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)

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