This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Marketing & Advertising, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Marketing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
New developments have made it more difficult for unscrupulous affiliates to make money. Emerging black sheep are detected and made known to the affiliate marketing community with much greater speed and efficiency
I could just as easily state precisely the opposite. Not only is an RS necessary, but the entire statement is suspect. 20040302 (talk) 10:16, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
I have removed this paragraph as it describes a non-existent conflict betwen CPA marketing and "traditional" affiliate marketing. CPA (cost per action) is one of several different types of affiliate pay structures; it does not represent a threat to "traditional" affiliate marketing as it is just one of several different ways in which affiliate offers are structured (including CPS [cost per sale] which is presumably what the original author meant by "traditional" affiliate marketing.)
Additionally, of the three sources cited in this section, two are 404 pages at a non-notable source and one is a forum discussion which does not itself arrive at any consensus, and is not authoritative. Frank Mottley (talk) 15:56, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
EDIT: I was going to remove the sources in question but, embarrassingly enough, find myself unable to figure out how to edit the Reflist. Frank Mottley (talk) 15:56, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
I think you have removed the sources? If not, please quote some actual text in the article that you think should be removed and I'll have a look. To remove a source, you delete the <ref>...</ref> reference (after checking that the source is not used elsewhere in the article). Johnuniq (talk) 01:29, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
Apparently I deleted them when I removed the paragraph in question, as they no longer show in the references list. Thank you for the tip -- better to know how to do things properly, of course. Frank Mottley (talk) 06:27, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
I'm not qualified to write on this, but I nominated it for NPOV review because of the language particularly of one section header. It says Pros and Cons but only lists the pros. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 21:38, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
Expanding on the criticisms of affiliate marketing
Overall, this article is too pro-affiliate marketing. I'd like to see the current "Past and current issues" renamed to something that more explicitly calls out the serious reservations many have towards affiliate marketing. This, too, should be clearly called out in the introductory text of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomqj (talk • contribs) 18:51, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
Who are these many, and what are their reservations? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 02:14, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
The term "affiliate programs" start being used under the headline "History". The term is used in the first sentence under the headline "Compensation methods", the sentence starts "Eighty percent of affiliate programs today use revenue sharing...". This sentence in particular makes the term "affiliate programs" seem the same as "affiliate marketing". Whether or not this is the case, as a layman I believe this needs a clarification. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 05:07, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
Unfortunately the lack of a standard industry term lends a little confusion to the matter. "Affilate program," "affiliate marketing program," and "publisher program" seem to be the most commonly-used terms to describe the relationship, but it would be difficult if not impossible to cite a source. Some businesses avoid using the term "affiliate" because it has legal or business connotations for other aspects of their business (e.g. affiliates in broadcasting, which is an entirely different concept from affiliate marketing.) I agree that the terminology and its use could use cleaning up, or at least standardising for purposes of clarity in the article. Frank Mottley (talk) 16:25, 4 November 2015 (UTC)