Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marcel Saucet


 * 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 Delete. czar ⨹   06:42, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Marcel Saucet

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I have an hard time to find a noticeable amount of reliable secondary and not-affiliated sources about this person. The references provided in the article are all primary sources. The only exception is a reference that should prove the fact this person is an associate professor and a researcher at the University of San Diego, but the linked page is empty: see here. I've conducted a search about this person and I had really an hard time to find secondary sources, because the amount of primary self-published material is overwhelming. This is one of the few articles about him that doesn't appear in a website affiliated to him: but the publisher doesn't seem notable. I've found a lot of videos about this person and they have been published both in multiple Youtube channels which are linked to him or his companies    and to apparently unaffiliated channels, like this one:. Overall, the fact that it is so difficult for me to find notable secondary sources and the fact that the first version of the article was full of unsourced claims like "He is considered the world expert of Street Marketing", motivate me to nominate the article for deletion, so that other editors can contribute to establish whether the subject fails WP:GNG and WP:BIO or not. ► LowLevel (talk) 01:47, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment: I'll also add that I didn't find any news about this person in news aggregators like Google News and Yahoo! News, in their international version or the France versions. ► LowLevel (talk) 01:56, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 04:03, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 04:03, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 04:04, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 04:04, 9 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete Does not meet WP:ACADEMIC criteria, and note that nearly all of the text of the article has been provided by a single SPA. Note that there is also an article Street marketing which includes some of the references from this article (the poorly formatted ones). That article probably needs a great deal of cleanup. LaMona (talk) 16:09, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I should add that this article could be re-directed to the Street marketing article for now, since it names him. LaMona (talk) 16:11, 14 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 03:34, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 07:15, 23 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete I don't see the significant independent coverage required to show he meets the GNG.131.118.229.17 (talk) 20:46, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. No evidence of academic notability, and most of the article comes across more as a routine curriculum vitae than as a description of significant accomplishments. The sources are mostly things by him rather than about him, mixed with some deadlinks; I don't see the nontrivial coverage by independent reliable sources required for WP:GNG. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:24, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
 * PS I blocked the article creator,, for being an obvious sockpuppet of indefinitely-blocked user . So I think there's also a strong case for a WP:CSD speedy deletion. The original block of Streetmarketing by was arguably a bit hasty, but that doesn't mitigate sockpuppetting out-of-process rather than requesting an unblock. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:09, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Hello David Eppstein, thanks for the update. If the other contributors to the discussion will agree, I would prefer to reach a consensus about the notability of this person. In case of a "Delete" decision for lack of notability, it would become an useful (see WP:G4) precedent in the event that the article will be recreated in the near future by other editors. ► LowLevel (talk) 00:50, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Fine with me. It looks like we're pretty close to a consensus already, anyway. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:10, 30 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. Fails WP:ACADEMIC, as his published works are not widely cited by other scholars. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  03:05, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
 * 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.