Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marc Drillech
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 keep. The Bushranger One ping only 03:49, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
AfDs for this article:
- Marc_Drillech (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Basic VP of what looks like a holding company. Not particularly notable. Article is a CV/vanity page. Fails WP:BIO McSly (talk) 17:40, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- keep. This article has just been approved by KTC. It has been approved at 16:22 and you propose the article for deletion 1 hour after. Is it against me or agains KTC? Marc Drillech is Vice-President of the first private group for higher education in France, Vice-President of 18 privates universities and has written books. The Wikipedia's academic notability guideline is very clear: "The person has held a highest-level elected or appointed academic post at a major academic institution or major academic society", which is completely the case here. 80.13.85.217 (talk) 17:47, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- He is a basic VP of a holding company managing private schools. WP:ACADEMIC doesn't apply here and even if it did, since he is not the president, it would fail that policy too. He is not notable the same way we don't list every (or any) VP from American Express for example. He is a non notable exec from a mid size company.--McSly (talk) 17:58, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- He is head of 18 privates universities. So he clearly meets academic notability : "The person has held a highest-level elected or appointed academic post at a major academic institution or major academic society"80.13.85.217 (talk) 18:04, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- He's not the head since he is only a VP. There are also not universities, they are private schools. Please be more careful before mis-characterizing your own article.--McSly (talk) 18:41, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- This another discussion, it is more about source quality. Please have a look on the sources, with are secondaries and qualities (an example) (and if you look on Google, you will also see movies with personalities such as Richard Descoings) . But as previously says, this is something else that keep or delete. Moreover, the article just has been approved by
KFCKTC, so it takes time for other contributors to improve it. And again, he is managing 18 private universities in France on the first group for private education. So he clearly meets the academic notability : "The person has held a highest-level elected or appointed academic post at a major academic institution or major academic society". 80.13.85.217 (talk) 18:53, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]- My username is "KTC" not "KFC". ;-) KTC (talk) 19:32, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Corrected. ;-) 80.13.85.217 (talk) 19:35, 7 June 2012 (UTC) [reply]
- This another discussion, it is more about source quality. Please have a look on the sources, with are secondaries and qualities (an example) (and if you look on Google, you will also see movies with personalities such as Richard Descoings) . But as previously says, this is something else that keep or delete. Moreover, the article just has been approved by
- He's not the head since he is only a VP. There are also not universities, they are private schools. Please be more careful before mis-characterizing your own article.--McSly (talk) 18:41, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- He is head of 18 privates universities. So he clearly meets academic notability : "The person has held a highest-level elected or appointed academic post at a major academic institution or major academic society"80.13.85.217 (talk) 18:04, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- He is a basic VP of a holding company managing private schools. WP:ACADEMIC doesn't apply here and even if it did, since he is not the president, it would fail that policy too. He is not notable the same way we don't list every (or any) VP from American Express for example. He is a non notable exec from a mid size company.--McSly (talk) 17:58, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep[!vote retracted, I think Drillech may well be notable but I think that the best thing to do is to delete the article and let it be recreated when there are more and better sources] Easily meets GNG. Lots of sources such as interviews and comments/ reviews on his books seem to be available in French.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 18:19, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- really? a Google search returns first his linkedin profile (which is already a bad sign), then his blog (even worse), then a short article in the business section just mentioning his move from an ad agency to this private group. Also, writing a book is not by itself a sufficient criteria for notability.--McSly (talk) 18:41, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Well obviosuly I don't know what Google shows you but I find this: [1][2][3](discussing his theory of the significance of the Boycott in marketing on page 259)[4][5].·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 18:49, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Not sure CapCampus is a reliable source. The rest are blog postings and none are in-depth coverage of the subject. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 21:02, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Fypeditions is not a blog, neither is the book on marketing. The claim that capcampus is not an RS is irrelevant since reliability of sources is determined in relation to a specific claim, what is relevant is whether it is independent of the subject and whether it constitutes significant coverage. The fact that Drillecg is being interviewed and quote in reliable sources and blogs about marketing is a good indication that some people, independent of him and his company, consider him notable.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 21:09, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Whether or not sources are reliable is absolutely important in determining notability. Being mentioned in blogs does not contribute to notability, except if it is a notable blog that is regarded to be a reliable source. An in-passing mention in a book does not contribute to notability, either. Fypeditions hardly gives any info on Drillech and is not independent either, being the publisher of the book. As far as I see, these sources do not establish notability. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 21:39, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- You are confusing the question of reliability and notability. You are right that a notable blog mentions builds notability - a non notable blog doesn't. Neither of them would be reliable sources for claims about anything other than the opinion of the author.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 22:18, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Fypeditions is not a blog, neither is the book on marketing. The claim that capcampus is not an RS is irrelevant since reliability of sources is determined in relation to a specific claim, what is relevant is whether it is independent of the subject and whether it constitutes significant coverage. The fact that Drillecg is being interviewed and quote in reliable sources and blogs about marketing is a good indication that some people, independent of him and his company, consider him notable.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 21:09, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Not sure CapCampus is a reliable source. The rest are blog postings and none are in-depth coverage of the subject. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 21:02, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Well obviosuly I don't know what Google shows you but I find this: [1][2][3](discussing his theory of the significance of the Boycott in marketing on page 259)[4][5].·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 18:49, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- really? a Google search returns first his linkedin profile (which is already a bad sign), then his blog (even worse), then a short article in the business section just mentioning his move from an ad agency to this private group. Also, writing a book is not by itself a sufficient criteria for notability.--McSly (talk) 18:41, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:22, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:22, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Simply not notable enough. He is one of 2 VPs of IONIS Education Group which seems to have been doing some promotion here recently. The president/chancellor Marc Sellam has an article, probably fair enough. The other VP Fabrice Bardeche is also up as AfD. These are management positions, not academic appointments. Mcewan (talk) 05:54, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Whatever one's view on the subject notability, the assertion that the article is a result of the subject doing self promotion simply have no basis in reality. The articles were created by 80.13.85.217 through WP:AFC. A quick look on User talk:80.13.85.217 will show you that 80.13.85.217 is static IP editor who is simply a very keen editor on French educational / aerospace topics. The over 60 articles submitted covers a wide variety of establishments and people, and it was reviewed by a similarly large number of AFC volunteers. We should be encouraging and helping someone like 80.13.85.217 who contribute lots of new articles and contents to the Wikipedia, in topics where Wikipedia doesn't do so well in due to its systemic bias. Please assume some good faith and not bite the newcomers by automatically assuming IPs are here to do advertisment and self promotion. The same should be extended to the volunteers at AFC who helps in what is a very backlogged area of Wikipedia. -- KTC (talk) 08:51, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- (For the record as the original AFC reviewer) - Keep. I'll agree that it might be borderline and not necessarily so easy to judge given all the potential sources seems to be in French, but it seems there are just enough independent sources combined to satisfy WP:GNG / WP:BASIC. -- KTC (talk) 09:04, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Sources could be better/upgraded, but no attempt has been made to fix the article (nor to allow others to do so). This was created through AfC, discounting an argument of self-promotion. --Nouniquenames (talk) 15:58, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.