Talk:IHOP

Merging incidents together

I feel that the refusal to serve and the racist receipt should be merged into one incident as "racism at locations" or something along those lines, as the receipt incident I would assume is only reported on once, but the general racist incidents appear to be widespread. Mr Pollo (talk) 21:48, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

I think I see what you mean when merging incidents _hopefully, as I've made a draft like structure that _hopefully illustrates the idea your going for, however I don't think its the play here as it doesn't contain enough incidents to warrant a merger. I would understand if there was a repeated pattern of overall racism or a large number of discriminatory incidents and just one receipt, however from what I can find online there isn't any other incident that delves into the broad of racism while maintaining consumer rights wiki _{action taskforce} guidelines. I think it fine as is until more incidents pop up that maybe warrant a merger in the grand scheme of things. SquidthePlummer (talk) 00:26, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

That might be the right call, though just in case @Keith thoughts? Mr Pollo (talk) 14:26, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

honestly I'm not even sure how relevant its inclusion is at all - if I'm not mistaken IHOP is a pretty huge chain right?

A giant corporation with thousands or tens of thousands of employees hiring a couple of racists by accident and then firing them after they're racist to a customer seems like something that's probably inevitable in a country like the US. It's not really systemic and also doesn't have any bearing on the 'modern consumer rights' type issues where companies take advantage of the new things that technology lets them get away with, and they didn't try to cover it up or anything from what the sources indicate.

Thy should certainly not be the incidents given highest priority. Keith (talk) 12:02, 13 April 2026 (UTC)