Template talk:Marketing

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
WikiProject iconMarketing & Advertising Template‑class
WikiProject iconThis template 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.
TemplateThis template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.


marketing concepts for advanced students

There is no page about anti marketing. should there be a page about this form of marketing? Would "we buy ugly Houses" is this Anti- Marketing. let me know if any one wants to start this page I will help out on the project best I can, Have limited skills but lots of time to learn! Max 03:37, 23 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Possible addition to template[edit]

If the article Smarketing survives its current deletion debate, then could somebody reading this add Smarketing to this marketing template? I would do it myself except I am not sure how this goes, or what section it goes in.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 21:20, 29 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template succumbing to kitchen-sink syndrome[edit]

One or more editors seem to have fallen prey to a tendency towards expanding this template by adding pages with increasingly-tenuous connections to the actual topic. None of Printing, Publication, or Broadcasting have anything to do with Marketing, but they're all listed in the "Promotional media" group. (I would personally argue that New media and Point of sale are also reaching, but there's at least the semblance of topicality to those. Not so, the first three.)

Similarly, in the "Key concepts" group, Pricing, Retail, and Service (economics) are held up as key concepts in Marketing, something I also find questionable due to those articles' extreme broadness of topic. Might as well throw Money and Property in there as well! (Please no.)

I'mma probably be bold and just yank those three (or five?) articles I mentioned out of the "Promotional media" group. I'll leave the fate of the key-concepts links I mentioned for someone with more topic expertise to decide. But they reek of a pile-on, IMHO. There's no prize for the infobox with the most links. Maybe some editors need to be reminded of that. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 14:14, 19 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]