Talk:Christian M. Ringle

Untitled
Some information is similar to that on the official website of the described person. The top cited references were inserted directly, maybe that is an issue?Varphi10 (talk) 10:08, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

removed manually edited references in order to prevent bot issues. Varphi10 (talk) 10:08, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Proposed merge with SmartPLS
We don't really need two pages for the minimal amount of information we have on these two topics, so a merge seems logical. Ringle is certainly notable as an academic (his citations, his professorial chair), while the independent notability of the software remains dubious at best. The content on the software can always be split out again at a later date if it grows out of proportion to the rest of the article. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:43, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment As SmartPLS article is in a horrible state, this could be a viable solution. I don´t have (yet) access to books needed for real article rewrite and I don´t think other than SPA editors will edit it anyway. Although I still think SmartPLS is notable enough for its own article, take this comment as weak "support" to this merger proposal. Pavlor (talk) 12:10, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ for now. But if anyone (?) wants to re-instate and improve the software page, please do! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:16, 19 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Request: Please review a revised SmartPLS article and undo the merge of SmartPLS with this page: User:Spintendo suggested on Talk:SmartPLS to post the review request of a revised SmartPLS article presented on Talk:SmartPLS and the request to "undo" the merge with SmartPLS with this page. Pavlor and others, could you please take a look at the revised SmartPLS article on Talk:SmartPLS. Nojokes375 (talk) 17:20, 17 December 2017 (UTC).

Reply
I've reviewed the information from the revised proposed SmartPLS article. The request is declined, as the provided references do not contain the corresponding page numbers. Kindly add page numbers to references #2 through #6, and resubmit the request at your earliest convenience. Regards,  Spintendo  ᔦᔭ   05:59, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Edit Request 9-JAN-2018
Thank you very much for your time, effort, and constructive feedback. As requested, we added the page numbers to references #2 through #6. You find the revised version of the text here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:SmartPLS However, we are not completely sure if we understood you correctly since we did not find specific page references in the reference of other Wikipedia pages (e.g., see the references of the specifc software descriptions that you find in this list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_system_dynamics_software). If we missunderstood your request, please advise. --Nojokes375 (talk) 17:53, 9 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment 1:Just to be clear, your request is that I read 230 pages of text in order to confirm the information from five citations (you asked for 6, but the first reference is located on page 30, which leaves us with 5) Is that correct? And also, if you could specify why providing 5 pages to read for 5 sources instead of 230 pages is not possible. Is there anyone on your end who has read these sources and can offer some insight into where the information may be readily found? I want to work with you, not against you — but 230 pages of dense, technical text seems to be pushing us in opposite directions. Please advise.  Spintendo  ᔦᔭ   13:58, 10 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Response to Comment 1: Thanks for your support on this matter. We definitely do not suggest that you read 230 pages. At our end, we read all these sources. Let's try to sort out this matter. We seem to be fine with reference #1. @Reference #2: Here, we cite a specific page in the book by Lohmöller (i.e., p. 29). On that page, Lohmöller shows the PLS path modeling algorithm (step by step in a pseudo-code form). @Reference #3: The article by Wold explains on pages 2 and 3 (in words) how the PLS algorithm operates. @Reference #4: This is one of the problematic ones since we cite pages 59-148. However, in the Wikipedia text proposal for SmartPLS, we use this book as a reference for the assessment of PLS results using SmartPLS. In the cited book, these pages include Chapters 6 to 10. Each chapter addresses a different set of assessment criteria and how to obtain their results by running the SmartPLS software. Instead of reading all pages, taking a look at the table of contents may allow you to confirm this reference. Otherwise, we are happy to provide serval specific pages from every chapter. @Reference #5: This is a similar case. In the Wikipedia text proposal for SmartPLS, we mention that the software supports advanced PLS methods such as confirmatory tetrad analysis, importance-performance map analysis, segmentation, multigroup. We use pp. 122-188 in the book by Garson (also available here as free pdf: https://www.smartpls.com/documentation/learn-pls-sem-and-smartpls/ebook-on-pls-sem) as a reference. On these pages, the author explains in separate chapters each of the mentioned advanced methods and how to obtain results by running the SmartPLS software. Again, instead of reading all pages, taking a look at the table of contents may allow you to confirm this reference. Otherwise, we are happy to provide serval specific pages from every chapter. @Reference #6: Here, we cite p. 745 of the article by Temme and Kreis. On this page, the authors provide a software comparison table and provide the information that one can run the software on multiple operating systems (since it is Java-based). Please let us know if any additional information would be necessary for the assessment of the proposed SmartPLS text for Wikipedia. Nojokes375 (talk) 20:45, 12 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment 2:The example you gave is a list page. There are different reference requirements for different pages. Specifically, for someone wishing to check the reference for something located on a list page, they need only click on the individual item in the list and check the references on the page of the individual item, per WP:SOURCELIST. The SmartPLS page does not appear to be a list page. To answer your question, we need to compare apples to apples.  Spintendo  ᔦᔭ   14:11, 10 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Response to Comment 2: Sorry, this is definitely a misunderstanding. We used the list page to quickly find some example of software description that we could use as an orientation in order to improve our citations. Nojokes375 (talk) 20:45, 12 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment 3:


 * Response to Comment 3: This sounds like a very good suggestion. However, since the redirection was a result of the discussion after the AFD decision to keep the SmartPLS page, we did not want to "interfere" since we have a conflict of interest. It is possible to access what remained of the SmartPLS page via this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:SmartPLS Also, it may be possible to undo the merge of pages here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=SmartPLS&action=history Besides the conflict of interest, we have no experience with WP:RM and how to properly use it (on the SmartPLS page?). We really fear to do something wrong. Your support in undoing the redirection would be highly appreciated. Nojokes375 (talk) 20:45, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

As you were the editor who made this move, it makes sense to seek your opinion on whether the article has achieved the necessary references to warrant being placed back under the SmartPLS name again, in accordance with the COI editor's current wishes. If you could check at your earliest convenience we would all be much obliged to you. -- Spintendo  ᔦᔭ   15:37, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
 * , thanks for trying to deal with this. I'm sorry, but I'm not going to give an opinion on it beyond what I wrote higher up this page: "... if anyone (?) wants to re-instate and improve the software page, please do!" (NB: I meant, of course, any good-faith volunteer editor). I am sufficiently fed up with the antics of that I don't trust my own ability to remain impartial (Nojokes, would you please read WP:PAYTALK, and try to understand that this is not a playground where endless horseplay is welcome, and that Wikipedia does not tolerate promotion of any kind? Thanks!). Pavlor identified some suitable independent sources (three, I think), and two of those are used for the proposed new version of the page. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:47, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Proposed article has three main problems:
 * 1) I don´t have access to some/most of the references for verification.
 * 2) Written in too technical language.
 * 3) Written and pushed by COI editor.
 * In addition to the sources posted during the AfD, there is new solid looking reference (number 4; Ramayah, T. ...; textbook about SmartPLS) - again, I don´t have access to this one to verify independence on the article subject, but I assume it is good RS (at least authors don´t state connection to SmartPLS in the preface). I´m willing to restore the proposed article on condition Nojokes375 will not edit it directly and only post requests on the talkpage. Pavlor (talk) 09:16, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks! During the AFD process, we learned a lot and looked in more detail into Wikipedia's "how to do things". Accordingly and with regards to the learnings from the AFD discussion, we made a proposal of a new text. We posted it with an edit request on the talkpage (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:SmartPLS). We will not edit that page directly and only post requests on the talkpage. Nojokes375 (talk) 16:47, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Noted, Thanks. Now my only question is (aimed at experienced editors), if I can simply copy article text from the talkpage and remove redirect, or there is other prefered way because of needed attribution of content? Pavlor (talk) 19:11, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I was bold and restored the article. However, if anyone finds its current form unsuitable for Wikipedia, I don´t mind returning the redirect. If you need any further changes, post them on the article talkpage. Pavlor (talk) 06:57, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Edit Request 9-SEPT-2018
This page may benefit from an update. Positions: -- Member of the Board and Excecutive Director of International Affairs of Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH) - Source: https://www.tuhh.de/alt/tuhh/uni/structure.html -- Member of the Board of the European Consortium of Innovative Universities (ECIU) - Source: https://www.eciu.org/contact -- Professor of Management and the Director of the Institute of Human Resource Management and Organizations (HRMO) in der Department of Management Sciences and Technology at the Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Germany - Source: https://www.tuhh.de/hrmo/team/prof-dr-c-m-ringle.html -- Adjunct Professor of the Waikato Management School, New Zealand - Source: https://www.tuhh.de/hrmo/team/prof-dr-c-m-ringle.html

Publications: https://www.tuhh.de/hrmo/team/prof-dr-c-m-ringle.html http://www.researcherid.com/ProfileView.action?returnCode=ROUTER.Unauthorized&Init=Yes&SrcApp=CR&queryString=KG0UuZjN5WmK0Qo3vgJDnE0Tup%252FVThBHrW5W8SkLmLo%253D

Number of Citations: https://scholar.google.de/citations?user=y5F176wAAAAJ http://www.researcherid.com/ProfileView.action?returnCode=ROUTER.Unauthorized&Init=Yes&SrcApp=CR&queryString=KG0UuZjN5WmK0Qo3vgJDnE0Tup%252FVThBHrW5W8SkLmLo%253D Nojokes375 (talk) 13:31, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Reply 09-SEP-2018

 * WP:NOTCV  spintendo   14:45, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Reply 10-SEP-2018
No worries, it does not really matter if the content currently is not up to date (and is wrong in one point). As a member of the Hamburg University of Technology, who uses this account, I am not allowed to improve the content directly. We will check with our press department if they can find out the possibilities to get an institutional account to use their expert knowledge about the professors at TUHH to make adequate changes and improvements. In any case, thanks for your swift reply. Nojokes375 (talk) 08:17, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Edit war
Maybe it is time to stop edit-warring and start discussing the article content. As of me, I don't like when someone is edit-warring over a major change without any discussion here on the article talk page (that is why I reverted added content). As of that disputed revision, refbombing is never a good sign, but I hope there is some explanation, how that change improves this article. Pavlor (talk) 13:03, 29 April 2022 (UTC)