Talk:Collective business system
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the Business and Economics WikiProject. |
| Start | rated as start-Class on the assessment scale |
| Low | rated as low-importance on the assessment scale |
I do not think this should be in Wikipedia because it qualifies as "original research." I just ran searches through LexisNexis and ProQuest and the only references to "collective business system" are to a business process patent held by AmeriQuest (US 6,351,738 B1). There are no references to this term in all American and Canadian law reviews, and it has never been mentioned in a single legal case in English-speaking North America (yes, Lexis carries all of them), so it is not a legal "term of art." Instead, it appears to be an original coinage which someone has invented as a generalization of several different business models.
While this analysis is certainly interesting, it belongs in an academic journal, not Wikipedia. When it becomes accepted by at least a significant minority of management or legal scholars, then it can come back.
--Coolcaesar 07:54, 13 May 2005 (UTC)
- You only real point seems to be with the title. (Personally, I think Collective business models would be better.) I see nothing wrong in having a NPOV analysis of different types of business practices - such can be very useful for someone confused by the jargon under the various topics but wanting a grasp of the differences between collective models such as, say, co-operative and trade association or multi-level and franchise. Granted, more work needs doing but incompleteness should not be a reason to remove what it there. --Douglas 14:43, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I've spent some time putting the text into a more balanced viewpoint (say I, an independant trader!) and getting the original author's ideology into a single section for people to ignore or read at will (though I wonder if it has a place at all). I've added the section on multi-level but don't have time to write it up just yet. More work is needed on the text in general. --Douglas 15:40, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
