Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SmartPLS


 * 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 keep. After sources were provided, consensus changed in favor of keeping based on the sources provided.  So Why  09:18, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

SmartPLS

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Doubtful notability. The first two sources cited are to the vendor's own web site, the next two are co-authored by Ringle, a creator of the product. The final two I don't have access to. I've found nothing better. Maproom (talk) 14:48, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:14, 13 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete, not notable. The Geisser article from 1974 is available through JSTOR; predictably, it doesn't mention this software, and I think it's pretty safe to assume that the other ref from the same year will not mention it either. The four sources written or co-written by the author of the software can be discounted, which leaves nothing … except that this does appear to be independent in-depth coverage of a kind. Alone, it isn't enough. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:05, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: I forgot to mention that the page is an unambiguous attempt at promotion – and Wikipedia does not tolerate promotion. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:53, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Do not delete the SmartPLS page
 * Note: This comments stems from the co-creator of the SmartPLS page, --Nojokes375 (talk) 17:42, 13 June 2017 (UTC) — Nojokes375 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * SmartPLS is one the leading software product to conduct PLS path modeling analyses. The product is semi-commercial: SmartPLS 2 is a freeware while SmartPLS is commercial. The software is mostly used in academia and researchers cited the use of the software more than 6,000 times in their articles so far (source: Google Scholar). The page contains general information about the webpage similar to other product pages such as Coca Cola, WarpPLS or SPSS. More specifically, the page explains what the SmartPLS software is and can do; future extensions of the page will include information about the history and additional useful information to describe this important product that supports thousands of researchers. Also, additional explanations and reference to research articles that describe the specific methods and algorithms implemented in the software will be provided.
 * If there is an issue with the citations, this can easily be corrected. The first citations refer to the two different software versions (i.e., the freeware SmartPLS 2 and the commercial product SmartPLS 3) as they are cited in research publications. Citations three and four refer to books that explain the PLS path modeling (or PLS structural equation modeling) method in general. The last two citations are research articles that established the Blindfolding method that has been implemented in SmartPLS.'''
 * Deletion of the webpage due to some concerns regarding the citations seems harsh and not in line with the Wikipedia deletion policy. If the SmartPLS page violates any Wikipedia regulations from a content point of this can easily be adjusted. But please do not delete the entire page of a software tool that is broadly used by researchers.--Nojokes375 (talk) 13:25, 14 June 2017 (UTC), co-reator of the SmartPLS page.
 * The software is a very often used software by research all over the world. Therefore, it seems good to have some information about SmartPLS in Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.193.165.68 (talk) 13:22, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:51, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Changes with regards to the previous comments:  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete: Cannot find significant coverage in reliable sources. -- Darth Mike (talk) 18:24, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
 * SmartPLS has significant coverage in reliable sources. The following references have been added to the wikipedia page that reference these sources, e.g.:
 * Mühlhaus, Daniel, (2014). Strukturgleichungsmodellierung : eine anwendungsorientierte Einführung in die Kausalanalyse mit Hilfe von AMOS, SmartPLS und SPSS. Springer Gabler. ISBN 9783642350115. OCLC 879744378.
 * Temme, D., Kreis, H., & Hildebrandt, L. (2010). A comparison of current PLS path modeling software: Features, ease-of-use, and performance. In Handbook of partial least squares (pp. 737-756). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
 * Wong, K. K. K. (2013). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) techniques using SmartPLS. Marketing Bulletin, 24(1), 1-32.
 * Garson, G. David (2014-02-08). Partial Least Squares Regression and Structural Equation Models: 2016 Edition (in Englisch) (2016 ed.). Statistical Associates Publishers.
 * Besides the publications that are co-authored by one of the developers, but with additional highly regarded researchers from the field:
 * Hair, Joseph F.; Hult, G. Tomas M.; Ringle, Christian M.; Sarstedt, Marko (2017). A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) (2 ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
 * Hair, Joseph F.; Sarstedt, Marko; Ringle, Christian M.; Gudergan, Siegfried P. (2018). Advanced Issues in Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
 * Also some references to the methodological underpinnings of the software have been added.Nojokes375 (talk) 06:27, 14 June 2017 (UTC); co-creator of the SmartPLS page
 * Comment 1) Do not continue to add bolded !votes: you only may only apply one. 2) who's "we"? Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:31, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment But if a software supports/implements/provides a certain algorithm or method, it may be useful, informative and reasonable to cite the research article that explain the algorithm or method. If such useful information and proper way of citation are unwanted in Wikipedia, such citations could be easily removed. The several remaining articles explain and refer to SmartPLS. A link to the Google Scholar results (https://scholar.google.com/scholar?start=0&q=smartpls) that show thousands of research articles discussing and using SmartPLS in their empirical research will be added, as on the WarpPLS page. Nojokes375 (talk) 13:25, 14 June 2017 (UTC), co-creator of the SmartPLS page.
 * Comment The references you've added above appear to be more for Partial Least Squares Path Modeling, which was deleted for copyright reasons. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:35, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment Even though the first page has been deleted, a corrected and improved version of the partial least squares path modeling page exists for a long time on Wikipeda. --Nojokes375 (talk) 13:26, 14 June 2017 (UTC), co-creator of the SmartPLS page.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ad Orientem (talk) 03:09, 21 June 2017 (UTC) Do not delete
 * SmartPLS is the standard software for running PLS-PM analyses, a method that has gained vast dissemination in the social sciences (see: Hair, Joseph F.; Hult, G. Tomas M.; Ringle, Christian M.; Sarstedt, Marko (2017). A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) (2 ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.). Prior versions of the site that seem to have promoted the software have been revised. I don't ssee much difference between this site and other sites on statistical softwares like SPSS and SAS (software). Similar issues have been discussed for Stata (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stata) but the site has not been considered for deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.44.200.70 (talk) 06:42, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, I can provide references to multipage reviews of several versions of Stata in published magazines (eg. PC Mag), could you say the same about SmartPLS? Pavlor (talk) 06:57, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

"Do NOT delete" this page - SmartPLS is also the software that is the backbone for a just published book on advances in PLS-SEM modelling (Hair, J., Ringle, C., Sarstedt, M. & Gudergan, S. 2017, Advanced Issues in Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM), SAGE.) such that a specially dedicated, objective site defining key elements is of benefit to the PLS-SEM community. Specifically, because there is a key emphasis on methodological advances on this site, keeping it would be rather beneficial. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.62.162.186 (talk) 09:55, 29 June 2017 (UTC) Do not delete: This is a very helpful wikipedia entry providing you with relevant information on PLS and on one of the key tools to use as an empirical researcher applying PLS-SEM. In light of deciding upon which software to apply, the information provided here is of high use and has high academic quality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nfg77 (talk • contribs) 13:51, 29 June 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Final relist: Please discuss which specific sources address the topic in depth, not mere mentions
 * Comment I have this AfD page on my watchlist for some time and I must say I never saw so many obvious SPA editors in single discussion, until now. I see they have no idea, how AfD works and how futile their desperate attempts are. However, I´m willing to review sources and base my "vote" on their content. Please, could some of the "Do not delete" editors highlight two best sources about subject of the article (eg. reviews of SmartPLS software)? Pavlor (talk) 14:55, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar  19:00, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete 100% corporate spam !Light2021 (talk) 19:19, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Still not delete!!! Would more than 6,000 citations in Google Scholar support the case? https://scholar.google.de/scholar?q=smartpls Nojokes375 (talk) 21:57, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
 * No. Number of mentions is irrelevant. In depth coverage in reliable sources is what you need to prove notability of SmartPLS for inclusion in Wikipedia. Eg. article (not only short news) about SmartPLS in published/online magazine (not blog or similar self-published media) written by someone not affiliated to SmartPLS would be such source. Pavlor (talk) 05:10, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Even tough the high number of peer reviewd (top-level) journal articles that use SmartPLS substantiates the relevance of the software in academia, it's certainly the content of these article. Alternatively, to find hundred of article, use a full text search in JSTOR, EBSCO, or ABI/INFORM. But you find examples of what your are asking for here
 * - Garson, G. David (2014). Partial Least Squares Regression and Structural Equation Models: 2016 Edition (in Englisch) (2016 ed.). Statistical Associates Publishers.
 * - Weiber, Rolf; Mühlhaus, Daniel (2014). Strukturgleichungsmodellierung : eine anwendungsorientierte Einführung in die Kausalanalyse mit Hilfe von AMOS, SmartPLS und SPSS. Springer Gabler. ISBN 9783642350115. OCLC 879744378.
 * - Temme, D., Kreis, H., & Hildebrandt, L. (2010). A comparison of current PLS path modeling software: Features, ease-of-use, and performance. In Handbook of partial least squares (pp. 737-756). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
 * - Wong, K. K. K. (2013). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) techniques using SmartPLS. Marketing Bulletin, 24(1), 1-32.. Nojokes375 (talk) 13:33, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Even though not included in the Wikipedia pages: You find plenty on YouTube tutorials explaining in-depth the statistical methods and how you can apply them by using SmartPLS (e.g., the vidoes by James Gaskin: https://www.youtube.com/user/Gaskination/videos)
 * Even though not included in the Wikipedia pages: You find plenty on YouTube tutorials explaining in-depth the statistical methods and how you can apply them by using SmartPLS (e.g., the vidoes by James Gaskin: https://www.youtube.com/user/Gaskination/videos)


 * Some pointers to text passage where you feel the text is "inobjective" would also be helpful. Since this is not promotional page but an objective source of information that is particular relevant to academic users of the PLS method and the software, changes where doubts in the objectivity of the text exist could be easily made by the Wikipeda community (and would be more constructive than simply posting "spam").Nojokes375 (talk) 13:42, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Youtube tutorials? You must be joking... My brief review of the four sources you provided:
 * Garson, G. David (2014)
 * (now) free textbook (ebook) by professor of North Carolina State University; published by him; author seems to be independent on smartpls company (no obvious association).
 * However, although this ebook is mostly devoted to smartpls, its form of publication makes this somewhat weak source.


 * Weiber, Rolf; Mühlhaus, Daniel (2014)
 * Ebook by University of Trier professors; published by Springer Gabler (solid German publisher); authors seem to be independent on smartpls company.
 * Solid coverage of SmartPLS. Although Christian M. Ringle (author of SmartPLS) was contacted for advice on this book, I think it is still subject independent source and good one.


 * Temme, D., Kreis, H., & Hildebrandt, L. (2010)
 * 20 pages article by professors of German Universities; published by Springer (solid German publisher); authors seem to be independent on smartpls company.
 * I don´t see the article (behind pay-wall), but I hope it contains at least one page about SmartPLS (assume good faith...). Probably good RS.


 * Wong, K. K. K. (2013)
 * Article in online journal (of New Zealand), which claims peer reviewed admission (20 % acceptance rate), I can´t verify this; author is Assistant professor on Ted Rogers School of Management (Ryerson University, Canada), seems to be independent on smartpls company.
 * If this is really OK journal, it may be good source. Otherwise not.


 * Conclusion: At least two of these are reliable sources for Wikipedia, one (Weiber, Rolf; Mühlhaus, Daniel (2014)) offers really broad coverage of SmartPLS. I think this is enough to prove notability of SmartPLS for inclusion in Wikipedia. Pavlor (talk) 15:48, 30 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep Enough reliable sources to estabilish notability. could you, please, check my review of four sources above? I think at least two of them may be good enough. Pavlor (talk) 16:00, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
 * If these are your sources, and only one article is enough to become Encyclopedic notable content, then you should read more about notability guidelines. Wikipedia will be filled with News paper articles. this is not a News Paper or journal. Light2021 (talk) 17:06, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Eh, several pages written by university professors and published by respected publishing house certainly aren´t comparable to "churnalism" we so dislike. Pavlor (talk) 17:59, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Again you prove the point and even by your own analysis, a software published in journal? how that is relevant for Wikipedia? this is not journal, let them be there at their place, why we need a Wikipedia page for that?Light2021 (talk) 18:44, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, this kind of journal is considered strong source for Wikipedia... Pavlor (talk) 18:53, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
 * you have asked me to comment, so I will. The first three sources you mention above are books which I don't have access to. But your citations give URLs which are to advertisements for those books, which may confuse readers as to what you are actually citing. The "Wong" source is to a document titled "Marketing Bulletin", which is most unlikely to be independent. None of those four sources is actually cited in support of any statement; references which are not there to support a statement in the article probably ought to be deleted. Maproom (talk) 22:55, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Commment: Not having access is not a good argument; also questioning that Marketing Bulletin is an independent journal. Those four sources substantiate that SmartPLS is a globally accepted standard software. And again, there are very many articles in prestigious journals (see this long list on Google Scholat, https://www.google.de/search?tbm=bks&hl=de&q=smartpls, or conduct a full text search for "SmartPLS" in JSTOR, EBSCO, or ABI/INFORM), many hardcover books the company is not affiliated with (see https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=SmartPLS), and also some dedicated software reviews from neutral scientists that compare SmartPLS with other software solutions (take this one as an example: oder http://sfb649.wiwi.hu-berlin.de/papers/pdf/SFB649DP2006-084.pdf). Nojokes375 (talk) 06:21, 1 July 2017 (UTC), co-creator of the SmartPLS page.
 * Thanks for comment. When I saw "Marketing Bulletin" I had exactly the same idea in mind as you. However, I found other papers cite this journal, so it isn´t probably pure marketing device - their webpage is here: I can´t verify their claims and I have no experience in this field of study to judge this journal. As of the other books, the two published by German publisher Springer/Gabler are without doubt reliable sources in Wikipedia sense. Here are their entries on the publisher´s webpage (with introduction and summary of content):, . You are right these sources really aren´t used in the article to reference its content. I will try to get access to them, but the article will be probably already deleted at that time... Pavlor (talk) 08:08, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
 * More generally – I see an attempt to vote more than once, and a vote by an editor whose only contributions to Wikipedia have been attempts to push this product. This will leave other editors with a general impression of scamminess. Maproom (talk) 22:55, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Commment: We have learned that this exchange of arguments is not about "voting". Again, the page is not about pushing a product. It provides information in an objective way about a software that is relevant in academia and for thousands of researchers. At some point the page has been set-up with detailed expert information and knowledge; other Wikipedia editors contributed in the past. Thereby, the objectivity and the content have been subject to continuous change and improvement in the spirit of Wikipedia. Nojokes375 (talk) 06:21, 1 July 2017 (UTC), co-creator of the SmartPLS page.
 * clear Conflict of Interest: I am co-creator of the SmartPLS page and this is very important to keep my page on wikipedia. is this even a point? Light2021 (talk) 06:38, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Do you realize that your very actions in this discussion will lead to deletion of the article about your software? I´m convinced SmartPLS is notable piece of software (with published articles and books fully devoted to it), but your blatant disregard for nearly all Wikipedia "rules" really doesn´t help your cause. Pavlor (talk) 07:45, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: COI is not a reason for deletion, nor is "many people use this" a reason for keeping. If there are sources dedicated to discussing this software, that can be a reason to keep. Relisting to see if others accept the latest sources

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:38, 7 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Merge to Partial least squares path modeling. Most of the existing content is promotional in nature. Power~enwiki (talk) 02:06, 9 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete lacks notability even if sources could be established as viable. SamHolt6 (talk) 19:16, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Keep per 's analysis of the sources, which I quote below since it is hard to find in the above text: My brief review of the four sources you provided:
 * Garson, G. David (2014)
 * (now) free textbook (ebook) by professor of North Carolina State University; published by him; author seems to be independent on smartpls company (no obvious association).
 * However, although this ebook is mostly devoted to smartpls, its form of publication makes this somewhat weak source.


 * Weiber, Rolf; Mühlhaus, Daniel (2014)
 * Ebook by University of Trier professors; published by Springer Gabler (solid German publisher); authors seem to be independent on smartpls company.
 * Solid coverage of SmartPLS. Although Christian M. Ringle (author of SmartPLS) was contacted for advice on this book, I think it is still subject independent source and good one.


 * Temme, D., Kreis, H., & Hildebrandt, L. (2010)
 * 20 pages article by professors of German Universities; published by Springer (solid German publisher); authors seem to be independent on smartpls company.
 * I don´t see the article (behind pay-wall), but I hope it contains at least one page about SmartPLS (assume good faith...). Probably good RS.


 * Wong, K. K. K. (2013)
 * Article in online journal (of New Zealand), which claims peer reviewed admission (20 % acceptance rate), I can´t verify this; author is Assistant professor on Ted Rogers School of Management (Ryerson University, Canada), seems to be independent on smartpls company.
 * If this is really OK journal, it may be good source. Otherwise not.


 * Conclusion: At least two of these are reliable sources for Wikipedia, one (Weiber, Rolf; Mühlhaus, Daniel (2014)) offers really broad coverage of SmartPLS. I think this is enough to prove notability of SmartPLS for inclusion in Wikipedia. I found a copy of the Wong article at http://marketing-bulletin.massey.ac.nz/v24/mb_v24_t1_wong.pdf. The article discusses SmartPLS extensively so this is another reliable source that establishes notability. I found a copy of the Temme source at https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Dirk_Temme/publication/227133606_A_Comparison_of_Current_PLS_Path_Modeling_Software_Features_Ease-of-Use_and_Performance/links/5729ec7508aef5d48d30aa62/A-Comparison-of-Current-PLS-Path-Modeling-Software-Features-Ease-of-Use-and-Performance.pdf, where SmartPLS is mentioned 31 times. Here is a paragraph about it: "SmartPLS: Since SmartPLS (Ringle et al., 2005) is Java-based, it is inde- pendent from the user’s operating system. Again, only raw data can be analyzed. The model is specified by drawing the structural model for the latent variables and by assigning the indicators to the latent variables via “drag & drop” (see lower panel in Figure 3). The output is provided in HTML, Excel or Latex format, as well as a parameterized path model. Bootstrapping and blindfolding are the resampling methods available. Like in VisualPLS, the specification of interaction effects is supported. A spe- cial feature of SmartPLS is the finite mixture routine (FIMIX) (see Chap- ter ??). Such an option might be of interest if unobserved heterogeneity is expected in the data (McLachlan and Peel, 2000)" The subject passes Notability. Cunard (talk) 05:44, 14 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep per Cunard. The promotional content can be nuked. I would remove the entire Data section. L3X1 (distænt write)   )evidence(  17:41, 14 July 2017 (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.