Talk:Flower delivery

Internet Low‑importance

	Internet portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet 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.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Business Low‑importance

	Business portal This article 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Plants Low‑importance

	Plants portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of plants and botany 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.PlantsWikipedia:WikiProject PlantsTemplate:WikiProject Plantsplant articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Spammy links

Why are the links promoting specific companies when there are thousands of sites offering the same services? These links seem inappropriate to this page.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Camillia (talk • contribs)

ANSWER: As there are photos and illustrations accompanying many Wikipedia entries to further explain a topic by way of providing examples of that which they illustrate - so where this particular entry seeks to explain 'Online flower delivery', surely it's appropriate to reference relevant [online] sites that are described in this article. Not doing so perhaps lessens this page's educational value. Apcar 21:54, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Examples will invite spam as companies vie to be placed on the page. In the case of FTD, the companies sells both brokered services and courier delivered flowers so they are not the best example of an order broker. In the case of The Grower's Box or Church Street Flowers, the companies have no name recognition. Better choices would be ProFlowers for Courier Delivery and Winston's of Boston for Florists but Wikipedia is not a US-centric site so I believe omitting the examples altogether is the best route. Camillia 00:40, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Added: The Grower's Box description calls the company a 'wholesaler' but by definition 'wholesalers' do not sell direct to consumers, as does that site. The description is inappropriately promotional.Camillia 00:46, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE: It appears that you're calling for the omission of any example sites in this article on Wikipedia "technicalities" - and give no substantive reason for not including any example sites. As pointed out earlier:

Again, there are photos and illustrations accompanying many Wikipedia entries to further explain a topic by way of providing examples of that which they illustrate - so where this particular entry seeks to explain 'ONLINE flower delivery', surely it's appropriate to reference relevant [online] sites that are described in this article. Not doing so perhaps lessens this page's educational value.

You rule: (1) No, on FTD becuase they sells both brokered services and courier delivered flowers, and (2) No, on Grower's Box or Church Street Flowers because they have no name recognition, which doesn't mean they aren't worthy illustrative sites for this article.

It's my opinion that this article approaches being too vague (and obvious) so as to provide little educational value at all. For instance, it should be mentioned - as you indicate - that FTD sells brokered services as well as courrier delivered flowers. And other like businesses that illustrate well this industry should be carefully selected to illustrate a current understanding of this line of business.Apcar 19:23, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Death threat?

I deleted a little bogus "You will die sentence." 24.165.9.148 (talk) 02:15, 16 February 2011 (UTC)Jonas M.[reply]

Thanks for noticing that amusing ambiguity, I changed

Flowers need to be conditioned after the shipping process and if the recipient does not know how to do this they will die.

to

Flowers need to be conditioned after the shipping process, otherwise they will die.

--CliffC (talk) 03:11, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge discussion

There's a merge discussion in the floristry page. At the least, however, this page should really just be about flower delivery in general. I imagine it is 99% online these days but that allows us to talk about the previous technologies in the history (through floral wire services). II | (t - c) 02:00, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

Some stuff I've looked at:

http://www.floristdetective.com/ - wouldn't be a reliable source, but it has some interesting investigations into business practices.
http://www.topconsumerreviews.com/flower-delivery/ - OK, admittedly my interest in this topic is as a consumer

II | (t - c) 02:31, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Major companies

The list of companies is missing:

sendflowers.com / fromyouflowers.com (owned by Tenth Avenue Commerce) - picked by CNBC in 2010, this company seems to do a fair amount of volume, probably more than the startup The Bouqs (altho that was on Shark Tank). Not sure if there are enough sources to make an article tho
- Flower delivery service From You Flowers gets personal (2015)

Also, companies from India are missing which are featured on silicon India.

- [1] (2019)

Source: [2] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:9395:BE2D:DD54:A956:F610:A092 (talk) 13:42, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]