Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Marketing & Advertising

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Marketing & Advertising (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject iconThis page 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.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the quality scale.
 

Contents

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal[edit]

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Expert attention[edit]

This is a notice about Category:Marketing & Advertising articles needing expert attention, which might be of interest to your WikiProject. It will take a while before the category is populated. Iceblock (talk) 23:09, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Help with two articles?[edit]

I'm going to post this on multiple applicable WikiProjects, so my apologies for the cut and paste. I don't really see the purpose in writing a new one for each WP. In any case, I need some help fleshing out the article for Gender Advertisements, the book by Goffman. Long story short, the article was created by a group of students who were sent here with apparently little to no instruction or education about Wikipedia and writing encyclopedia articles, so the page had the standard issues: original research, bad sourcing, tone- the works. I've done enough to show where the book would be notable, but the page does need to be fleshed out to focus on the book's influence on others and a basic outline. I'm not overly familiar with the work, so it'd be better for someone familiar with the work to edit the page. I think that the students probably saw the basic article for gender advertisement, which has similar issues (but better sourcing), and modeled their page after that and after the basic student paper type outline. Both articles could use some work from a savvy editor, if anyone's up for the challenge. I've cleaned out the worst in the book article and threw some sources in, so it has that going for it. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 01:01, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Christmas and holiday season[edit]

Christmas and holiday season has been proposed to be renamed, for the discusssion, see talk:Christmas and holiday season -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 05:04, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Bill Cosby in advertising FAC[edit]

Hi! Just a heads up that I'd greatly appreciate input on this FAC nomination. -- Zanimum (talk) 22:03, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live![edit]

WikiProject X icon.svg

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Category:Streisand effect[edit]

Category:Streisand effect, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for deletion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you.RevelationDirect (talk) 02:12, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Help with a student draft?[edit]

Recently a student posted an article to the mainspace, which I've moved to the draftspace at Draft:Racial stereotyping in advertising. It was a little rough around the edges and needs a lot of work, but it's an extremely good topic that has the potential to be a fairly high importance article- enough to where I'm actually surprised it isn't already on Wikipedia. I'll try to get on and help them later, but this article really needs a lot of TLC and patient editors that can work with students. I don't think that you'll have to take them by the hand or anything, just occasionally explain why you're doing what you're doing. I'm going to post this in another WP as well, since it covers a few different areas. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 11:01, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Brochure[edit]

The Brochure article needs a lot of improvements. Qwertyxp2000 (talk) 07:48, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Suggested retail price listed at Requested moves[edit]

Information.svg

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Suggested retail price to be moved to List price. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 22:33, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Pageview stats[edit]

After a recent request, I added WikiProject Marketing & Advertising to the list of projects to compile monthly pageview stats for. The data is the same used by http://stats.grok.se/en/ but the program is different, and includes the aggregate views from all redirects to each page. The stats are at Wikipedia:WikiProject Marketing & Advertising/Popular pages.

The page will be updated monthly with new data. The edits aren't marked as bot edits, so they will show up in watchlists. You can view more results, request a new project be added to the list, or request a configuration change for this project using the Tool Labs tool. If you have any comments or suggestions, please let me know. Thanks! Mr.Z-man 23:21, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Media inventory listed at Requested moves[edit]

Information.svg

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Media inventory to be moved to Advertising inventory. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 17:30, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Media space (advertising) listed at Requested moves[edit]

Information.svg

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Media space (advertising) to be moved to Advertising inventory. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 21:01, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Proposed merge: Real-time bidding into ad exchange[edit]

I've proposed merging Real-time bidding into ad exchange, since real-time bidding is what ad exchanges do. Comments? John Nagle (talk) 21:02, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

General cleanup in online advertising.[edit]

After a big dispute at WP:AN/I#Programmatic_Media, some changes are underway:

Overall, the subject of online advertising has lots of good information, but insufficient overview for the casual reader. Consider as an audience the high school student or journalist trying to understand how online advertising works. Most of the articles seem to be addressed to people in the industry. Anyone want to write some introductory material? Thanks. John Nagle (talk) 21:10, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Article assessment backlog cleared[edit]

I am pleased to announce that as of 8:00 GMT, November 1, 2015, Category:Unassessed Marketing & Advertising articles stands empty. The project reached its high water mark of about 130 unassessed articles during the summer of 2014. During the summer and autumn of 2015, the project pulled in a number of articles including Billboard, BonziBuddy, Cidade Limpa, Click-through rate, Coolhunting, Copywriting, Creative director, Faith Popcorn, Fred the Baker, Graffiti, Grand cru (food and drink), House Hippo, Jingle, Loyalty program, Parody advertisement, Pinkwashing (breast cancer), Promotion (marketing), Publicity, Ron Popeil, Sex in advertising, Town crier, and Valdivieso advertising sign, just to name a few. If you'd like to find articles on which to work, feel free to peruse Category:WikiProject Marketing & Advertising articles or browse the project's popular pages list. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 08:01, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

That is a fantastic achievement for a wproj marked as semi-active. I wonder if you care to make this announcement on wproj-business-talk? Ottawahitech (talk) 14:40, 6 January 2016 (UTC)please ping me

Draft:AdTruth[edit]

Dear advertising experts: This draft is about a company that is involved in targeted advertising. There are lots of references, but I'm not very good at separating out reliable sources from adspeak. Perhaps someone here can recognize inappropriate references and delete them, or at least tell if this is a notable company.—Anne Delong (talk) 16:34, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Article alerts added[edit]

Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject_Marketing_&_Advertising#Article alerts. Ottawahitech (talk) 14:33, 6 January 2016 (UTC)please ping me

Popular pages[edit]

I see this project has Wikipedia:WikiProject Marketing & Advertising/Popular pages -- should this be added to the main page? Ottawahitech (talk) 14:47, 6 January 2016 (UTC)please ping me

Merge request[edit]

I would propose a rapid merger of Unique visitor and Unique user, both in this Wikiproject's purview. The larger, more detailed of the two (Uu) states repeatedly that the two are synonymous, and the smaller of the two articles (Uv) is very short and based on a single source. Transfer of the content should be fast and simple, with addition of a sentence that Uu is (it appears) more often used my the coding communities, and Uv by business/marketing individuals. Cheers. Le Prof User:Leprof_7272 Leprof 7272 (talk) 16:17, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Notice of Neutral point of view noticeboard discussion[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic South of the Border (attraction). Thank you. --Labattblueboy (talk) 18:35, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Help with Ogilvy & Mather[edit]

Hi there. A few weeks ago, I proposed a new Major work section on the Ogilvy & Mather Talk page to replace the Notable campaigns section that currently appears in the article. Only three campaigns are included in the article right now, so I expanded the material to encompass more clients and work, particularly any campaigns that have their own Wikipedia articles.

I prepared the draft on behalf of Ogilvy & Mather and have a financial conflict of interest, so I would like to find other editors to review my work. I thought editors here might be interested since the article falls under the scope of this project. To be clear: I will not make any edits myself and prefer that someone else move my draft to the live article if it appears to be an improvement. I welcome feedback or changes if there are any. Thanks! Heatherer (talk) 00:57, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Seeking feedback on new article[edit]

I just created a new article about my employer, Team One (advertising agency). I recognize that my conflict of interest may be a concern, and am seeking an independent review of whether I have succeeded in adhering to the neutral point of view. -PenaCynthia (talk) 21:50, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

PenaCynthia, I have reviewed the article Team One (advertising agency) and it seems to be articulated from a neutral point of view. However, in accordance to the WP:CONFLICT policies, you might consider going through the following article - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Best_practices_for_editors_with_close_associations#Don.27t_create_new_articles.
Happy Editing..!! Sanket Edits Wiki (talk) 10:54, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback and sharing this link. I'll definitely review it in details. PenaCynthia (talk) 18:29, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

iVote - Super Bowl 50 TV ratings[edit]

Input is welcome in the poll on the Super Bowl 50 talk page, which stemmed from this discussion above it. Rowssusan (talk) 05:15, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Article assessment surpasses 5000[edit]

As of this writing (February 13), the total number of articles tagged with {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Marketing & Advertising}} exceeds 5000 for the first time. By contrast, one year ago the article count stood at 386, and two years ago the article count stood at 205. If you'd like to find articles on which to work, feel free to peruse Category:WikiProject Marketing & Advertising articles or browse the project's popular pages list. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 07:07, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Peer-to-peer marketing[edit]

There appear to be a number of hits that come up in a google search for peer to peer marketing, or P2P marketing, so it appears to this non-marketing person that the term is (widely?) used.

However, there seems not to be, at present, a link to which one can go on Wikipedia to get the concept explained. I did searches for both terms and came up blank.

Am I missing something, and there is an existing marketing article or articles where the concept is explained, perhaps under another name? Or might this be something that Wikipedia just doesn't have any article content on at present, for whatever reason, whether because the concept is not that important, or verifiably sourced, or because no editor may have had the time or made the choice to build such content? Any answer is fine; I'm just wondering, as I used the term in an article I was developing today (based on the non-wiki sources and explanations). Cheers. 00:25, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Reputation management[edit]

Just an FYI that this article was used for a school assignment last semester, needs cleanup. valereee (talk) 16:16, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Trouble finding references? The Wikipedia Library is proud to announce ...[edit]

Wikipedia Library owl.svg The Wikipedia Library

Alexander Street Press (ASP) is an electronic academic database publisher. Its "Academic Video Online: Premium collection" includes videos in a range of subject areas, including news programs (like 60 minutes) and newsreels, music and theatre, speeches and lectures and demonstrations, and documentaries. This collection would be useful for researching topics related to science, engineering, history, music and dance, anthropology, business, counseling and therapy, news, nursing, drama, and more. For more topics see their website.

There are up to 30 one-year ASP accounts available to experienced Wikipedians through this partnership. To apply for free access, please go to WP:ASP. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 21:32, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Requesting help updating company info[edit]

Hello, My name is Madison (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:MadisonfromStanding) I have submitted an edit to the page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Maritz,_LLC) and was wondering if someone wouldn't mind reviewing and incorporating the proposed changes to improve the page. The changes are very simple: fixing key facts and figures in the infobox, including the CEO and number of employees, and some uncontroversial phrasing changes to the introduction text. I'm following Wikipedia's guidelines by requesting this here (due to a COI) and also because this group is focused on marketing and advertising. Please let me know if you have any questions about the proposed revisions. MadisonfromStanding (talk) 21:25, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

requesting help on USP article[edit]

The Unique Selling Proposition is still tagged at Start-Class on the quality scale. In response to an almost 5 year old template: no citations in section, added at least one citation for each slogan to verify it's existence, wording, and help the reader increase understanding. Also, attempted to make section intro text more encyclopedic to encourage reading to go further. Especially calling back to earlier passage identifying real "benefit" as essential to the structure.

Help with either having citations for, or removing, opinion that USP has actually been replaced by "positioning". Talk page has more on that.

Eturk001 (talk) 22:57, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Content recommendation[edit]

I've redirected this term to Contextual advertising. I hope it is the right target. What do you think? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:13, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

MDC Partners[edit]

Hello! I'd like for another editor to review a new article draft I submitted last week for the advertising holding company MDC Partners. The draft essentially just expands on what is already in the entry, especially the company's history, organization, and its partners and services. I left a message on the Talk page with more details and a link to the draft here, but haven't had a response yet. I prepared the draft on behalf of MDC Partners, so I will not make any changes myself due to my financial conflict of interest. Looking forward to feedback from editors here! Thanks! Heatherer (talk) 14:24, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

GAR of David Meerman Scott[edit]

David Meerman Scott, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:05, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Under your jurisdiction?[edit]

I am not a member of your project, but I stumbled across Guilt-Free Consumption, which seems like it may fall under this WikiProject's Scope. The page has some pretty large stylistic problems, but a lot of effort seems to have gone into making it. Just letting you all know, as I can't figure out how to tag it as of interest to your Project (for article statistics/categories). Happy editing. -- 2ReinreB2 (talk) 23:51, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Merge proposal[edit]

Hey folks! The proposal to merge Business marketing with Industrial marketing is over 3 years old. It appears to me that these cover the same topic. The discussion was never created but the tag has been there for 3 years, so I think it's safe to call the merge uncontroversial. Any chance someone here might be interested in completing that merge? Thanks a bunch! Happy editing! Ajpolino (talk) 04:08, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

2016 Community Wishlist Survey Proposal to Revive Popular Pages[edit]

Magic Wand Icon 229981 Color Flipped.svg

Greetings WikiProject Marketing & Advertising Members!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about a technical proposal to revive your Popular Pages list in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

If the above proposal gets in the Top 10 based on the votes, there is a high likelihood of this bot being restored so your project will again see monthly updates of popular pages.

Further, there are over 260 proposals in all to review and vote for, across many aspects of wikis.

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Best regards, SteviethemanDelivered: 18:03, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Article assessments through the end of 2016[edit]

In 2016, articles within the scope of the WikiProject increased by a quarter from 4458 to 5534, and importance unassessed articles and completely unassessed articles remained near 0. The number of assessed articles surpassed 5000 back in February 2016 -- DanielPenfield (talk) 09:41, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
WikiProjectMarketingAndAdvertisingArticleAssessments.svg

Suggestions for improving marketing and advertising articles[edit]

I came to Wikipedia in October, 2016. My self-imposed mission was to correct fundamental flaws in a number of marketing articles. In the space of just three months, I have worked every single day (from between 4 and 12 hours daily) and completely overhauled a number of articles, by imposing a conceptual framework and adding substantive content:

  • Advertising management - many quality templates (all now removed) - proposals for merger with Advertising on talk page now redundant- much expanded and improved; was rated as a stub - definitely could use a review of its status
  • Australian Market and Social Research Society Limited - proposal for deletion on basis of unintelligible and lacking notability (all now withdrawn)
  • Brand awareness - was rated stub; with many quality templates - all now removed - now much improved, conceptually sound and properly referenced - could use a review of its status
  • Consumer behaviour - many quality templates (all now removed) - now much expanded, conceptually sound and properly referenced; could use a review of its article status- Psychology has now claimed this article as their own
  • E. Jerome McCarthy - was scheduled for deletion on the grounds of lack of notability (AfD nomination now withdrawn)- some issues remain to be addressed (but due to hounding by editor monitoring this article, I feel unable to proceed work on this article)
  • Market segmentation -many quality templates and tags; many criticims and suggestions on talk page - now much expanded and improved (all suggestions and critisisms on talk page integrated into revised article) - could use a review of its article status
  • Service blueprint - now much improved and expanded, conceptually sound and referenced
  • SERVQUAL - now much improved and conceptually sound and referenced
  • Servicescapes - now much improved and conceptually sound and fully referenced
  • Services marketing - now much expanded and improved and properly referenced - couple of issues remain to be addressed - could use a review of its article status

I have also made minor changes to short articles to try and get them up to C class:

  • Gimmick - stub class, was possibly scheduled for deletion; now of acceptable standard
  • Press kit -brief article in line for possible deletion; now improved and of acceptable standard

In addition, I tried to improve the following articles, but due to hounding, harrassment and bullying, from other editors was forced to abandon the mission, resulting in both articles now being in a worse state than before I even started on them. In the case of the article on Positioning (marketing), I have left suggestions for content with references that could potentially be added by an editor other than myself to get around the patrol that has been set up on that article:

I would have liked to overhaul the following, but these pages are so heavily patrolled by editors exhibiting Ownership behaviours that my initial attempts to be Bold were rejected within minutes and I abandoned all hope of improving these articles. The article on Marketing, which should be the centrepiece, is a joke amongst academics and students of marketing. I have left detailed commentary on specific errors that require fixing and also provided suggestions, in the form of a plan with recommended headings and sub-headings, organised around a coherent conceptual framework, for a revised article. In the case of Marketing research I have left detailed suggestions for content additions, with reliable references that could be added by an editor other than myself. My feeling is that Integrated marketing communications and Marketing communications should be merged (see talk page for details):

  • Marketing - fundamentally flawed, lacking in focus, bizarre content
  • Marketing research - history incorrectly credits Nielsen with many firsts; a more detailed and accurate history, with proper references, is required
  • Integrated marketing communications - multiple issues, mainly due to incomprehensibility and lack of citations
  • Marketing communications - multiple issues, mainly due to incomprehensibility and lack of citations
  • Promotion (marketing) - discussion appears to be entirely about advertising media - thus the distinction between advertising and promotion is blurred; no real sense of promotion as a process or problem-solving activity
  • Promotional mix - far from a comprehensive coverage of elements used in promotions - where is branded entertainment, product placement, event marketing, telemarketing, digital communications, exhibitions and trade fairs? Some mention of ethical considerations would be useful - especially in relation to digital promotions and privacy, spamming, A little discussion of how the promotional mix has changed over the past decade would help to round out this article nicely. e.g. it is definitely worth mentioning the shift from interruption models to dialogue models
  • Target market - the current article is actually about segmentation rather than target markets with a little bit of the 4 Ps thrown in for good measure; this article needs a much stronger focus - How are target markets identified? what criteria are used to identify the most valuable target markets? What is the difference between a primary market and a secondary market? How do marketers identify the size and value of target markets? Without a strong focus, this article is simply duplicating content found in the many articles that address market segmentation.

I have also identifed pages that are so problematic or misleading that they really should be deleted as soon as practical (see article's talk page for reasons), including:

I have designed developed a number of images, diagrams, flowcharts that have been added to Wiki Commons and are now used in some of the marketing articles and may be useful on other articles. These images include, but are not confined to:

  • Dick and Basu's Loyalty Matrix
  • A basic enviromental psychology model
  • Hypothetical service blueprint (fast food operation)
  • Typical symbols used in service blueprints
  • S-T-P (Segmentation- Targeting- Positioning)
  • Two different approaches to demographic segmentation (using one and two variables)
  • Major bases used in market segmentation
  • Market segments using clustering techniques
  • The purchase funnell
  • Target audience vs target market
  • Broad approaches to media scheduling
  • Sample media schedule
  • The purchasing decision model
  • The 7 Ps of services marketing
  • Rate of diffusion for selected communications technologies
  • Different types of queueing systems
  • The servicescapes model
  • The model of service quality


Articles with excessive levels of replication

I have also identified many pages that replicate content/ concepts that are well covered in other articles. I asked for some assistance in relation to this on Wiki Help desk, but my query was ignored. The amount of replication on Wikipedia almost defies comprehension, but for the record here are a few samples of articles that canvass the same material organised into groups

Group One: Market Segmentation

Market segmentation (main page)
Contents replicated in: Segmenting and positioning; Target market; Total addressable market; Serviceable available market; Microsegment; Behavioral targeting; Targeted advertising; Geo-targeting; Product differentiation

Group two: Positioning

Positioning (marketing) (main page) contents replicated in Perceptual mapping; Segmenting and positioning; Product differentiation
Group three: Advertising - socio-historical aspects
Advertising (main page, but almost entirely devoted to history of advertising)
Contents replicated in History of advertising; Targeted advertising and to some extent in Advertising research
Group four: Advertising - practice/ management
Advertising (ostensibly main page, but almost entirely devoted to history of advertising)
Contents replicated in Advertising management; Advertising campaign; Advertising media selection; Media planning; Target audience; Account planning - arguably Advertising management should become the main page
Group five: Promotion/ Marketing communications
Main page is unclear; but possible one of three possible candidates: Promotion (marketing) or Integrated marketing communications or Marketing communications
Content of all three is similar and content of all three repeats material covered in: Promotional mix; Promotional campaign and in the narrower articles of Advertising; Advertising management; Direct marketing; Public relations; Sales promotion; Product placement; Branded entertainment; Promotional merchandise (and that's not to mention the proliferation of articles on digital media of which there are literally hundreds)
Group six: Marketing
Main page Marketing
Repeats content and concepts canvassed in Marketing management; Marketing mix; Marketing strategy - The article devoted to marketing management is really about marketing strategy. These three articles are very unfocussed and confused.
Group seven: Target markets
Main page is possibly Target market
Content/ concepts are also canvassed in Market segmentation; Total addressable market; Serviceable available market; Targeted advertising ; Target audience; Geo-targeting and Behavioral targeting

To avoid this ongoing replication of articles, marketing really needs to have a strong framework. See, for example, the psychology sidebar Psychology sidebar (just put it inside double brackets {{..}} to view) which clearly shows how concepts and branches of psychology ar inter-related and where articles fit. Part of the marketing problem is that many of the articles start out with very poor definitions of the topic - and this sets the stage for random subject matter to be added to the article. In addition, pages that are unfocussed also lead to the desire to create new articles with a better focus. For example, the article on Advertising is an uncomfortable blend of socio-historical issues and advertising practice - but very strongly weighted towards history and social criticisms. The fact that this article included some theory of advertising along with this management advice led one editor to decide to start his own article on History of advertising - so now in effect, Wikipedia has two different articles on the history of advertising. Vigilance of new and developing articles should monitor the quality of definitions and should also make an effort to evaluate how well the article's content focuses on core themes.

During my time on Wikipedia, I have been bullied, harrassed and hounded. I have been given appalling advice and had some unfathomable work rules imposed by various editors (none of it backed by any policy). At least three different editors informed me that subject matter experts should refrain from editing in their subject areas and should ONLY make edits outside their subject area. One editor, who was a real bully, continually tried to impose work rules on me. For example she insisted most persistently, that all new content had to be developed in the Sandbox where it was to be perfected, before being uploaded to the Talk page for discussion and only after it had consensus approval could it be added to the article (and since it looks like talk pages in the marketing area are consulted once in every 8-10 years, this advice was clearly designed to lead me to a dead-end). In her words, nothing should go into the article until it was ready for prime-time display. She also insisted that I clean up the expression and grammar in an article before adding new content, even when it was clear that some of the pre-existing content had to be deleted - it apparently needed to be clean before deletion. She followed me around Wikipedia, continually commenting on edits, tagging edits and sending me up to 7 mini-lectures each day on my sins (real and imagined). I won't bother detailing all the other rules and advice that she tried to impose. I had a hard time shaking her off.

And, now the last straw is the battle with the so-called Wikpedia External Links Project, whose stated intention is to 'improve the quality of external links', but judging by their actions is actually a front for the real agenda which is the 'total eradication of all external links'. I find their actions to be dishonest and completely out of line with the spirit of the guidelines on external links.

I have sucessfully discussed deletion decisions with several external links deleter types - in an effort to reinstate links to journals and professional associations - they have suggested a range of strategies

(a) write inclusion criteria and post on the article's talk page (I did this, and went one step further by writing detailed justifications for each and every link)
(b) if the link is to a notable journal or organisation, write an article about it and then you only need to include it in the ""See Also"" links (Seriously?)

But it actually doesn't matter what I do, in a matter of days, another editor will come along and delete the entire "External Links" section. Their concerted action and peristence, combined with the patent dishonesty behind their actions, is too much. From the outsett, I found the Wikipedia culture oppressive, confusing and contradictory, but somehow found a way to clean up articles without drawing too much attention to myself. But these 'External links' editors are just randomly looking for articles to attack - and for many of them - the only editing they do is deleting external links and writing to people asking them to stop adding external links. This is the straw that broke the camel's back. I simply cannot stand it any more. Good-bye BronHiggs (talk) 21:44, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Marketing article[edit]

The article on Marketing, which I assume is of core importance to this project, has been reverted to its 2009 version because of copyright violations. It probably needs to be completely rewritten. There's a detailed proposed outline on the talk-page in case that is of any use. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:29, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Update: this is just part of a much larger problem affecting many articles in this project. Please see here. Any help welcome. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:32, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Request for the the Maritz, LLC article[edit]

Hello, I'm attempting to expand and update the Maritz, LLC Wikipedia article on behalf of Maritz Holdings, Inc. Specifically, I am hoping to find neutral editors who are willing to review the "Corporate overview", "Current subsidiaries", and/or "Former subsidiaries" sections drafted here. As I mentioned in the edit request, I know this is a lot of text to review, and I am fine with separating this single request into requests for each section, if needed. This request is not to change existing text but to expand information about the company's overall structure and subsidiaries. All of the information is sourced, and I've made neutrality a top priority. I am happy to answer questions on my talk page or within the edit request on the article's talk page. Thanks for any help in advance. 71.91.238.194 (talk) 21:54, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Live for Now (Pepsi)[edit]

Project members are invited to help expand the newly created Live for Now (Pepsi) article about the controversial Pepsi ad. Thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:51, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Popular pages report[edit]

We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month, Community Tech bot will post at Wikipedia:WikiProject Marketing & Advertising/Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of WikiProject Marketing & Advertising.

We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:

  • The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
  • The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
  • The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).

We're grateful to Mr.Z-man for his original Mr.Z-bot, and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of WikiProject Marketing & Advertising, and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.

Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:15, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

GAR[edit]

Us Tareyton smokers would rather fight than switch!, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article.

Customer value maximization - expertise needed to determine what to do with article[edit]

Customer value maximization (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) has been created and maintained by a sock farm for Xerago.com. A discussion has been started on it's talk page on whether it should remain, or should be stubbed/deleted/redirected/merged. Editors with expertise on CRM or related topics would be extremely helpful in the discussion. --Ronz (talk) 16:54, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation links on pages tagged by this wikiproject[edit]

Wikipedia has many thousands of wikilinks which point to disambiguation pages. It would be useful to readers if these links directed them to the specific pages of interest, rather than making them search through a list. Members of WikiProject Disambiguation have been working on this and the total number is now below 20,000 for the first time. Some of these links require specialist knowledge of the topics concerned and therefore it would be great if you could help in your area of expertise.

A list of the relevant links on pages which fall within the remit of this wikiproject can be found at http://69.142.160.183/~dispenser/cgi-bin/topic_points.py?banner=WikiProject_Marketing_&_Advertising

Please take a few minutes to help make these more useful to our readers.— Rod talk 17:01, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Discussion Invitation[edit]

A merge proposal was made to merge Keith Raniere with NXIVM in November 2017, I have revived the merge proposal. Please see discussion here. Your comments in the discussion would be appreciated since the page is within this WikiProject. -- Waddie96 (talk) 14:42, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Marketing performance measurement[edit]

Marketing performance measurement, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. AIRcorn (talk) 10:52, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Piața A-Z[edit]

Notice

The article Piața A-Z has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

not notable

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Mathglot (talk) 05:31, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement![edit]

Today's Article For Improvement star.svg

Hello,
Please note that Popular culture, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of Today's articles for improvement. The article was scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Today's articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing!
Delivered by MusikBot talk 00:05, 2 July 2018 (UTC) on behalf of the TAFI team