heights Military Academy which both Dan Evins and his son attended. The school had closed in 1986 and the building had sat empty since then. Cracker Barrel spent two million dollars to restore the home and used it as its corporate headquarters from 1999 to 2013. Reason: This information is more historical than anything, it doesn't strike me as a community initiative, so I think it would make more sense as part of the history section. Add another subheading titled 2011–present just after "Previously the signs had featured only the company's logo." Reason: This is another subheading to break things up in a chronological flow, and gives a clear space for recent history. Remove/Move: " On January 17, 2012, company founder Dan Evins died of bladder cancer." Reason: This seems like something of a non-sequitur to me, since at that time Evins was no longer directly involved with the company. If editors would like to keep it in, I'd suggest moving it to Executives and removing the cause of death, since that is irrelevant to the company's history and already covered in the Dan Evins biography. Move "By 2011, Cracker Barrel had opened more than 600 restaurants in 42 states." to the top of the new "2011–present" if accepted. Reason: It's currently out of chronological order and this will fix it. Remove "Since then, the company has continued to grow its off-premise sales, launched two virtual brands including the Pancake Kitchen and Chicken n' Biscuits, as well as two new "Ghost Kitchens" in the Los Angeles area called Cracker Barrel Kitchen which only processes off-premise orders." Reason: TenPoundHammer had suggested looking for opportunities to cut content from the article. This is an addition I'd requested a while ago, and we no longer operate the ghost kitchens. I don't have a third-party source that talks about them closing, so I thought this would be a place where just trimming a bit would make sense. Add "Cracker Barrel permanently added alcohol to its menu for the first time in September 2020. The company began testing a limited selection of beer, wine and mimosas at 100 stores in early 2020 before announcing that it would expand the offerings to over 600 of its locations after receiving a positive response from its customers. Reason: Selling alcohol for the first time in the company's history seems like a significant moment worth at least a brief mention, and it received widespread coverage in mainstream media.

Okay, that wraps up my ideas for the History section. As always, because of my COI I'll leave these suggestions for volunteer editors to review and implement as appropriate and I welcome questions and feedback. Thanks! CB JessicaM (talk) 18:42, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

I've made the changes, CB JessicaM. They all make sense to me and the history section is looking much better now. Silverseren^C 21:54, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Template:Reply to Thank you so much! I agree, and appreciate you taking the time to review and make the changes. I'll be back soon with the next set. CB JessicaM (talk) 21:36, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Part 3: Restaurants changes

Hello, I'm back with my next set of changes to suggest. This time I'll be focusing mostly on the Restaurants section, with one quick request for the Infobox:

Extended content

Our CEO is Julie Felss Masino, as of August. The announcement was covered, and our company website is up to date. Can we update the Infobox to reflect the change? The first paragraph of Restaurants jumps back and forth between dining and gift shop content. I propose splitting it up into two shorter paragraphs, one about dining and one about the gift shop. Here's my suggested change, which moves existing information around and makes copy edits for flow. I also cut the sentence about removing trans fats, which seems unnecessarily detailed at this point: As a Southern-themed chain, Cracker Barrel serves traditional Southern comfort food often described as "down-home" country cooking. Breakfast is served all day, and there are two menus: one for breakfast, the other for lunch and dinner. Since the first restaurant opened, the menu has featured Southern specialties, including biscuits, fried chicken, and catfish; seasonal and regional menu items were added during the 1980s and 1990s. The gift shops sell gifts including simple toys representative of the 1950s and 1960s, toy vehicles, puzzles, and woodcrafts. Also sold are country music CDs, DVDs of early classic television, cookbooks, baking mixes, kitchen novelty decor, and early classic brands of candy and snack foods. Move the following to the beginning of the Fans subsection. I recall a comment that that section seemed a bit out of place, and I think this would help give it a more logical presence. "Cracker Barrel is known for the loyalty of its customers, particularly travelers who are likely to spend more at restaurants than locals." The second paragraph in Locations, service, and decor has some redundant references to interior decor and split up content about the peg games. I suggest changing that paragraph to the following for better flow and to reduce redundancies: The locations are themed around the idea of a traditional Southern U.S. general store. Items used to decorate each store are authentic artifacts, including everyday objects from the early 1900s and after. Each location's exterior features a front porch lined with wooden rocking chairs, while the interiors all include five common decorations: a shotgun, a cookstove, a deer head, a telephone, and a traffic light. Every table has a wooden peg solitaire game. The first sentence of paragraph three of Locations, service, and decor could be clearer, since it is about decor in addition to the standard decor. I suggest changing it to read: The decor at each location also includes artifacts related to the local history of the area, such as antique household tools, old calendars and posters, and antique photographs." Rename the Awards sections as Recognition, which is a more neutral name and inclusive of formal awards as well as notable rankings already in that section.

That's everything on my list for the Restaurants section.

1. REDIRECT Template:Reply to

Template:Redirect category shell tagging you since you've been reviewing my changes so far, I'd be happy to continue to collaborate with you. As always, because of my COI I'll leave these suggestions for volunteer editors to review and implement as appropriate and I welcome questions, feedback and other ideas to improve the article. Thanks! CB JessicaM (talk) 15:32, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Sorry for the wait, CB JessicaM. I've implemented everything and made some other minor changes on my own discretion, such as removing the Executive sub-section on the former CEO. I presume that entire section will be re-organized anyways to something that flows better when you get to it. Silverseren^C 22:07, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Part 4: Corporate affairs changes

Hello, I'm here with the next round of changes to suggest for the article, this time getting into the Corporate affairs section.

Extended content

I suggest removing the Board of directors subsection. Reason: It's quite a lot of information and the way it's written seems to me to describe a typical board structure for a public company, rather than anything notable or of particular interest about Cracker Barrel. The sourcing is primary for both paragraphs, and from what I can tell Cracker Barrel has not received significant third-party coverage about its board of directors. I agree that having a whole subsection called "Executives" with only information about one of the company's former CEOs didn't make a lot of sense. Since that's gone now, I suggest the following summary of Cracker Barrel's leadership history: Company founder Dan Evins led the company until 2001, when he was succeeded by Michael Woodhouse. In September 2011, Sandra B. Cochran became the company's CEO and president. She held the position until August 2023, when Julie Felss Masino was named as Cochran's successor. Rename Partnerships to Partnerships and sponsorships and move the following content from Community involvement into this section: Cracker Barrel sponsored the NASCAR Atlanta 500 race at Atlanta Motor Speedway from 1999 to 2001 and the Grand Ole Opry from 2004 to 2009. The company was the first presenting sponsor of the Grand Ole Opry. This sponsorship allowed the company to make connections within the Nashville music industry, following which it entered into partnership with a number of country music performers. Reason: Renaming this and moving the suggested content will group similar details, and the sponsorship information does not seem like it fits as "community involvement". If editors accept this change, the sentence "The chain has established partnerships with artists including Alison Krauss, Charlie Daniels, Josh Turner, Kenny Rogers, Dolly Parton, Alan Jackson, and Alabama, to offer CD releases and merchandise." could be removed because it is redundant to what's already in Partnerships. In Community involvement, change "Cracker Barrel has also formed a partnership with the Wounded Warrior Project, a charity for injured veterans." to "Cracker Barrel has also formed a partnership with the Wounded Warrior Project, a charity for injured veterans, as well as the nonprofit Operation Homefront to support programs for military families. Reason: This change consolidates similar information, and would allow trimming "In 2016 Cracker Barrel partnered with nonprofit Operation Homefront to launch Operation Rocker, which provided Cracker Barrel rocking chairs to families involved in Operation Homefront's Homes on the Homefront program, and Star Spangled Baby Showers, a program for expectant military families." from the article. The Conflict with Biglari holdings section has grown quite long over the years. Since it has come to a close, what do editors think of replacing that whole section with a summary? Here's my proposed version: Sardar Biglari purchased shares of Cracker Barrel in 2011 through his company Biglari Holdings Inc. He has been critical of the company's management, and between 2011 and 2020 made five attempts to join the company's board of directors. Cracker Barrel claimed Biglari had a "hidden agenda" and a conflict of interest by holding shares in other restaurant chains such as Steak 'n Shake. In 2022, Cracker Barrel entered into an agreement with Biglari, whereby the restaurant chain would agree to appoint Biglari's preferred nominee for the board of directors, Jody Bilney. As part of the agreement, Cracker Barrel was to pay Biglari compensation for monies spent by Biglari while in pursuit of specific board nominations. [[Non-disclosure agreement|Mutual nonTemplate:Nbhdisparagement]] and standstill agreements were also entered into by both parties. Reason: I think this adequately summarizes the history here. I am open to what others think is appropriate, and welcome others' ideas.

Those are my thoughts for Corporate affairs, if anyone else has thoughts on improving it, please let me know! Happy to answer questions or help however I can.

1. REDIRECT Template:Reply to

Template:Redirect category shell tagging you to get this on your radar! Thanks for all you've done so far, I think the article is looking a lot better. CB JessicaM (talk) 18:26, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

All done. I also made some re-arrangements on how things were to be grouped together in those sections. Now all that's left to update are the somewhat tricky controversy sections. I do remember having difficulty with them and others' opinions back during the original FAC nomination. And both sections have become much more bloated since then. Silverseren^C 02:20, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Template:Reply to Thank you! I have posted my thoughts on the controversies section below. I do expect editors to have feedback and am happy for this to be a discussion. Again, I appreciate the time you've taken to review and implement my proposals! CB JessicaM (talk) 19:23, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Part 5: Controversies

Hello, now that we've gone through the rest of the article, what's left is addressing the Controversies section. I've learned that having a section called "controversies" is not preferred because the title is inherently biased. I hope my suggestions below will help address that and appropriately represent the information. I am happy for this to be a discussion with the community and invite any editors who are interested to participate. Silver seren, I'm very interested to hear your thoughts given your recent assistance and history working on the article.

1. REDIRECT Template:Reply to

Template:Redirect category shell tagging you both here, too, since you were both active in the FA review last year.

Extended content

LGBT policies: I think this section is something of a mashup of topics that fit with the heading or are adjacent but don't quite fit and may not be relevant. My thought is to trim out non-policy content, such as the parts about Phil Robertson and Grayson Fritts, consolidate the Corporate Equality Index portion, and trim some other small details about things like the rainbow rocking chairs. Then, move this to be a subsection of Corporate affairs and keep the name LGBT policies. Here is how I think this could look: LGBT policies In early 1991, an intra-company memo called for employees to be dismissed if they did not display "normal heterosexual values". According to news reports, at least 11 employees were fired under the policy on a store-by-store basis from locations in Georgia and other states. After demonstrations by gay rights groups, the company ended its policy in March 1991 and stated it would not discriminate based on sexual orientation. The company's founder, Dan Evins, subsequently described the policy as a mistake. From 1992 onward, the New York City Employees Retirement System, then a major shareholder, put forward proposals to add sexual orientation to the company's non-discrimination policy. An early proposal in 1993 was defeated, with 77 percent against and only 14 percent in support, along with 9 percent abstaining. It was not until 2002 that the proposals were successful; 58 percent of company shareholders voted in favor of the addition. Between 2008 and 2021, Cracker Barrel raised its rating in the Human Rights Campaign's Corporate Equality Index from 15 to 80 by adding sexual orientation non-discrimination policies and training programs. Beginning in 2016, the company adopted a pro-LGBT stance, developing an internal diversity council which included LGBT members. Since 2017, the company has sponsored Out & Equal, a workplace-equality non-profit organization. Race- and gender-based discrimination lawsuits: I've reviewed sources on these lawsuits and noticed a couple of things. The section does not include the final resolution of the 1999 and 2001 cases. Instead, I think it presents the 2004 Justice Department investigation as if it's the continuation of those cases, which is inaccurate. There is the mention of a settlement in 2006, which as included makes it look like that is related to the earlier cases, but it is separate. I am not an expert on what qualifies litigation for being added, but it seems like a minor case that didn't receive a lot of coverage. My proposal is to move this section into Legal disputes, rename that section to Litigation, because that is a more neutral name, and rename this subsection to Civil rights cases, which I think is a clearer descriptor. Here is what I think it could look like, with changes including adding resolutions to the cases, which hopefully clarifies the timelines. Civil rights cases In 1999 and 2001, federal lawsuits were filed against Cracker Barrel in Georgia. The former was brought by a group of employees who claimed the company had discriminated against them on the grounds of race, and the latter by customers making the same accusations. Both lawsuits were supported by the NAACP. Regarding both accusations, Cracker Barrel officials disputed the claims and stated that the company was committed to fair treatment of its employees and customers. In October 2002, a federal appeals court in Atlanta ruled that the NAACP and an additional 40 plaintiffs could not join the lawsuit brought by customers in 2001, and in January 2003 a federal magistrate recommended that the lawsuit brought by employees not be given class-action status. Both lawsuits were settled by the company in September, 2004. The U.S. Justice Department filed a suit against Cracker Barrel in May 2004, after its own investigation had found evidence that the company allegedly violated Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by discriminating against minority customers at its restaurants. The company settled the lawsuit by signing a five-year agreement to introduce "effective nondiscrimination policies and procedures", and hiring an outside auditor to ensure compliance with the terms of the settlement. Move the following to Partnerships and sponsorships: Cracker Barrel is on the Corporate Advisory Board for the Texas Conference of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), and is a corporate sponsor of the NAACP Leadership 500 Summit. Move the content below into Corporate affairs, perhaps into Leadership: Its chief executive officer (CEO), Sandra Cochran, was the second woman in Tennessee to hold that office in a publicly traded company. One last thought I had was in regards to the Introduction. In the discussion last year, SandyGeorgia brought up the introduction and asked whether a full paragraph for the 1990s controversy was appropriate. Based on my understanding of WP:LEAD, that content seems to be receiving more space in the introduction than it should, compared to how much space it takes up in the article body. What do editors think of summarizing the last paragraph of the introduction? It could look something like this: "The company was criticized for anti-LGBT policies in the 1990s, which it reversed in response to backlash from the public and shareholders"

That's everything. I know because of my conflict of interest these are trickier topics to navigate, and I've done my best to propose improvements based on Wikipedia's content policies, guidelines, and Manual of Style. As always, I'll defer to what the community decides is appropriate, and happy to provide any additional context or perspective I can in the discussion. Thanks again! CB JessicaM (talk) 19:23, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

1. REDIRECT Template:Reply to

Template:Redirect category shell, sorry for the re-ping, but I've looked over all the suggestions above and they seem alright with me. Do either of you have any disagreements on the suggested changes? I notice that SandyGeorgia has been editing less over the holiday period (and not at all for the past three days), so apologies for bothering you if you've been busy IRL. Silverseren^C 19:30, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

I've added most everything, CB JessicaM. As for the lede section, I think the third paragraph should be replaced with a version that discusses the LGBT rights issues in one sentence, the Civil rights cases in another, and I guess a sentence about the Kraft Foods legislation. Thus it's still properly summarizing the article as a whole. Silverseren^C 23:31, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Template:Reply to Thanks so much for all your work on this! Your suggestion makes sense to me. If that's the direction you'd like to go, here are my thoughts for three summary sentences:

The company was criticized for anti-LGBT policies in the 1990s, which it reversed in response to backlash from the public and shareholders. In the early 2000s, Cracker Barrel was the subject of several civil rights lawsuits and a U.S. Justice Department investigation, all of which were settled. Cracker Barrel licensed products are sold in grocery stores under the name "CB Old Country Store" following a 2013 trademark-infringement lawsuit brought by Kraft Foods, which sells cheese under the brand name Cracker Barrel.

Now that I'm looking at all these changes together, I'm wondering if Kraft Foods vs. Cracker Barrel has wandered into WP:UNDUE territory? Most of it is sourced to the appeals court decision, and overall it seems like a pretty routine case that wasn't groundbreaking or setting new precedents, and did not meaningfully impact the company. Should that whole section be cut back quite a bit? Curious to hear your thoughts. Thanks! CB JessicaM (talk) 21:10, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

I certainly think so, CB JessicaM. The large quote is certainly unnecessary and the whole section could probably be reduced to a single paragraph. For now, I've replaced the lede paragraph with your suggested version. Silverseren^C 00:20, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Template:Reply to Thank you for updating the lead. Here's what I've come up with as a replacement for the current Kraft Foods v. Cracker Barrel section, using the current sources:

In November 2012, Cracker Barrel licensed its name to Smithfield Foods' John Morrell Division to sell a line of meat products through retail channels. In response, Kraft Foods, which has sold a line of cheese under the Cracker Barrel brand since 1954, filed a trademark-infringement lawsuit in February 2013. Kraft asked that the Smithfield Foods deal be nullified by the U.S. District Court in the Northern District of Illinois. A judge granted an injunction against the sale of the Cracker Barrel branded meat products. The injunction was upheld by the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals and Cracker Barrel agreed to sell its products under the brand name "CB Old Country Store".

Happy to hear any thoughts you have. Thanks again! CB JessicaM (talk) 21:13, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Seems good to me, I've swapped the paragraph into the article. It looks like TenPoundHammer added in an expansion tag for the 1980–1996 section, with a request for info on the "first location outside Tennessee, annual growth, etc.". The first one seems straightforward enough to do. Not sure exactly what's desired for the latter though, since the first paragraph there seems to have quite a bit of info already on growth rates and resulting revenue amounts. Silverseren^C 01:23, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Template:Reply to Excellent, thank you so much for all your help with these updates! I think this article is looking much better overall. I'll look into the information requested for History, but I'm not sure there will be much aside from perhaps the first location outside Tennessee if I can find a good source. Meantime, my last little cleanup project is the beginning of the introduction, and I've posted that below if you'd like to review. Thanks again! CB JessicaM (talk) 19:37, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Part 6: Introduction

Hello, hello! With this article overhauled, I have just a few changes left to suggest to the Introduction. Please see my proposed changes in the comparison below:

These are mostly minor changes for flow and clarity. Happy to discuss changes if anyone has questions. Thanks! CB JessicaM (talk) 19:37, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

I waited a bit to see if anyone else had anything to comment or add. Seems not, so I've gone ahead and implemented your suggested grammatical changes, CB JessicaM. Silverseren^C 19:28, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Template:Reply to Thank you so much! I sincerely appreciate all of the time you've put into helping review and implement these changes.

I did look into the first location outside Tennessee. It was the fourth Cracker Barrel and was in Dalton, Georgia. That said, I was not able to come up with a third-party source to use for verification. I'm not sure if the tag about expanding that section should be removed or left for a bit longer in case other editors want to look for sources? I think it's about as expanded as it can get, but I'll defer to whatever you think is best.

Thanks again! CB JessicaM (talk) 19:56, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Let me ask. TenPoundHammer, were the expansions to that section absolutely necessary? I do think it has quite a lot of fiscal information already, for one. Silverseren^C 20:16, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

CEO comments

The New York Post is reporting that the company's CEO admitted on an investor call that it's not as relevant as it used to be: https://nypost.com/2024/05/23/business/cracker-barrels-ceo-admits-chain-not-as-relevant-as-we-once-were/

I can't find actual transcript from investor call, but some of the more salacious, non-trustworthy outlets (e.g. Daily Mail) have run with the story. I was going to update this article based on NY Post story, but per Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources, I think I will hold off until I can confirm those comments + clearly see their source. Sawitontwitter (talk) 15:35, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Links are unavailable

Several of the references are linked to nexis.com with a link that attempts to retrieve a live document. The "archived" versions of these links are also attempting to retrieve a live document, meaning that if you don't have a nexis.com account, you can't read the source articles even on the Wayback Machine. Examples:

• url=http://w3.nexis.com/new/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4S5W-1K80-TX4X-W1B5&csi=140610&oc=00240&perma=true |url-status=live |url-access=subscription |access-date=January 25, 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131224125539/http://w3.nexis.com/new/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4S5W-1K80-TX4X-W1B5&csi=140610&oc=00240&perma=true |archive-date=December 24, 2013 |issn=0097-8043
• url=http://w3.nexis.com/new/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=3SJB-2X10-0019-F10P&csi=7986&oc=00240&perma=true |url-status=live |url-access=subscription |access-date=January 25, 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131224120410/http://w3.nexis.com/new/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=3SJB-2X10-0019-F10P&csi=7986&oc=00240&perma=true |archive-date=December 24, 2013
• url=http://w3.nexis.com/new/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=3SND-S900-007B-43X7&csi=3559&oc=00240&perma=true |url-status=live |url-access=subscription |access-date=January 25, 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131224123832/http://w3.nexis.com/new/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=3SND-S900-007B-43X7&csi=3559&oc=00240&perma=true |archive-date=December 24, 2013

Ɛs Huvər (talk) 19:22, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

What's the best way to fix the links, Ɛs Huvər? Silverseren^C 00:38, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

@Silver seren I don't know. Is there any way to get a link to a static version of the page? Ɛs Huvər (talk) 18:54, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

I don't think Nexis pages can be archived properly due to them being to a called document database, unfortunately. Silverseren^C 20:06, 14 March 2025 (UTC)