Help desk | ||
---|---|---|
< December 8 | << Nov | December | Jan >> | December 10 > |
Welcome to the Wikipedia Help Desk Archives |
---|
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages. |
I am not sure that I am posting my query in the right place, but here goes...
I would like to propose a way to consolidate and rationalise the increasing number of articles in the marketing communications and advertising area causing high levels of repetition. At the moment there are many articles that canvass the same subject matter, using slightly different terminology.
In the broad area of marketing communications, articles that cover more or less the same content include:
In the area of advertising, articles that cover similar content, albeit with a different perspective, include:
(NB: The article dedicated to Advertising is heavily skewed towards a history of advertising in terms of verbiage. It contains only a very cursory treatment of advertising management. The discussion of the socio-historical aspects is fair. The management of the advertising function is perfunctory, low level and contains serious omissions and other flaws. Thus the article on Advertising and History of advertising cover very similar content.
In addition to all this apparent repetition, there are also articles dedicated to specific elements of the promotion mix, including Personal selling, Direct marketing, Direct response media, Direct response television, Sponsorship, Public relations and many more (too numerous to itemise) which simply repeat material already covered on the articles listed above.
It seems to me that the number of repetitive articles combined with different and confusing titles needs some kind of rationalisation. For any user with a limited understanding of marketing communications, it would be very difficult to navigate the proliferation of articles that canvass the same subject matter, leading to real difficulties locating relevant information easily and causing confusion about which articles are superior or more accurate. My feeling is that this type of repetition is not only unnecessary, but it is counter-productive.
I would like to propose that this unnecessary level of repetition be avoided by the following recommendations:
1. The article on Advertising be devoted to the socio-historical study of advertising. This would mean that it be removed from the Business and Economics portal and become part of some type of humanities/ social science portal)
2. The article on Advertising management become the main page for any discussion of advertising as a managerial activity in the Business/Economics Portal
3. The articles on Promotion (marketing), Promotional mix, Integrated marketing communications and Marketing communications be merged into a single article entitled "Integrated marketing communications (IMC)" because this is the preferred terminology used by marketers and advertisers (and also because there is very strong opposition to any removal of the IMC article -see article's talk page).
4. The myriad of minor pages devoted to individual elements of the marketing communications mix (personal selling, direct marketing, sponsorship, as listed above) be made into dictionary definitions rather than free-standing articles.
5. That some type of disambiguation be devised to direct users to relevant pages when they search for articles in the area of marketing communications and/ or advertising.
I have noticed that some editors, after having confronted pages like Advertising, which contain an uncomfortable mix of social, historical and managerial topics, tend to decide that they need to develop their own new page dedicated to a specific area such as History of advertising. Thus the raft of articles lacking in a clear focus is contributing to the proliferation of new articles and playing into this unnecessary repetition.
I have posted comments about this level of repetition on the discussion page of most of these articles. However, based on prior history, users on marketing pages only post comments or respond to issues about once in every 8 years! So, I am not holding my breath waiting for any reply to my suggestions. I wonder whether some kind of intervention from Admin might speed up the process and help to remove repetitive content and rationalise these pages in the marketing area? BronHiggs ( talk) 00:15, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
I uploaded an updated poster of Fifty Shades Darker (film) yesterday at File:Fifty Shades Darker film poster.jpg. Someone reduced it for me. I went to look over the picture again only to see that the previous version is still there. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 02:14, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello, how do I enable auto archiving on my talk page ? Thanks. Js82 ( talk) 02:16, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Is my sandbox private or can anyone view it? I need to know this because I don't want anyone to view what I'm going to write (I don't know if I needed to say that) Thanks! Ramister ( talk) 02:24, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
User:
namespace, User talk:
, Draft:
and Draft talk:
namespaces are automatically
not indexed....meaning most search engines including Google, meaning most readers will not find them. However anyone may search and view them Wikipedia directly by using the
Special:Search option.--
Moxy (
talk) 07:18, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
I would gladly donate but everytime I tried to edit some jerk would delete the information. I hold a PhD and served 14 years in the US Army until my last deployment I was injured. I served in roughly 5 campaigns / "wars / operations". Additionally, I had 10 deployments!! I received all my education post injury / medical retirement. I'd LOVE to contribute and see NUMEROUS issues within the military info.. if you created a "hierarchy" where people can't delete what you contribute you'd have far more contribubitions!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.155.82.245 ( talk) 03:30, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
The following articles have templates within templates that construct a link to the article National Park Railway Station when passed National Park. However, this is a disambiguation page.
The links should be:
How can this be fixed? MB 04:55, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
I know not to do that, but I can't find the page that spells it out (not for me, you understand). At least I think I once saw such a page. Chris the speller yack 05:49, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Editors can contribute as much as they want? -- John of Reading ( talk) 07:54, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
An image was uploaded to Commons from Flickr, which was ostensibly under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license at the time. However, the original image hosted on Flickr has since become All rights reserved. Should the image on Commons be deleted now?
Original image on Flickr:
[1]
Image uploaded to Commons:
[2]
Derivative of image uploaded to Commons:
[3]
Ypna ( talk) 05:54, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Can I get to see my own edits also on my watchlist ? Currently I only see edits made by other users. Thank you. Js82 ( talk) 06:02, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
When I search for my uploads on enwiki from the mobile version, I get my commons uploads as a result... why is that?-- The Traditionalist ( talk) 09:14, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Also, when I click on a link to The Sinclair Method on /info/en/?search=One_Little_Pill I am now redirected to the Wikipedia page for alcoholism.
Please could the editor responsible explain the basis for this decision to delete/redirect? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:4AC5:1B00:5D09:A49D:D49:19E3 ( talk) 10:28, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello, yet again one of the most progressive and successful treatments for alcoholism has been deleted from Wikipedia. It is hugely concerning an activity so reckless could occur, but even further disturbing there is no record of its deletion. Millions are suffering and dying from this illness and I can only gather under some false pretext the most successful treatment (79%) is absent from Wikipedia. At what point can you ensure this _never_ happens again? The anti-intellectualism behind this need be rooted out and dashed from moderation activities. TSM has been featured on TEDTalk and just recently heard before the senate. Kindly address this error immediately. Lives are at stake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.30.64.108 ( talk) 13:10, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
References
This is not important, just curious. It may be evidence of an unimportant bug in navigation popups.
I have navigation popups enabled in "preferences" – "gadgets". When I hover over the link Brown-necked parrot, it shows me the first paragraph of the article, including the string "<em>Poicephalus</em> parrot". Where do the em tags come from? The word is bracketed by double apostrophes in the source code of the article, and by <i></i> tags in the article as served to my browser. Maproom ( talk) 11:29, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
[[Poicephalus|''Poicephalus'' parrot]]
. I reported it in 2014 at
Wikipedia talk:Tools/Navigation popups/Archive 9#em tags in piped links with no reply. <em>Poicephalus</em> parrot
produces "Poicephalus parrot" but popups does not generate correct code when it's inside a link.
PrimeHunter (
talk) 11:57, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
When I click on "deleted user contributions", in addition to the showing me the deleted contributions, if any, it now shows me a large box entitled "Search for contributions". How do I eliminate the box and go back to the old display? Thanks.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 13:13, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
.mw-special-DeletedContributions .mw-htmlform-ooui-wrapper {display: none;}
Hello mynme is mita overvliet and i would like to react to the article of mita overvliet. I was suspenden for 2 years ,first the ban was 4 years but after my case with the CAS in switzerland the IWF had to change there rules and make the suspension from 4 years to 2 years. This was done for all other athletes and actually my case in cooperation with the doping authorities in the netherlands was the breakthrough for it. Also my results where higher in some competitions, my results in the osmanaliev tournaments which isheld everyyear in kirgistan was 75/100 also remco eenink was ever realreally my coach i am only registrated in the netherlands because of my dutch paspoort. I trained 1,5 year in rumenia and 5 months in spain and 7 years in the bundeswehr in germany andand i live now in kazakhstan/russian border siberia where i train. I have been for 10 years in trainingcamps,and now i will start again. One ofthe reason my suspension was made from 4 years to 2 years was because there was a medical problem with my physical condition that included cervix cancer and was the reason of a high level of norandrosterone in the body,and the furosemide i honestly admitted and showed my papers frfrom the prescription from other competitions that was made by the docdoctor,for the competition in 2011 idid not have the right paper. This case is sensitive for me because i was so fighting hard anand it worked out,we have had always so many problems witwiththe weightlifting in the netherlands espacially the federation.things ae changing now because of remco eenink. My coaches where peter kaeks in germany and in kazakhstan anatoly vasilich liu-shin. But remco has been a soort of a sport psychologist for me. Sorry to write sso uch but i was upset with the information about mmyself on wikipedia.
The great gudmundur sigurdasson in iceland has teched me olympic weightlifting aand thats howit started. I hooe you guys can adadjust the information about me — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mitaovervliet ( talk • contribs) 14:16, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
I sometimes use a custom variation of "Citation Needed" to indicate a not-serious answer. Example: [5] [6]
I use the following markup...
[ [[Citation (horse)|Citation]] [[Need, California|Need]][[ed (text editor)|ed]] ]
...which displays like this:
I would like it to display as "[Citation Needed]" instead of "[ Citation Needed ]", but if I try to remove the extra spaces like this...
[[[Citation (horse)|Citation]] [[Need, California|Need]][[ed (text editor)|ed]]]
...I get this:
[[[Citation (horse)|Citation]] Need ed]
So, is there some clever way to format my silly bit of markup so that it displays without the leading and trailing space? -- Guy Macon ( talk) 17:25, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Homeopathy has actually been based on thousands upon thousands of bits of research that have been conducted over the last 150 years. It is based on certain principles which our modern American health care model does not have . You can disagree with the basic tenets, but the research and the logic is there. I am not saying much here because I have no idea where this will go just a test. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.163.211.155 ( talk) 20:29, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
What No Article about baseball in 2017 and no 2017 in music There's only 3 Weeks Left. come on get your lazy butts in gear now. 68.102.57.28 ( talk) 20:56, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
I was simply trying to make minor adjustments to records and update our head coach's picture on his wiki page and it went through fine yesterday. Now it is all coded and doesn't look correct. How do I fix this? I am not a coder and do not understand anything like that. Not sure what is the problem with the page now. Please help or simply correct it for me if possible. Not sure if I did something to mess it up or not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Notaroy69 ( talk • contribs) 21:00, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Is there a way to set my preferences that I'm overlooking, or any other method, so that I do not automatically follow redirects to their target pages? Basically, I'd like wikipedia to treat every redirect I click as though the link has &redirect=no after it, if possible. AddWittyNameHere ( talk) 21:47, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
I Don't know how to make a template. 68.102.57.28 ( talk) 23:02, 9 December 2016 (UTC)