André Marchand (academic)

André Marchand (academic) (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)

Appears to fail WP:PROF. I'm having trouble finding secondary sources about this guy. -- Pingumeister^(talk) 16:26, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Agree. Probable paid editor too. — fortunavelut luna 16:32, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• No, this page should not be deleted because this acaedmic person actually exist. Here are some proofs:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] --Wiwigald32 (talk) 16:45, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Have a quick glance at WP:E=N, "only" an essay, but relevant nonetheless. And, compounding the issue, the sources provided are very much in the main either primary sources, self-published sources, or providing slender coverage of only passing mentions; thus the subject has not received the required depth or persistence of coverage in independent, third-party reliable sources required to pass the most basic WP:ANYBIO, let alone PROF. Cheers, — fortunavelut luna 17:15, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:19, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:19, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:19, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If these 15 sources with news, articles, and photos are still not enough to prove the existence of André Marchand, here are even more sources for the most important categories for academics:

@Wiwigald32: Just FYI, I have compressed the big article-style notes you provided above- they're still there and can be looked at- but per this, they should probably be added to the article itself. That, after all, is where they belong! :) — fortunavelut luna 18:03, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi: Thanks Fortuna. Have you read these selections of publications about André Marchand? What else do you need to accept the English version of this german researcher?--Wiwigald32 (talk) 18:14, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi: This professor really exist! I know him personally. How can you still have doubts despite the many sources about him? Do you want to offend him? You could even call him or his office tomorrow (it is evening in Germany now), see: https://www.wiso.uni-koeln.de/forschung/find-an-expert/experts/prof-dr-andre-marchand/

• No one doubts you that he exists, has published, or can answer the phone. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:27, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep @Shawn in Montreal: Hi Shawn, what do you still need to know about him to make a decision? He has published in the globally highest ranked journal of his discipline (the Journal of Marketing, see http://journals.ama.org/doi/abs/10.1509/jm.10.0537?code=amma-site). Most scholars in this field do not reach Andre’s current level of achievement in this regard in their entire careers. His remaining publications are in journals that are also highly regarded. And here is another source from Springer about his research: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-45596-9_58 and another one (see page 22) https://www.epi.media/download.f59095f4c61f67c63a42a700ecf9332e_1/ --Wiwigald32 (talk) 18:48, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• I have added the respective URLs for the selected publications to the article itself. --Wiwigald32 (talk) 19:05, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• A final note from me for today: The University of Cologne is the largest university in Germany and clearly one of the most prestigous German universities. In addition, the Journal of Marketing (in which Professor Marchand has published) is the international number one scientific journal in the marketing discipline. See for example: https://www.ama.org/academics/Pages/AMA-Journal-Impact-Factor-Rise.aspx and http://www.scimagojr.com/journalrank.php?category=1406&year=2015. --Wiwigald32 (talk) 20:35, 31 August 2017 (UTC)— Wiwigald32 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
• Delete. Citation record [32] is inadequate to pass WP:Prof. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:32, 31 August 2017 (UTC).[reply]
• Delete. Citation counts too low to pass WP:PROF#C1, no other notability evident. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:44, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• According to [33] "Criterion 1 can also be satisfied if the person has pioneered or developed a significant new concept, technique or idea, made a significant discovery or solved a major problem in their academic discipline." With the publication in Journal of Marketing, which is the highest ranked journal in the Marketing discipline, Prof. Marchand has developed and evaluated a ground-breaking new concept of a automated recommendation system for groups. Websites such as amazon.com will use this system probably in the future and the numbers of citation will strongly increase. One should also keep in mind that the citation count alone is not an appropriate measure for the impact a scientific breakthrough has. Usually, less innovative articles such as literature reviews get much more citations than a significant new concept. Moreover, he is a professor at the University of Cologne, which is ranked number 41 by a recent report: http://www.scmlist.com/home/university-rankings/analytical-report/ — unsigned, but from User:Wiwigald32

• For the specific criterion you just described, "in this case it is necessary to explicitly demonstrate, by a substantial number of references to academic publications of researchers other than the person in question, that this contribution is indeed widely considered to be significant and is widely attributed to the person in question." If you can indeed do that, please modify the article such that it fulfills this requirement. -- Pingumeister^(talk) 09:05, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]