The contents of the Selling page were merged into Sales on 19 November 2015 and it now redirects there. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history.

Merge article "sales" into "selling"[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result was merged by Oncenawhile. --BDD (talk) 17:50, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As of this writing, "sales" and "selling" both have articles, with content forking involved. I'm not saying it's inconceivable to find a logic for having two separate articles—I simply question the clarity of logic and the value of having two separate articles. What is accomplished in these two that couldn't be accomplished in one united article with the correct organization (heading structure, writing quality, etc)? I will also freely admit, however, that I do not feel motivated at present to do the work of combining them. So I'll just leave it at this: Anyone who cares sufficiently should analyze the merits of one article versus two. — ¾-10 16:46, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, it would be merging the result and a tool. --Pgreenfinch (talk) 13:29, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the Sales article is mostly about the act and skills of selling. Pgreenfinch may be correct that a Sales article could be different if it addressed the final transfer of ownership, the result. But the current Sales article does not distinguish itself by addressing the result, and that final transfer seems a narrow topic which might be better covered as one phase of this article on Selling, anyway. Kim9988 (talk) 18:35, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support a merge. Both articles are poorly constructed and poorly sourced. A well crafted and sourced merged article would be more encyclopaedic and would avoid the vaguely defined overlaps that are already present. If indeed there is a distinction between a "result" and a "tool" then that can made abundantly clear in the text. Making that distinction in a single article would also help to clarify the point. This distinction is at present totally opaque to me having read both articles. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 12:32, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support a merge. This page is poorly made and should be merged with the other one.Anarchyte (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 01:29, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support The pages definitely should be merged. They are about the same topic. LK (talk) 03:41, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

No History or Criticism[edit]

No History or Criticism for this section (or Sales).

It all seems to be theoretical procedures as described in Business 101 courses, without any historical perspective, or perspective of the impact of selling on human society as a whole. 162.205.217.211 (talk) 06:57, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]