Talk:Emerging market

message: I believe most of the countries in South Asia should be regarded as emerging markets and should be in the list, so should Nigeria, after all it did achieve significant growth since the 90s. Sri Lanka has an educated work force and its economy has a bright future, so does Bangladesh. It is one of the handful of nations which has successfully combatted terrorism in home ground and it has higher GDP than many couuntries from the 2nd world. So why are these 3 nations not mentioned here? I would be glad if explained in detail. Thank you.
:Nigeria and Bangladesh have big populations, but not Sri Lanka. Usually institutions who released table of emerging market countries have some own reasons, but mainly based on growth of several consecutive years. If small country such as Maldives has good growth, so the market is to small and no one of the institutions will list Maldives in Emerging Markets table. In the table on Section Commonly Listed, we can see Bangladesh and Nigeria, but not Sri Lanka.Gsarwa (talk) 04:21, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where is Nigeria, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh?? 

message: Hello, 
My name is Jonathan and I am part of the founding team of Emerginvest - a Boston-based startup that provides unbiased data, and information on the world's emerging markets (think of a Yahoo Finance for emerging and frontier markets). I was writing because I think it might be a good resource to put in the external links section. Again, we don't offer investment advice or anything along those lines - simply data that people can use to keep track of these economies.
Thanks for your time.
Irishness1 (talk) 20:29, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding Emerginvest to External Links 

message: There is a strange edit war going on over the inclusion of Israel in the MSCI list of emerging markets. Israel is clearly there in the cited list. Would those who want to delete Israel please explain why it should not be included?VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 07:16, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The dispute seems to be that Morgan Stanley has stated that it intends to reclassify Israel in 2010.  I think it's best to wait until 2010 if this reclassification actually occurs to redo the list, but I believe it would be fair to note in the text that MS currently has indicated they plan to change the classification.  All articles classifying countries are subject to a good deal of edit warring, presumably from editors who object to their nation's placement.  An editor was recently deleting the Russell Index which listed South Korea as developing.  These articles require a good deal of vigilance to prevent nationalist agendas. --JayHenry (talk) 02:55, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Question: is Morgan Stanley a reliable source or not?? South Bay (talk) 05:21, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

text: Why should Wikipedia "wait"? Israel will be reclassified - just in 2010, and by then - it's still classified by MSCI as an Emerging Market, so by then - Wikipedia should put Israel in MSCI Emerging Market list, and In 2010 Wikipedia should update its lists. Anyways, your suggestion of noting what MSCI has indicated they plan - is acceptable, so I added a footnote in the txet. HOOTmag (talk) 07:15, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  MSCI is a major producer of such indices, and we're only presenting its list as an example of an institution's classification system.  It's certainly okay for this purpose and the article does note there are limitations to any such list.  I think the footnote is a good solution that we can all be comfortable with?  Thanks HOOTmag! --JayHenry (talk) 00:11, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strange edit war over Israel 

message: South Korea classified by FTSE as a developed market in today. This references (Will be classified by FTSE as a developed market in September 2009. See: FTSE Country Classification, September 2008) change to this references (Classified by FTSE as a developed market. See: FTSE Country Classification, September 2009). --Werewaz (talk) 06:50, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Set Sail For The Seven Seas  229° 36' 45" NET   15:18, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  South Korea classified by FTSE as a developed market in today. 

message: United Arab Emirates is not classified by FTSE's Secondary Emerging Markets list. But UAE will classified by FTSE's Secondary Emerging markets list. I have requested this part (The Secondary Emerging Markets are: To be moved to Frontier September 2010., , , ,Possible change to Frontier. Possible change to Advanced Emerging., , , , , ,  , , , , , , From September 2010..)
change to this (The Secondary Emerging Markets are: ,To be moved to Frontier September 2010. , , ,Possible change to Frontier. ,Possible change to Advanced Emerging. , , , , ,  , , , , , .
*  will be classified by FTSE as a Secondary Emerging market in the September 2010 indices.http://www.ftse.com/Indices/Country_Classification/Downloads/FTSE_Country_Classification_Sept_09_update.pdf). --Werewaz (talk) 15:48, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Change FTSE emerging markets part. 

message: can someone take the "s" out of the page name  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.104.118.88 (talk) 22:34, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  naming 

message: In the article it reads: "Emphasizing the fluid nature of the category, political scientist Ian Bremmer defines an emerging market as 'a country where politics matters at least as much as economics to the markets'." </br> Is this supposed to be a definition? What is the precise meaning of "to matter" and of "politics" in this statement? And, is the fact that politics "matter" just as much as "economics" (?) any different from countries that are not the "emerging" status? </br> We ought to either clarify or delete. 80.108.15.242 (talk) 11:10, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition 

message: Trying to get a consensus on taking the stub article 'Financial sector development' and merging it into this article.  It's an orphan, and isn't a lot of content to bring over.  Post replies here or on my talk page.  --Alang814 (talk) 01:06, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger with [[Financial sector development]] 

message: In the map shown here, why did Palawan was highlighted as a part of another entity, while it is a part of the Philippines?--180.193.3.8 (talk) 12:18, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map Correction 

message: The image shown here is completely ridiculous. How it came to the mind of the authors to classify Czech Republic, Slovakia, Poland, Croatia, Bulgaria etc a 'developing countries'? Is there any source that claims these European Union members are 'developing'? Who came to a conclusion that being an 'emerging market' means being 'developing country'?--MathFacts (talk) 11:31, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  The image 

message: There is a lot of overlap and some contradiction between this article and the Newly industrialized country article. I wonder if a merge or co-ordinated editing might help to create better consistency. Roger (talk) 19:55, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see any contradiction. What do you think is contradictory? Thanks. I don't think these articles should be merged, because both concepts are completely different. Plus emerging markets is a purely economical term, and NIC is both a socio-political and economical category. AlexCovarrubias ( Talk? ) 22:40, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article and "Newly industrialized country" 

message: I feel like the CIVETs don't belong in the main table of comparison.  Strictly speaking they're a list of a subset of especially promising emerging markets, as defined by the Economist, with a focus on young populations.  I've expanded the BBVA list to include all their emerging markets, however we already have the full Economist list separately.  Since it will be a pain to go through and remove the entire CIVET column though, I'm going to post my objections here for now, and clear the CIVET column at some indefinite point in the future.  I'm playing around with maps right now for this and other articles and the way I do things, hopefully if anybody has any compelling reasons to keep them that I'm missing (again, subset of a larger list; as with BBVA) this will give plenty of time for you to chime in. —Quintucket (talk) 19:55, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  CIVETs 

message: On its own, Emerging Markets Index does not seem all that notable.  It could be turned into a single table that includes both countries and cities, whether or not it is merged.  But doing that would also make it fit pretty well in the existing section in Emerging markets. -- Beland (talk) 19:24, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge of Emerging Markets Index 

message: From the article: "The 10 Big Emerging Markets (BEM) economies are (alphabetically ordered): Argentina, Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Poland, South Africa and Turkey.[19]"
But these are only nine countries ...
And I believe the cited page doesn't work.141.22.66.232 (talk) 09:43, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where is the 10th BEM economy? 

message: Dr. Park has reviewed this Wikipedia page, and provided us with the following comments to improve its quality:
We hope Wikipedians on this talk page can take advantage of these comments and improve the quality of the article accordingly.
Dr. Park has published scholarly research which seems to be relevant to this Wikipedia article:
*Reference : Park, Cyn-Young & Lee, Jong-Wha, 2011. "Financial Integration in Emerging Asia: Challenges and Prospects," Working Papers on Regional Economic Integration 79, Asian Development Bank.
ExpertIdeasBot (talk) 16:55, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dr. Park's comment on this article 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Emerging markets. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://store.businessmonitor.com/iran-us-rapprochement-historic-opportunities-beckon.html
*Added  tag to http://custom.hbsp.com/b01/en/implicit/product.jhtml?login=BREM060105&password=BREM060105&pid=1126
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110511132646/http://www.investincolombia.com.co/emerging-countries/emerging-countries-2010/ to http://www.investincolombia.com.co/emerging-countries/emerging-countries-2010
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100613001319/http://ctl.mit.edu/library/winning_emerging_markets_five_key_supply_chain_capabilities to http://ctl.mit.edu/library/winning_emerging_markets_five_key_supply_chain_capabilities
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:15, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Emerging Market Global Players is only a project on FDI from leading institutions in emerging markets to gather original data from company surveys and additional research and to produce annual reports based on their findings. Those EMGP reports identify the top multinationals from each of a number of emerging markets, provide detailed information on the key features of the firms’ activities abroad, and discuss other issues, including the underlying policy context influencing outward investment from those emerging markets and the impact of the MNEs on sustainable development. So, the participate countries in the project are not reflect the emerging markets in all over the world due to only one institution of the countries involve in the project and the reports are different each other with each different titles. IMHO, the column of Columbia University EMGP on Section Commonly Listed should be deleted.Gsarwa (talk) 04:05, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Emerging Market Global Players (EMGP)

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Emerging markets. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100417061448/http://www.internationalbusinessreport.com/Reports/2010/Reports/emerging_markets/index.asp to http://www.internationalbusinessreport.com/Reports/2010/Reports/emerging_markets/index.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:50, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 
The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) feminist (talk) 16:43, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Emerging markets →  – The article should use singular title per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (plurals). The current lead section also uses the singular form ("An emerging market is a country that has some characteristics of a developed market..."). Neo-Jay (talk) 14:03, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

text: The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move.  Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The first sentence in the second paragraph in the Terminology section needs to be fixed: Who is Sherzodbek Safarov?
Old:
"Originally coined in 1981 by then World Bank economist Antoine Van Agtmael,[7][8] the term is sometimes loosely used as a replacement for emerging economies, but really signifies a business phenomenon that is not fully described by or constrained Sherzodbek Safarov;" 
New:
"Originally coined in 1981 by then World Bank economist Antoine Van Agtmael,[7][8] the term is sometimes loosely used as a replacement for emerging economies, but really signifies a business phenomenon that is not fully described by or constrained it;"  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:56A:7936:A000:85F9:2C6B:5180:449 (talk) 10:26, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 2 September 2018 

message: First sentence of second paragraph of Terminology section:
"Originally coined in 1981 by then World Bank economist Antoine Van Agtmael,[7][8] the term is sometimes loosely used as a replacement for emerging economies, but really signifies a business phenomenon that is not fully described by or constrained Sherzodbek Safarov;"
Who is Sherzodbek Safarov?
Change to:
"Originally coined in 1981 by then World Bank economist Antoine Van Agtmael,[7][8] the term is sometimes loosely used as a replacement for emerging economies, but really signifies a business phenomenon that is not fully described by or constrained by it;"
2001:56A:7936:A000:85F9:2C6B:5180:449 (talk) 10:28, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minor error in Terminology section 

message: I propose merging Frontier markets into Emerging market. I think the content in Frontier markets can easily be explained in the context of Emerging market, and a merge would not cause any article-size or weighting problems in the latter article. The existence of multiple articles on what is basically a slight variation on the same concept leads to worse article quality and wastes the efforts of editors. Thenightaway (talk) 03:18, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge proposal