This template is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This template is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
This template is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles
@Hendrick 99 and Oiyarbepsy: I think this template is 'back to front'. Uberisation is a concept of Sharing economy, not Sharing economy is a concept of uberisation. Therefore, I propose moving (renaming) template Sharing economy with uberisation as a concept. Jonpatterns (talk) 21:20, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Whilst I agree that there should also be a template of this sort dedicated to sharing economy related topics in general, it should be noted that uberisation is a sufficiently distinct and notable topic to warrant a template to itself. Hendrick 99 (talk) 07:50, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This should be done. The current name is ridiculous.
Are streaming services classed as sharing economy/uberisation?[edit]
In what way to streaming services such as Apple Music and Netflix an example sharing economy/uberisation? They are centralised companies with traditional job structures, they are just digital retailers (aka business to consumer). Jonpatterns (talk) 21:20, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I've been bold and removed the Wikimedia Foundation and sister websites from this template (diff). I don't believe they're applicable to a list of economic projects - which is all about a peer to peer fee-for-service model of business transactions. Wikimedia is 'sharing', but not 'economy' IMO. Equally, the rest of the list is a bit of a mess in the sense that most of the categories are only represented by a single article - I feel the template needs a general cleanup but that's a different task... Wittylama 14:06, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
There is no inherent connection between most of the items in this navbox. Is there a much narrower version of its scope to meet the needs of WP:NAVBOX#3, or is TfD the best option? czar 20:00, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
