Talk:Promotional item

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Disambiguation
WikiProject iconThis redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.
 

Etymology[edit]

I believe that "Swag" can also stand for "So what, another giveaway."

Or "Some Worthless Advertising Gimmick", "Scientific Wild Ass Guess", "Stuff We All Get", "Stolen Without A Gun", "Stuff We Ain't Got", "Shitty Worthless Ass Gift", "Samples, Wearables, and Gifts", ... These are all backronyms are are probably not the true etymology. 208.201.253.21 (talk) 22:21, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

I think it is from an acronym used commonly by Union hands meaning Stuff We Ain't Gettin'. Drjonfrockit (talk) 07:26, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Vendors[edit]

There are at least 23K of them, so I'm thinking that only vendors who meet WP:CORP belong here. Ronabop 05:58, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

But why not do something like list the top 25 according to a non-profit org? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.213.9.50 (talk) 20:28, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Merge[edit]

Based on this request being made in January, and no objections, I went ahead with the merge. For some reason, though, the target link when you now go to "Advertising Specialties" does not go straight to this article, if anyone can fix that it would be much appreciated. Jkraybill 16:29, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

I vote Merge. Promotional item is used 3x more on Google than Advertising specialties. There is no distinction. Oicumayberight 22:12, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree, The term Advertising Specialties is not as widely used as say Promotional Items and Promotional Products.

I vote Merge. The fewer the number of these spam-catching articles we have, the better. They can pay for their own advertising. Phaedrus86 03:00, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

I vote Merge - I'm in the "promotional products" industry and these terms are interchangeable, but usually people say "promotional products." --Constana 18:19, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Promotional Products or Advertising Specialties[edit]

They are interchangeable. Advertising Specialties is the older of the phrases but Promotional products has become more widly used in the past 10 years. 4-6-07

I think either can be used. Advertising specialties refers to a range of items beyond just "products" - like cups, mugs and pens. It also encompasses embroidered clothing and branded merchandise, and refers directly to what the purpose of the products are - to "advertise" a company's logo and brand. In business terms, they "advertise." "Promotional products" works, but the term is a bit limiting. Concert marketers do "promoting," while logoed merchandise "advertises."

I disagree with the above comments. Cups, mugs, and pens are "products." I don't see your point. Promotional products and advertising specialties are synonymous. Advertising specialties was the common term in the past, but now its most people in the industry say promotional products. Also, "advertising specialties" incorporates the branding of the for-profit Advertising Specialty Institute. --Constana 18:46, 18 August 2007 (UTC)


Added Citations[edit]

Today I added several citations, deleted some editorial and spam content, and reworded a couple sentences with questionable grammar. Disclosure: I am employed by a promotional products company, but further disclosure: I strongly oppose spam, articles without sources, and commercial content on Wikipedia! I added links to a PDF document, the "State of the Industry" by Counselor Magazine, which can be a bit markety for outsiders but is produced by the main independent body that covers the industry. It is certainly very pro-industry, but their numbers tend to be well-researched and I have not found any other reliable source for the figures they present. Jkraybill 17:04, 18 August 2007 (UTC)


    • This is the fallacy that you're perpetrating - Counselor Magazine "...is produced by the main independent body that covers the industry." is not true! ASI is a for-profit provider of resources to the industry! It would be comparable to Ford being called an independent body representing the car industry. PPAI, or PPA is the industry's non-profit body! PDFs found here provide non-biased data. Again, ASI is *for profit.*
      • HELLO - is anyone going to fix this? Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.187.48.116 (talk) 05:30, 27 July 2008 (UTC)


http://www.ppa.org/Media/Industry%20Information/Trends%20and%20Data/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.184.36.47 (talk) 13:29, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Per WP:RS, sources should be independent of the subject they treat. Doesn't anyone write about this in business school? What about the news media? There must be some relevant discussion of promotions outside of the promotions industry or trade groups. Cnilep (talk) 15:03, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Proving that promotional gifts work[edit]

I've just added an external link to a blog that has an article on it that shows how promotional products can be shown to have a good return on investment. This is a difficult thing to demonstrate within this particular context and any extra information can be helpful I believe. Lindaph1 (talk) 18:42, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I think it is from an acronym used commonly by Union hands meaning Stuff We Ain't Gettin' —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drjonfrockit (talkcontribs) 07:22, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Pop-culture references[edit]

In an episode of "The Office", character Michael Scott attends a job fair and refers to Swag as "Stuff we all get". —Preceding unsigned comment added by [jocago] (User:jocago talk) 15:29, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Page Cleaning[edit]

Took some time today to clean up the Promotional Items page. Deleted 2 sections that had NOTHING to do with promotional items but instead were plugs to sites that you can buy reports about overseas sourcing in China. All spam gimmicks. I also fixed the references to be coded properly. If you are going to take the time to contribute to Wikipedia, please also take the time to learn the proper markup techniques. It takes 5 minutes to do. On a side note, SWAG can be an acronym for many things and recently has become popular as a noun referring to the way one carries themselves (you may have heard the term "swagger"). In THIS industry we use it to refer to giveaway items. Break it down however you like, but it is talking about gifts we receive as a way to brand companies. If your term for it refers to something your not getting, then you are thinking of a different use of the word that does not apply here. —Preceding comment added by Kirkman775 09:15, 25, September 2009

Merge discussion[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The merge was completed.

The page Promotional item is tagged "globalize/US", meaning it is too focused on the US context and neglects other areas. The page Promotional merchandise is tagged for multiple issues, including its focus on the UK and Ireland. Both articles treat largely the same topic. I see no reason why these pages should not be merged. This would strengthen both articles, and eliminate duplication. Cnilep (talk) 15:18, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

I have a lot of information I could add regarding the promotional products industry in Australia (having worked in the industry for 6 years), which would help with this USA bias. Was not sure if I sure if I should check here first before adding bulk information? Can someone confirm if I am ok to go ahead (I don't want to step on anyone's toes, or put in a lot of work just to have it deleted!) MatthewCummins (talk) 10:18, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

So long as you cite your sources, that will be fine. Bulk of information that's based only on your own experience, on the other hand, wouldn't be verifiable by the article readers. - MrOllie (talk) 15:12, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Hearing no objections, I have completed the merger. All content, except for a few details from the lead section, were copied to Promotional merchandise. The combined page still needs editing. Cnilep (talk) 20:04, 15 January 2010 (UTC)


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