Talk:Marketing channel

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 May 2020 and 3 July 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jade71u.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 00:36, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Reference in the Middle of Article

There is a reference in the middle of the article:

Armstrong, G. (2009). Marketing: an introduction ([European ed.). Harlow, England: Financial Times Prentice Hall.

Not sure if that should be a citation of the previous paragraph, sentence, etc... 174.109.240.52 (talk) 06:20, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. GermanJoe (talk) 17:03, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

• Note, that plagiarizing a source - closely following the original text just rephrasing a sentence here and there - is also prohibited. GermanJoe (talk) 17:03, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Marketing channel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140812205947/http://blog.mbaco.com/what-are-marketing-channels/ to http://blog.mbaco.com/what-are-marketing-channels/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:27, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Canadian Federation of Agriculture reference under Zero section for Types

The Zero-level Channel section contains an odd reference to farmers specifically selling their goods without intervention by the Canadian Federation of Agriculture. Not sure if this reference needs to be included, or if it would be better as an example. Seems to be a weird use of syntax or possibly even a commentary on federal regulations?

I've considered editing it to just make that sentence an example rather than the definition.

I'm new to this so if anyone has any insight, I'd appreciate it. Uncle Jay (talk) 14:47, 16 April 2019 (UTC)