Draft talk:Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics

This draft is a translation from German to English

Dear reviewers,

This draft is my translation from German to English. The original Wikipedia page is here: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schweizerische_Gesellschaft_f%C3%BCr_Volkswirtschaft_und_Statistik

Once the draft in English is approved, I will make an interlanguage link between these two pages.

Thank you in advance for your perusal.

Kind regards,

KMerrigold

KMerrigold (talk) 09:21, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Comments from author re Draft

[The following was posted on my Talk page so I have moved it here where it is more appropriate and visible--Cabrils]:

Thank you for your feedback and suggestion to communicate on your user talk page. I am reaching out to discuss my draft page, Draft:Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics. Following your request to specify which criteria I believe the page meets, I will provide a detailed explanation here. Your recommendations for improving the draft, if needed, would be greatly appreciated.

The Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics was established in 1864. The society is responsible for the Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics, which is also about to celebrate its 160th anniversary. The majority of the external secondary and reliable sources I have found predominantly reference the journal and its open-access publications on the SpringerOpen platform. However, the society itself, which is the driving force behind the journal and appoints its editorial team, may not be as prominently featured in the media.

Therefore, I would like to argue that the page meets the WP criteria #3 due to the following reasons:

• It provides information about an association that unites all Swiss universities with Faculties of Economics.
• It highlights the society's role in publishing the renowned Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics.
• The journal's chief editor is Professor Marius Brülhart.

I would value your feedback on whether this meets the criteria for organizational notability. Thank you for your time and assistance. Best regards, KMerrigold(talk) 16:37, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

My reply: @KMerrigold Thanks for your reply, which I believe is sincere. I may be missing something, however I am not seeing how your reply addresses specifically the criteria at WP:NORG, in particular, how does the draft establish the notability of the organisation, including by evidencing support for that notablilty? Cabrils (talk) 04:19, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Cabrils,

Thank you for your response.

I would greatly appreciate it if you could review the updated draft again. I have added a new section titled "Members" and included notable individuals from various time periods.

Please let me know if there are any additional steps I need to take to ensure the page can be published.

Best regards,

KMerrigold KMerrigold (talk) 15:22, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

You have not addressed any of the issues I address in my original comment. It is clear that you do not understand how Wikipedia works so I encourage you to peruse (not just scan) my comments, including the links included therein. Cabrils (talk) 00:47, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

• Re: members. Please see WP:NOTINHERITED. Listing somebody as a member is only admissible if there are independent reliable sources discussing the importance of a person for the society. See also WP:NOTADIRECTORY.--Randykitty (talk) 17:29, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

  Dear @Randykitty,

  I have included internal links for the majority of the persons mentioned. On their respective Wikipedia pages, we can find information confirming their membership or presidency within the society. I am inquiring if this approach is feasible in principle. The recommendation is to avoid relying on the society's archives for its extensive 160-year history and instead use secondary reliable sources, which may not be as comprehensive. This has posed a challenge for me, as initially, the plan was to translate from the German Wikipedia page, which is relatively straightforward. However, my English translation has evolved into a rich research piece with numerous cross-references across Wikipedia. Could you please clarify why the approach differs for the same society across different Wikipedias?

  Thank you for your guidance.

  Best regards,

  KMerrigold KMerrigold (talk) 18:15, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

• Different Wikipedias do things differently, they are independent from each other. Here, sourcing rules are much stricter than on many others. Linking to WP articles is absolutely insufficient, WP cannot be used as a source. Hope this explains. --Randykitty (talk) 18:20, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

  Dear @Randykitty,

  Please kindly look at the section " Members" right now. I have added the reference to the list of members.

  Best,

  KMerrigold KMerrigold (talk) 18:24, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

@Randykitty Agree, this is helpful feedback. Cabrils (talk) 00:48, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

WP:THREE best sources that establish notability of the subject

The WP:THREE best sources that establish notability of the subject:

1) Emil Walter-Busch; Tilman Slembeck: "Economics", in: Historical Dictionary of Switzerland (HLS), version from November 6, 2013. Online: https://hls-dhs-dss.ch/de/articles/008263/2013-11-06/

2) Werner Stahel; Tobias Schoch; Kaspar Staub: "Statistics", in: Historical Dictionary of Switzerland (HLS) , version from 10.01.2013. Online: https://hls-dhs-dss.ch/de/articles/013798/2013-01-10/

3) History of social security | Actors | Science Experts | Kinkelin, Hermann. Online: https://www.geschichtedersozialensicherheit.ch/akteure/wissenschaft-expertinnen-und-experten/kinkelin-hermann

KMerrigold (talk) 07:36, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for this. I might be missing something, but I'm not seeing how these articles establish notability as defined at WP:NCORP:

"A company, corporation, organization, group, product, or service is presumed notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject."?

Firstly, sources (1) and (2) are from the same source (https://hls-dhs-dss.ch) and so only count as a single source.

Secondly, the extremely brief mention of the subject in these sources, and also in source (3), would seem to be examples of trivial coverage (WP:ORGTRIV), that is "simple listings or compilations"..."standard notices, brief announcements, and routine coverage"..."brief or passing mentions" etc.

Thirdly, source (3) is a brief biography about Hermann Kinkelin, not the subject itself, which is only briefly mentioned.

It may still be that the Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES) (Schweizerische Gesellschaft für Volkswirtschaft und Statistik (SGVS)) may meet the requirements, but I'm not seeing how these 3 sources does that. Again, I would encourage you to peruse the entirety of WP:ORG. And of course welcome your thoughts as you might be able to explain how you see these sources meeting the criteria. Cabrils (talk) 23:53, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Dear @Cabrils,

Thank you for your thoughtful feedback regarding the notability of the Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES). I appreciate your detailed review and your commitment to ensuring the standards of Wikipedia's notability guidelines are met. Here are some clarifications and additional sources that might address your concerns.

While the initial sources you reviewed may appear limited, there are additional sources that provide broader significant coverage of the SSES:

   Best Source #1. The SSES is recognized as an important place for UniDistance’s “anchoring in the Swiss academic community”: https://unidistance.ch/en/economics/news/unidistance-suisse-in-the-board-of-the-swiss-society-for-economics-and-statistics-sses

   Best Source #2. Verein für Socialpolitik: The SSES holds an ex officio position on the board of this important society of economists in the German-speaking area: https://www.socialpolitik.de/de/executive-council

    Best Source #3. Economic Journalism Awards: The SSES is the source of awards for leading economic journalists in Switzerland, reflecting its role in the field of economics: https://www.nzz.ch/wirtschaft/nzz-wirtschaftsredaktor-hansueli-schoechli-erhaelt-den-economic-journalism-award-2022-ld.1690252 and https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/inside-swi/swi-swissinfo-ch-podcast-wins-economic-journalism-award/79950034

Additional source: The Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics, published by SSES, is highlighted in this article as one of the oldest economic journals in the world (While its notability may not immediately suggest inherited notability of the society, it is undeniable that the journal's existence is inextricably linked to the society that brought it into being and continues to play a key role in the development and progress of the journal): https://www.blick.ch/schweiz/14-prozent-weniger-touristen-franken-hammer-trifft-ferienorte-id4711025.html

All these references illustrate the SSES's involvement in significant economic discussions and academic activities, thus supporting its notability under WP:NCORP. I hope this addresses your concerns and demonstrates the SSES's relevance as per Wikipedia's guidelines.

P.S. I understand that I have provided more than three sources to ensure a comprehensive understanding of the society. This is to provide you with diverse perspectives and to reflect accuracy in neutral judgement about the society's notability.

Thank you again for your input.

Best regards,

KMerrigold KMerrigold (talk) 04:23, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for this. Please see my comments below. Cabrils (talk) 02:36, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (deletion of key information)

Dear @SafariScribe

I hope this message finds you well.

I kindly request that you reconsider reinstating the content related to the history and notable members that was recently removed. I invested considerable time gathering this information from various sources to support a neutral information on the impact of the society in fields such as statistics and actuarial mathematics. This content also helps to clarify the current structure of the Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics and the Swiss Statistical Society, including the historical reasons for their separation and the evolution of the SSES' focus from statistics to economics.

Unfortunately, the material was removed before @Cabrils had the opportunity to review it, despite having addressed previous concerns raised by him. Given the effort put into providing reliable, verifiable sources to support each point, I believe it is important to allow a full review and discussion of this content before any final decisions are made.

Additionally, it would be beneficial to revisit previous correspondence with your colleagues (please see above), referencing the three best sources, and to highlight the continuity of the society's history in relation to influential organizations such as the Royal Statistical Society, the American Statistical Association, and the Statistical Society of Paris.

Let us work together constructively to enhance the draft. Initially, @Cabrils expressed concerns about the lack of sources, which I addressed. However, the recent deletion has left the draft incomplete and lacking in critical detail. I am committed to improving it and hope we can collaborate effectively to ensure its quality.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Best regards,

KMerrigold KMerrigold (talk) 19:01, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

@KMerrigold,

The content you're requesting I reinstate isn't valuable, they are promotional researches with some unsourced and off topic (see WP:BURDEN). For such organisation, it should be able to meet WP:ORG but I don't seem to find one except the publication of a notable journal. Also, inputting contents like notable members without proper secondary sources doesn't make any progress. Oh, here's a walk-in for progress: are there secondary sources? i.e the sources that aren't associated to the society such as magazines, newspapers, journals, e.t.c. I can only agree with the dictionary citation titled Statistik, but the rest doesn't help matter. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 19:18, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Dear @SafariScribe,

Could you please let me know which of the following sources you find most valuable? These sources were included in various parts of the text. I may have overlooked something, but I’m not seeing how these articles contradict the notability criteria outlined at WP:NCORP or fail to meet reliability standards.

The SSES is mentioned:

·     On Springer-Nature’s journal page: https://sjes.springeropen.com/

·     On the homepage of the SAGW, the Swiss Academy of Human and Social Sciences: https://www.sagw.ch/sagw/netzwerk/fachgesellschaften

·     Among affiliated associations of the scientific event organisers “La Suisse n’existe pas”: https://www.lasuissenexistepas.ch/mitgliedsgesellschaften.html

·     As a “national institution” here: https://socio.ch/index3.htm

·     As an important place for UniDistance’s “anchoring in the Swiss academic community”: https://unidistance.ch/en/economics/news/unidistance-suisse-in-the-board-of-the-swiss-society-for-economics-and-statistics-sses

·     Newspaper article: https://www.blick.ch/schweiz/14-prozent-weniger-touristen-franken-hammer-trifft-ferienorte-id4711025.html («Das international beachtete Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics wird durch die Schweizerische Gesellschaft für Volkswirtschaft und Statistik herausgegeben, der Gesellschaft der schweizerischen Wirtschaftswissenschaftler. Mit 152 Erscheinungsjahren gehört es weltweit zu den ältesten Zeitschriften der Nationalökonomie.»)

·     As an “ex officio” member of the board of the “Verein für Socialpolitik”: https://www.socialpolitik.de/de/executive-council

·     As the source of a prize given to Switzerland’s leading economic journalist: https://www.nzz.ch/wirtschaft/nzz-wirtschaftsredaktor-hansueli-schoechli-erhaelt-den-economic-journalism-award-2022-ld.1690252

·     As the source of a prize given to another prominent economic journalist: https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/inside-swi/swi-swissinfo-ch-podcast-wins-economic-journalism-award/79950034 KMerrigold (talk) 19:28, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

@KMerrigold, Again, thank you for your thoughts and contributions. The fundamental issue however is that the draft has to meet certain criteria, whcih I have explained to you in detail in my numerous comments. You really need to properly read and understand how notability works, and the need for reliable sources.

Wikipedia is not a place to host a history of the Society: please see WP:WWIN. It is a place to include information on notable subjects insofar as the information can be evidenced by verifiable reliable sources. The draft must adhere to WP:GNG and WP:NORG.

Regarding your WP:THREE, I have to agree with SafariScribe. Again, please [peruse] WP:RS. Your sources do NOT meet the guidelines.

And again still: I am in no doubt the the Society is reputable and professional, this issue is whether it meets the notability criteria. We need to see reliable sources (eg multiple, substantial articles in reputable journals or newspapers discussing the Society and identifying it as a notable institution). I hope this helps and encourage you to persevere. Cabrils (talk) 02:48, 1 August 2024 (UTC)