Talk:Rubio's Fresh Mexican Grill

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sadly, the Rubio's restaurant in Oregon is no more. I am removing Oregon from the list on this page. - gerb

[edit] "Frivolous lawsuit" characterization

I marked the "frivolous lawsuit" sentence with a "citation needed." It makes a difference whether that characterization was made by an independent and qualified observer, or by an interested party (say, a lawyer for Rubio's, or a propagandist for some legal think-tank representing corporate interests against the interests of consumer-plaintiffs). Notice that the sentence in question uses the passive voice, thereby avoiding saying who made that characterization. Bruce Tindall 00:42, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

One doesn't have to be a corporate shill to see the insanity of this lawsuit. So the lobster burritos contained squat lobster rather than clawed lubster... they still contined lobster meat. It is a strech to call what Rubios did "deceptive advertizing". But some woman with too much time on her hands goes whining to a bunch of class-action ambulance chasers and all of a sudden the rest of us have to pay more when we eat at Rubios. It may be "the way of things" but that doesn't mean we can't call a spade a spade... just my $0.02... --SpinyNorman 03:45, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

One might also ask "cui bono?" Who might actually be harmed by such advertising, and who might benefit from such a suit? What if "Fred," say, ran a competing restaurant with a product that actually contained what's commonly called "lobster" rather than "langostinos"? I think "Fred" might have a legitimate beef. Or lobster. And perhaps the plaintiff could have been such a competitor, or a front for same. In any case, the current wording of the article has a passive-voice allegation with no Wikipedia-required verifiability. I don't suggest that the characterization of the lawsuit be deleted from the article; just tell the reader who made the characterizaton, and let the reader weigh the characterization in light of who made it. If it's a spokesperson for the Chamber of Commerce of the U.S., a reader might come to one conclusion; if it's a highly-respected law professor specializing in advertising and known for objectivity, a reader might come to another. Bruce Tindall 23:42, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:RubiosLogo.png

Image:RubiosLogo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 10:29, 6 June 2007 (UTC)