Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marque


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   redirect. Any content worth salvaging can be pulled from the page history. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:26, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Marque

 * – ( View AfD View log )

"Marque" is nothing more than French for "brand". This page is a content fork from Brand, where it pretends that an Automotive brand is somehow different than other kinds of brands. In fact, the only difference is that car brands are often called marques. That difference does not justify having a whole other page. Wiktionary and Marque (disambiguation) are more than adequate. Dbratland (talk) 02:42, 24 December 2010 (UTC) 88Response Good points, Peter E. James. Let's delete this article and redirect Marque to Brand. A section on automobile branding could be written, based on reliable sources, and that section could mention the term "marque". However, this material doesn't make the grade. Cullen328 (talk) 23:22, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:57, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete This article is original research about branding in the automobile industry, and its conclusions are entirely unsupported by the "references", which are nothing more than lists of "prestigious" brand names. Cullen328 (talk) 08:51, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Put a fork in me. EEng (talk) 21:39, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
 * "Marque" shouldn't be a red link - it should be redirected to another article with relevant information added there, or kept to allow improvement as a separate article. Most of the article is unreferenced and possibly original research, but improvement is possible. Brand is probably long enough, and a split would eventually be needed, and although there is some overlap with badge engineering it isn't entirely the same topic, so it can probably stay separate. Maybe it should be moved to a more descriptive title, such as "Automotive branding". Peter E. James (talk) 22:50, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment 'Marque' is still used in British English to refer to 'brands' of car, motorcycle, etc - but not to brands of soup, tyre or computer. It's not as common in everyday talk, where 'make' is more used. The word is French in origin - but so is 'garage'. It is now by adoption an English word, so its French origin and current use there are not grounds for deletion. I am against a simple redirect to 'brand' as in British English there is a distinction perhaps not found in America. Peridon (talk) 23:19, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
 * What, specifically, is the distinction? We don't create content forks just because British and American English have synonyms that mean the same thing. Mini is a brand of car owned by BMW. Marlboro is a brand of cigarettes owned by Altria. Brand and marque are synonyms, unless you can cite a source saying they're not... ?Currently the article makes no assertion that car marques are any different than brands; it talks about fashion and market segments, and consolidation, the halo effect, and so on. But every single thing it says is equally true of brands of everything, not just brands of automobiles. --Dbratland (talk) 04:10, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 * In the UK, now tends to be used more in connection with the more expensive or 'desirable' motors - some random examples of its use: http://www.topmarques.co.uk/ http://www.daimler.co.uk/ http://www.searchwellsetc.com/site/pages/vintage_cars.php The Free Dictionary gives "A model or brand of a manufactured product, especially an automobile." Wiktionary gives the English meaning as "A brand of a manufactured product, especially a model of motor car." The article does make the point that the term 'marque' applies mainly to cars and thus is only a synonym for 'brand' in that context. It's not only the prestige aspect - the Fortnum and Mason label is a brand and would never be referred to as a 'marque'. In my opinion, there is enough distinction to merit at least a short section in 'Brand' with a redirect from 'Marque'. Peridon (talk) 12:44, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Saturn and Chevrolet are not a prestige brands (or marques, if you like), but the BBC Telegraph, Guardian routinely call them marques, along with Cadillac and Bentley. And if you notice, these publications blithely substitute "brand" for "marque", e.g. "GM needed to slim down and strengthen its eight brands [...] It also sees a focus in North America on Chevrolet and Cadillac, with the other six marques - GMC, Pontiac, Buick, Saturn, Saab and Hummer - focused on targeted niche markets." --Dbratland (talk) 18:47, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 * BBC, Guardian and Telegraph would be expected to use this terminology. The Sun wouldn't. Saturn is a 'brand' virtually unknown in the UK. Chevrolet is, but now associated with the former Daewoo models. I'm not saying it is a universally applied terminology. I am saying it exists in a special usage and needs to be recorded in some way. Note that while I have quite a record myself of voting '!Delete', I also go against the trend and have supported the article of a rapper (a form of music I detest). Whatever its usage, it exists and is documented. I'm not saying the article is perfect - few are - but that the term needs mention despite the dislike for it of some Americans. Peridon (talk) 19:06, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Any distinction from "mark" can be handled by a single sentence in the brand article. Redirect there. EEng (talk) 20:05, 27 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Redirect to brand. I think there is some useful content here that could be used in another article if sourced. For this reason, I do not see a need for a full-scale deletion. OSX (talk • contributions) 06:44, 1 January 2011 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.