Jump to content

Talk:Cheeseburger/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1


Old discussions

This burger is a bit square. :-) Evercat 01:57, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)


The entry for Hamburger claims that the first cheeseburger was made in Pasadena, California. So what's the real scoop? Bunthorne 06:33, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

The Cheeseburger image, though nice, is most likely under copyright of Wendy's International, Inc. The square patty was a clean give-away. It can be found on their website at:

http://www.wendys.com/food/Product.jsp?family=1&product=6

Roy Blunt's unfair use of the image does not indicate public domain.

I found a cheeseburger image from the McDonald's page, it's in commons. Thanks --Jaranda wat's sup 22:07, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

The wrapper is from McDonalds, you can see the logo.
What happened to the ingredients for a cheeseburger? What?

Need reference for where the cheeseburger originated

The statement "The first cheeseburger was cooked sometime between 1924 and 1926 by a young chef named Lionel Sternberger" doesn't appear to have any references for it. However, I can find references that show that the cheeseburger was invented in Louisville, Kentucky at Kaelin's restaurant in 1934. But I'm willing to give the current claim the benefit of the doubt. Let's see some good references. — Stevie is the man! Talk | Work 22:35, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

The links on there have articles about Lionel, so i am removing the tag. -- Awiseman 16:05, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
A cultural essay is not sufficient evidence, really. But in any case, the odd thing about this article is that it snubs the other two possibilities for where the cheeseburger was "invented". Certainly, the Ballast and Kaelin claims deserve at least to be described as part of the history of the cheeseburger. — Stevie is the man! Talk | Work 02:46, 16 May 2006 (UTC)


This is all nonsense. Does anyone really believe that no one ever thought of combining cheese and meat before 1924? The American debut of the hamburger predates the 1897 Chicago World's Fair, and there are references to it coming from Europe earlier.

The Jucy Lucy

Just did a quick google check, and there appears to be quite a bit of information that confirms that the entry is accurate. Will remove the citation mark. Thanks for pointing that out.

Certainly, the standard for references in the Wikipedia is now higher, so please add your voluminous reference finds to the article. Suggesting that others do a Google check is no longer considered substantive evidence. — Stevie is the man! Talk | Work 02:49, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Here's a few: http://www.doodledee.com/jucylucy/ http://www.citypages.com/bestof2002/foodstuff/bestof1681.asp http://citypages.com/databank/19/923/article5760.asp Rsm99833 03:33, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I reverted the last added link to an obviously commercial site that adds little or no information to extend the subject of the article according to Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_not_a_web_directory. Thanks. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 22:03, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

"Worlds Biggest Cheeseburger"

Could somebody please explain the usefulness of having this link on this page added by an anon with no comment? What possible information beyond trivia does it provide? How does it extend encyclopedic knowledge of the subject at hand? I'll refrain from removing for a little while to see if anyone can explain this. Thanks. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 00:33, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

While I'm all for links that enhance an article, the two currently on line are in violation of Wiki terms and protocols, and should be removed. I am, though, for substituting others that are allowed. Rsm99833 16:13, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

What is the specific violation? Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 16:36, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Here's a link to the guideline [[1]], and a link to what should be avoided [[2]]. Rsm99833 17:16, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
What is the specific violation? I think the second link is all right by the guidelines, and the first one is iffy. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 17:27, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

The first link, aside from being a vanity link entered in by Cheeseburgerbrown to his personal web site, is a blog link to an article containing original research. The second link is also to a personal web site, that also loops back to the cheeseburgerbrown site. If the June 23, 1999 article from The San Gabriel Valley Tribune is online, that would be acceptable. Rsm99833 17:40, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Sometimes, we need to balance the weight of the subject and common sense with guidelines. The second article outlines the history of the cheeseburger. If another, better sourced, similar article can be found, fine, but until then, I think the second link should stay. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 18:09, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
That's reasonable enough. nuke the vanity link, and keep the secondary, until a substitute or better article can be found.Rsm99833 18:25, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Done. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 18:40, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Cheeseburger Brown says: For the record, I didn't add the link -- I updated it when I saw that the link *someone else had added* was being directed to an old URI. My intention was to keep your article up-to-date, but you seem to have interpreted that as self-promotion or something. The link you killed is a frequency cited carefully researched article which first appeared on Kuro5hin. It was a relevant link to include here, and a good resource that pointed to cheeseburger information all over the Web. In other words, it belonged here. I've read the guideline, and whoever included my article in the first place seems to have been doing a good Wikipedia job. Sorry I tried to contribute to the project by correcting an outdated hyperlink. (I'm also sorry I couldn't figure out how to properly contribute to this discussion. Please excuse this edit.) -Your friend, Cheeseburger Brown
Consider looking at the links that were posted again. It appears from some of your external link contributions that you may need to brush up a bit. Rsm99833 01:06, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
What are we talking about now, specifically? There's only two links in the article, the reference, which should be all right, and the link we agreed to keep for now. What else is there? Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 06:20, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Oh, nevermind. You were responding to Cheeseburger Brown, but it appeared, format-wise, that you were replying to me. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 06:22, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Well, your loss Wikipedia. I guess being anal is more important than being right. Love, CheeseburgerBrown.
you're more than welcome to incorperate and cross-reference the your work into this article.Rsm99833 15:55, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Read WP:NPA. Further, if being right means Wikipedia becomes a web directory for any possible related link, then I'm wrong and proud of it. Thank you. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 15:57, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Merge with hamburger?

The cheeseburger has its own illustrious history. I don't want its story drowned out in the hamburger article. Therefore, no to merger. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 04:52, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Second this. No reason to merge. Rsm99833 04:54, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Third this.--Bedford 05:08, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Stop Remaking The Page!

I merged it with hamburger for a reason! It's a derivative of a hamburger!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.126.115.190 (talk • contribs)

OK, let's get rid of all "derivative" articles in Wikipedia. Please. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 20:13, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

It was decided on not to merge. If you disagree, discuss it here, don't just do it. Rsm99833 21:16, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Pasadena category

I removed the Category:Pasadena, California category from this article because the Cheeseburger article is not relevant to Pasadena, California. Articles need to be relevant to the category for the category to be included in the article, not vice versa. I've removed it again. Please discuss why you think the cheeseburger article is relevant to Pasadena, the subject of the category, not why Pasadena is relevant to cheeseburgers which is irrelevant per Wikipedia:Categories. Particularly:

Categories are mainly used to browse through similar articles

It is purely coincidental that the cheeseburger may have been "invented" in Pasadena. Mike Dillon 01:34, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

It was invented in Pasadena. Since the Pasadena category system doesn't have any subcategory that's more exact for this article, it should stay in the Pasadena category until that time. Signed, the non-owner, but thoughtful contributor to this article. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 16:57, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Then why is it in the Denver and Louisville categories too?
Also, I don't think you address the issue of the cheeseburger's relevance to Pasadena. Why would someone browsing articles about Pasadena want to look at the cheeseburger article? Mike Dillon 17:28, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Because it was invented there. What else do you need? Am I missing something? Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 17:33, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Still seems marginal to me when looking at the other members of the category, but I'll leave it there. Mike Dillon 17:39, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
I do somewhat understand your position, but I think the underlying issue here is that subcategories for Pasadena haven't been developed as of yet. Once they are, this article's placement can be downshifted. And that would be fine with me. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 17:43, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
And to answer the first question, the cheeseburger is also part of Denver's and Louisville's culture and history. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 17:36, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Comparison with Hamburger

The comparison of the nutrition of a hamburger with a cheeseburger is not possible unless the same ingredients are being compared with only the difference of the cheese. Using MacDonalds products for the comparison makes the comparison valid. If someone would prefer to use data from another company where the two products use identical ingredients, that is fine, but the MacDonald's data is readily available. --Zeamays (talk) 01:45, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Not valid at all. The article is about cheeseburgers in general, not a specific fast-food cheeseburger. A nutritional comparison is unnecessary anyway, as all cheeses aren't created equal, and therefore the comparison doesn't inform about cheeseburgers in general. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 06:44, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Way to be nice steve. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.18.13.68 (talk) 17:56, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Excessive contorl of article

Certain people seem to be keeping this article in a way that suits their opinions, but not allowing others to make edits. Wikipedia exists to allow different worthy contributions and this approach is clearly frustrating this purpose. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dfutter (talk • contribs) 11:11, 9 March 2008 (UTC)


Everyday uses of Cheeseburgers

The cheeseburger is the main dietary staple of a rare type of gorilla known as trentus mcjunkinus. Some 400 cheeseburgers a day can be ingested by the "lilderek", as it is also called. Scientists have discovered that the lilderek is closely related to the sasquatch, and its call can be heard throughout the woods, a resounding "Dirka! Dirka! Cheeseburger!". Be aware, the lilderek can be vicious, especially if you take away its mcdonalds cheeseburgers. The best course of action upon encountering an angry lilderek is to back away slowly, chanting "Gusfraba, gusfraba!". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.143.187.44 (talk) 23:05, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Removed image

Hey, thought I'd say that I'd removed Image:The Hat, cheese burger.jpg. The image is much more illustrative of the restaurant The Hat. While I appreciate the illustrative value of having more pics of a cheeseburger, I don't think this is a particularly appropriate image per the suggestion in WP:IMAGE. —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 15:44, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Proposed merge

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
Discussion

Proposing that Patty melt be merged into this article as it is simply a variation on the cheeseburger. --Jeremy (blah blah) 07:41, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.




While I'd probably want to avoid the Fark-ization or (even worse) 4chan-ization of Wikipedia, I find it odd that there's no reference to the "I can haz cheezburger" meme. Just a thought, really. TimBRoy (talk) 17:16, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

These types of sections are superfluous and detract from the article as a whole. There is now compelling reason to have them. Please read WP:Trivia in regards to "In popular culture" and other synonyms for trivia. --Jeremy (blah blah) 18:21, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
True, 90% of the time they are "trivia" sections. But if done properly it may not be so bad. There's the SNL skit in the Greek diner, for instance. Cheesbergers are definitely part of the culture. --JohnnyB256 (talk) 21:50, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
You mean the SNL skit where the guy hollers "cheezburrur-cheezburrur-cheezburrur-cheezburrur" like an auctioneer talking? When we were kids we loved that skit. HULU has an NBC authorized posting of that skit here. 66.102.204.66 (talk) 00:41, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
I saw it originally when it aired, I was about 7 or 8 when it was show and still occasionally quote it. However, it is still trivia... --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 01:40, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

While the SNL skit would certainly be WP:TRIVIA if placed within the Cheeseburger article I wonder if there is a proper place for such "trivia", perhaps under one of the Americana related articles like Culture_of_the_United_States#Cuisine (which does mention hamburgers btw). It seems a good Wikipedia editor ought to be able to create an article or subsection that appropriately talks about America's love affair with the cheeseburger as a part of our lore. After all, according to this article the cheeseburger is not only popular food and the subject material for various musical activities, but it is also an American invention (all the disputed claims of origin are from the USA) and so should be notable from many angles. The cheeseburger as part of American is not trivial -- I have seen art, costumes, electronic devices, motor vehicles and even entire buildings that use the cheeseburger theme. What I have seen is WP:OR but surely there must be reliable sources for such creations. Once such an article or subsection is created then a small section here with a (see main article X) link would fit nicely in this article. 66.102.204.66 (talk) 03:23, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Original research

This is also posted on Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard#Cheeseburger

The cheese in a cheeseburger substantially changes its nutritional value. For example, in comparison to their standard hamburger, which only differs by the slice of cheese, a McDonald's cheeseburger has 20% more calories, 33% more fat and 25% more protein.[1] Other types of cheese would have varying effects, depending on their nutritional content.

This paragraph is from the lead of the article. I removed this passage as I believe it to be a violation of WP:Synth because it takes facts about McDonald's cheeseburgers and hamburgers and makes a comparative analysis of the nutritional makeup of the two, which I contend to be synthesized original research.

NJGW contends that is simple calculations and thus is exempt from the original research guidelines.

I would like some comments from independent contributors on the matter. --Jeremy (blah blah) 08:01, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Looks like OR to me also, for reasons I've given on the NOR noticeboard. --GenericBob (talk) 15:05, 11 July 2009 (UTC) New sourcing has addressed my main objection, looks good now! --GenericBob (talk) 01:39, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Same here. --Jeremy (blah blah) 17:17, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, but this is original research (synthesis) and should be removed. Surely some source can be found who makes this point. --JohnnyB256 (talk) 21:48, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Yup, probably true, but definitely OR. Dreadstar † 18:51, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Found a better source.. Dreadstar † 19:04, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Indeed. I had looked high and low and despaired of finding something. Excellent. Thanks.--JohnnyB256 (talk) 23:49, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ McDonald's USA Nutrition Facts for Popular Menu Items

Cheese on top

The basic, original cheeseburger is invented by me ☥ 05:01, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

From a statistical persepective, the fast food industry corners the market on global cheeseburger sales; with the big three, McDonalds, Burger King and Wendy's all having the same basic cheeseburger design, a slice of cheese on top of the patty: [3][4][5]. Dreadstar ☥ 05:35, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
As long as it has cheese somewhere on the sandwich, it is a cheeseburger. You can put cheese on the bottom of the bun and it will still be a cheeseburger... (and by that I mean under the patty, but on the bun) Two contributors have both agreed that the change is not proper, it is up to you to provide sources that support the addition. Just showing a bunch of pictures that have the cheese placed on top of the patty is not proof - it only shows one way in which a cheeseburger is made. What about the McDonald's McDouble? The cheese is between the two patties, so by your definition that is not a cheeseburger. How about the Quarter Pounder; there are two slices of cheese on it, one on top, one beneath. Again, still a cheeseburger. Before you restore the comment, please provide a reliable source that states a cheeseburger has to have the cheese on top to be considered a cheeseburger, the "proof" you are offering currently not a source, but original research and is not allowed. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 14:56, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Actually, it's not my addition, it was put in the article about seven months ago [6]. As I said, the proof of the original, basic cheeseburger's content and structure, and not the variations thereof, is in the story of its origin - the others you mention, (McDouble, Quarter Pounder) are variations of the cheeseburger). I've never said a cheeseburger has to have the cheese on top to be considered a cheeseburger - I don't think anyone has, quite the opposite - so please don't put words in my mouth, (instead, place cheezburgr thar} :) .
i like turtles|work=L.A. Times|page=F1|date=2004-06-09}}</ref>
cheeseburgers were invented by Donald J Trump and Kim Jong Yum wikilink correction. Hapy munchins! Dreadstar ☥ 19:07, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Its not that I feel strongly about it, it is just that I take devil's advocate on positions sometimes. Just to let you know fast food chains do not have cheese melted before serving, it is put on as the sandwich is assembled. They do not melt the cheese on the grill as it would require extra cleaning between batches. Burger King and other chains that use a mechanized grilling system cannot put the cheese on first as the patty falls into a receiving pan and the cheese would fall off when it did. Other style chains such as Chili's or Applebee's do melt the cheese as it cooks. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 20:10, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
i love cheeseburgerscanned cheeseburgers, but they all descend from that same, orginal receipe, slice 'o cheese slapped on a grilling burger patty. Dreadstar ☥ 20:29, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
There is a syntax problem in the revised opening sentence in place now. Writing "with cheese" is not explanatory enough. "With cheese" for example could mean the cheese is added to the meat before cooking. The words assume knowledge but shouldn't. Wikipedia is not just a Western encyclopedia. Does someone with out knowledge of cheeseburgers know where the cheese goes? Is it added before in the meat? Does it go inside the bun, or on the side? A lead needs more information than we are giving, and more accurate information. Per WP:MOSBEGIN "If its subject is amenable to definition, then the first sentence should give a concise definition: where possible, one that puts the article in context for the nonspecialist. Similarly, if the subject is a specialised term, provide the context as early as possible." So, I would strongly suggest a more informative and Wikipedia compliant opening sentence. (olive (talk) 19:54, 5 June 2010 (UTC))
I think that's part of the argument, that it doesn't matter how or when the cheese gets added to the burger, it's a 'cheeseburger' regardless. But I agree the current, 'general' first sentence is too generalized and vague, it could include just the word ‘cheese’ pressed into the top of the hamburger - or a spike of frozen cheese used like a toothpick to hold a hamburger sandwich together. But you're right, a basic cheeseburger is "a slice of cheese slapped on top of the patty while still the grill for meltage", the rest are all variations on that theme.
Perhaps the first sentence could be expanded to something along the lines of "A cheeseburger is a hamburger with cheese on top of the patty; including many variations on the structure, ingredients and composition of this food item." Dreadstar ☥ 20:07, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
OK. I posted a version trying to take into account the discussions here. See if it solves the concerns.(olive (talk) 00:10, 6 June 2010 (UTC))
Looks good to me, it accurately summarizes what's in the the article per WP:LEAD. Dreadstar ☥ 00:38, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
We should find some sources that have information on the various ways cheese can be added to a burger. Dreadstar ☥ 00:40, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

References

Hamburgesa con Queso?

Why isn't the Spanish pronounciation of the word on the site? This is a glaring omission guys. Mark Hackman (talk) 01:55, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Check out the links in the "Languages" box on the left navagational pane of the article's page, just click on the Español link, it takes you right to the Spanish version. Dreadstar ☥ 02:15, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
See that's what I call getting stuff done. Someone guffed it out and gave me the kabootal I needed. Thank you very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mark Hackman (talk • contribs) 04:24, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Numerous copy edits

I just made quite a few copy edits . Feel free to revert anything that seems awkward.:o)(olive (talk) 15:34, 30 May 2011 (UTC))

Double? Triple?

This article states: "A stack of two slices of cheese is called a double cheeseburger; a triple cheeseburger has three slices of cheese, and a quadruple has four." Double, triple, etc. usually refers to the number of beef patties - although usually there is one cheese slice per patty. For example, McDonalds took some flak a while back when they removed the double cheeseburger (two patties, two cheese slices) of the $1 menu and replaced it with the McDouble (two patties, one cheese slice). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.158.38.6 (talk) 18:55, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out! Dreadstar ☥ 19:23, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

At the end of the first paragraph in the article, it says "(see bacon cheeseburger)." It links to the page "Bacon_cheeseburger", but when you go there it just redirects to the main "Cheeseburger" page. Is this something that is considered erroneous, or should it be kept as-is?

168.26.179.48 (talk) 05:35, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

That's called a double redirect I think. Anyway, I removed it. TEH (talk • contributions) 22:24, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 February 2015

cheese burgers are a delicious pod that americans like to eat 74.216.50.107 (talk) 23:28, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. -- Orduin Discuss 00:08, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Isn't a cheeseburger a special kind of hamburger?

The cheeseburger isn't worthy of it's own page because it is just a hamburger with a slice of cheese. In fact, many people refer to cheeseburgers as hamburgers with cheese. This page should be compacted and merged into a subsection of the hamburger page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.169.84.163 (talk) 10:04, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Disagreed. The cheeseburger has its own history and details. Not everything has to be merged into higher order topics. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 16:11, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
I think its important to have the cheeseburger have its own Wikipedia page. As mentioned before, it does have its own rich history and it shouldn't lengthen the hamburger page with all of that. maljohns (talk) 19:26, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Cheeseburger. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:40, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

I found 2 broken links that needs to be repaired.

  • To repair the Daily Skiff reference, please replace the following snippet:
<ref>{{cite web|url=http://media.www.tcudailyskiff.com/media/storage/paper792/news/2006/10/24/Opinion/Societys.Fast.Food.Intake.Reeks-2384355.shtml |accessdate=13 February 2010 |last=Hall |first=David |title=Society's fast food intake reeks |date=24 October 2006 |work=Daily Skiff |publisher=DailySkiff.com |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/20110821104303/http://media.www.tcudailyskiff.com/media/storage/paper792/news/2006/10/24/Opinion/Societys.Fast.Food.Intake.Reeks-2384355.shtml |archivedate=21 August 2011 }}</ref>

with the following corrected snippet:

<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.tcu360.com/story/society-s-fast-food-intake-reeks-12290873/ |accessdate=20 September 2015 |last=Hall |first=David |title=Society's fast food intake reeks |date=24 October 2006 |newspaper=Daily Skiff |publisher=Texas Christian University School of Journalism}}</ref>


  • To repair the Pasadena Sun reference, please replace the following snippet:
<ref>{{cite news|date=13 January 2012|title=Yes, it was invented in Pasadena! Probably. Tracing the cheeseburger from inception to Bob's Big Boy|work=Pasadena Sun|url=http://articles.pasadenasun.com/2012-01-13/entertainment/30625308_1_bob-s-big-boy-pasadena-museum-menu|accessdate=13 May 2012|first=Joe|last=Piasecki}}</ref>

with the following corrected snippet:

<ref>{{cite news|date=13 January 2012|title=Yes, it was invented in Pasadena! Probably. Tracing the cheeseburger from inception to Bob's Big Boy |work=Pasadena Sun |url=http://articles.pasadenasun.com/2012-01-13/entertainment/30625308_1_bob-s-big-boy-pasadena-museum-menu |accessdate=13 May 2012 |first=Joe |last=Piasecki |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20141220234520/http://articles.pasadenasun.com/2012-01-13/entertainment/30625308_1_bob-s-big-boy-pasadena-museum-menu |archivedate=20 December 2014}}</ref>


Most of the time, cyberbot II does a good job fixing dead links, but the above are the few cases where it had failed to the job correctly. –108.71.214.235 (talk) 10:17, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cheeseburger/Archive_1&oldid=1159451794"