This  level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Business High‑importance 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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Occupations (defunct) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Occupations, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.OccupationsWikipedia:WikiProject OccupationsTemplate:WikiProject OccupationsOccupations Biography This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography

This article's kinda short. -__-;; — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.197.189.115 (talk) 00:30, 16 February 2006 (UTC)Reply

Should there not be a list of people called merchant or are there too many????--The penfool — Preceding unsigned comment added by The penfool (talk • contribs) 08:32, 4 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

there should deffinately be more information on this topic because i need more info for school :( — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.162.68.112 (talk) 23:47, 31 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

What about including some etymology - the prefix of "mer" meaning "of the water" (e.g mermaid). This would introduce the concept of the "law of the water" under which all commerce flows. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.221.40.3 (talk) 09:48, 22 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Well… that kind of makes sense. I also needed this for school, but it has not enough good information for me to use… I absolutely agree with you. 2001:569:50F9:7D00:B9BA:3DD6:FC3A:2E12 (talk) 02:43, 15 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

The section about law in the UCC is wrong. UCC 2-205, the firm offer must originate from a merchant and contain his signature, but does not need to be BETWEEN two merchants. Poorly done. now can someone help me find the tilde key..., nm.198.151.130.135 (talk) 15:11, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Merchant. 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 http://www.webcitation.org/6GDf1o5rh?url=http://www.brown.edu/Departments/Italian_Studies/dweb/society/structure/merchant_cult.php to http://www.brown.edu/Departments/Italian_Studies/dweb/society/structure/merchant_cult.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:38, 8 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

@BronHiggs: According to WP:HYPHEN, "A hyphen is normally used when the adverb well precedes a participle used attributively (a well-meaning gesture;" In the text "The Phoenicians were well known amongst contemporaries", the participle "known" is not used attributively, so a hyphen is not needed. It would therefore be clutter. I am not the only editor who regularly removes useless hyphens. Removing punctuation that does not help the reader is not "making unnecessary changes". But one might argue that inserting useless hyphens is "making unnecessary changes". Chris the speller ^yack 05:00, 29 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Chris the speller: OK, I see! I had incorrectly thought that the passage was a reference to the "well-known Phoenicians" in which case the hyphenated usage would've been appropriate. Please feel free to change it back. BronHiggs (talk) 05:18, 29 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

@BronHiggs:  Done. Thanks, I have done so. Happy editing! Chris the speller ^yack 13:39, 29 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

This article has a dozen paintings to illustrates Dutch commerce and merchants, but barely even mentions the merits of Arab and other merchants. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.36.175.217 (talk) 11:22, 24 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

...if you look at Trader (finance) you can see it's supposed to refer to a specific thing in futures markets (some traders are called "locals" or "local traders") and not just to your neighbourhood shopkeeper as described in this article here. 2A00:23C5:FE0C:2100:64EE:A829:1748:DCF (talk) 16:08, 15 December 2020 (UTC)Reply