Talk:Menards

copyvio concern[edit]

at least parts of this article are said to be a result of references to the Menards Team Member Handbook. This is likely a copyrighted publication. If anyone has access to the document, please make sure it's not being plagiarized here. Thanks. Tom e r ^talk 05:56, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Handbook[edit]

I have a copy of the handbook, any specific parts in here that you'd like me to look up? Andrew

Just make sure the text, especially of the "Company History" section isn't lifted from the handbook. Thanks for your effort. Cheers, Tom e r ^talk 10:09, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Handbook[edit]

Nate 05:02, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've checked my copy of "Growth With Menards - A Team Member Information Booklet" (printed 06/2004). The afore mentioned booklet is not copyrighted, but does include the following disclaimers:

"This brochure is a unilateral statement by MENARD, Inc. of company policies and procedures and is not intended to create and express or implied contractual obligations. The contents are designed and should be used solely for informational purposes."

"...This MENARDS Team Member Information Booklet and the policies and procedures contained herein supercede any and all prior Team Member information booklets or brochures and the policies and procedures contained therein."

"...The company will not, and Team Members should not, interpret any verbal or written statements, including those in this booklet, or other policies, practicies or procedures as altering "at will" status or providing expressed or implied contractual obligation."

I would hence conclude the the information within, in regards to documents published under such disclaimers by Menard, Inc., are not copyrighted material as of 06/2004.

Quotes of wisdom at bottom of page in advertisements[edit]

--Acidradio 09:36, 12 January 2007 (UTC) Hey does anyone know about the origin of these "words of wisdom"? Menards is the only place I've ever seen such a thing...[reply]

Groceries[edit]

They are moving into the grocery business. This is no joke. --Kalmia 16:28, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A Menards by my house sells "edutainment" computer games. They were not very fun though. :p -- ShadowJester07 ►Talk 18:36, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Midwest Manufacturing[edit]

I notice there's no mention of Midwest Manufacturing, which is essentially a manufacturing division of Menard's (making roof and floor trusses, nails, screws, treated lumber, prehung doors, etc); I think it's definitely something worth including in this article or an article of its own Jowe27 03:59, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not just Midwest...I think Countertops over there is John's too. I may be wrong tho. Just make sure whatever you decide to include is verifiable. Tom e r ^talk 16:06, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From my research, despite the "coincidental" location that the two or three (if you also consider Countertops, Inc.) share in Eau Claire, WI, there is no explicit link between any of them that can be verified. In light of this, I do not believe that the articles should be merged at this point in time until they chose to disclose any relationships between the two or three. Nbuuck 22:36, 4 July 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I agree with Nbuuck 24.7.217.221 00:18, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In light of the decision in a debate regarding the deletion of the article "Midwest Manufacturing," and citations provided therein establishing a discernible relationship between the two entities (Menard, Inc. and Midwest Manufacturing), I believe that the two should be merged. Nbuuck 00:58, 20 July 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Midwest Manufacturing is without a doubt a division of Menard's

Well, I asked a brother of mine who works for Menards, and he says that Midwest Manufacturing, or MM, is, indeed, related to Menards. He said that whenever an employee of MM walked into the store he works in, the MM employee acted like the company WAS part of Menards. So, with this new information having been given to me, I support the merging of the MM article with the Menards one. In fact, maybe have the MM article redirect to the Menards one. 24.15.113.196 04:21, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a division of the Menards stores

Midwest Manufacturing is RELATED to Menards, but is not part of the stores. Basically there is a holding company above both the Menards stores and Midwest Manufacturing and some other smaller holdings as well. They should NOT be merged as they are separate, but related. They are run completely as separate companies. Countertops shares some ownership (John owns some of coutertop) but is not part of the holding company. Lummox 19:04, 20 August 2007 (UTC)M[reply]

If you go by the stand point that John owns it then it should be part of Menards, then shouldn't there be mention that he also owns Menards Engine Group. This is a company also under Menards Inc umbrella that makes racing equipment (testing equipment, tires, and engines). And by this same logic shouldn't they remove the Lucky Charms entry and put it under General Mills? Midwest manufacturing is not Menards, they have a different budget, they have there own management staff, there own pay roll, etc.--68.117.99.119 (talk) 06:26, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Town of Union[edit]

This is the true headquarters site of Menards. Is it worth mentioning? --Imhungry 18:46, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, even the company documents all say Eau Claire. That is their mailing address and their corporate identity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lummox (talk • contribs) 16:44, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But what is the zipcode for the mailing address? A company I worked for once identified with the biggest city in the area, although they were really in a small town. They did this for recognition purposes.173.20.4.42 (talk) 12:18, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First 2-Story Menards in 2006?[edit]

The article says the first two story Menards opened in 2006 in MN. The Menards at 8311 W. North Avenue, Melrose Park, Illinois is two stories. I've been shopping at this store since at least 2000. Here is a picture.
76.209.226.225 21:07, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

what if there's an earthquake? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.125.110.223 (talk) 20:00, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Brands Carried at Menards[edit]

It is stated that Trex is one of the brands carried by Menards. This is not correct. Cbaver81 (talk) 04:27, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DJ Robert huh?[edit]

What's up with that part in history in 2008. Is that just a simple employee or do they mean Disc Jockey? Allmightyduck (talk) 12:48, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Menards only has cheap crapt that won't last, get smart and buy better that will last and work much better. Mark-up from Chinese crapt is one of highest in retail. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.126.168.225 (talk) 22:47, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Free Advertising? Bias?[edit]

Parts of this article sounds very suspiciously like it was written by a member of the Menard's team to me... the part about concrete blocks being made by them, and now they are considering going with someone else, is followed by what seems to be a totally unrelated and media-friendly blurb. Am I the only one who thinks this reads more like an ad than an _encyclopedia_ entry?

72.161.51.117 (talk) 00:50, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Conflicts" Section[edit]

The tone of the first paragraph of the "Conflicts" section suggests (rightly or wrongly) that it was written by someone with an axe to grind with Menards. It sounds like it was written by someone with inside knowledge of the company's disciplinary procedures, which could be seen as original research. Though a citation is given at the end of the paragraph, I did a "Find on Page" search for some key words between the paragraph and the cited page, and didn't find a match.

The entire "Conflicts" section relies heavily on a single article from Milwaukee Magazine (an article which is over six years old). The bulleted list of violations and controversies appears to have been directly cut and pasted from the article. Combined with the first paragraph referenced above, the entire section gives undue weight to the negative. In fact, it's the largest section in the entire article!

I recommend removing the section entirely, as all it does is bash the company. Alternatively, if someone felt like dedicating the time, a rewrite of the section to be a bit more impartial would work, too. IrishCowboy (talk) 14:48, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The current "Conflicts" section looks a lot like a copyvio from [1]. SQL ^{Query me!} 04:28, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Weird Sentence[edit]

The fourth bullet of the "Controversies" section contains the line "Typical of the whole flat taxer/Afrocentric/logical fallacy history movement." which doesn't seem related to anything in the article. I'm guessing this was somebody's error?

(Apologies if I'm doing this wrong...the most I've ever edited has been a few spelling corrections and adding somebody's death-date.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.133.39.139 (talk) 23:55, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

To add to article[edit]

To add to this article: an explanation of why there is no apostrophe before the "s" in this company's name. 173.88.246.138 (talk) 23:21, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Menard, Inc.[edit]

Should I make an article about their holding company Menard, Inc.? WiinterU (talk) 02:46, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]