Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephane Bancel


 * 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. Although a number of users who have advocated deletion here are IP editors making the same point, their point is well taken. Arguing over whether Bancel meets the strict wording of WP:ANYBIO doesn't help us establish whether or not there are sufficient independent, reliable sources to base an article on the subject. DGG's comment almost made me tip this over to no consensus, but I do not think that it has a firm enough agreement among the rest of the commentators nor a strong enough argument to overcome them by itself. Accordingly, I am going to close this as delete, but if someone wants to take this to deletion review and see if it should have been a no consensus or keep closure instead, please go ahead without discussing with me. NW ( Talk ) 18:18, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Stephane Bancel

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The subject of the article lacks notability and a previous article on the subject was deleted Articles for deletion/Stéphane Bancel. I never saw the previous article, but I don't see notability in the current one. I am One of Many (talk) 01:00, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
 * This is self promotion article. Similar article was deleted by Wikipedia.  The link to the previous deleted article is  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:St%C3%A9phane_Bancel  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.34.105.47 (talk) 01:10, 29 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete Misleading references. For example reference 1 is given over and over again to support several claims, but it leads to Moderna Therapeutics company web site.  The intention of the article seems to be mislead through irrelevant references.  This article should be deleted.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.34.105.47 (talk) 01:26, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete I could not successfully verify the two basic claims to notability. The first is having been named Young Global Leader by the World Economic Forum in 2009. The alumni website simply does not list him, and every reference in the article that does is a press release. I wonder what his board members would think of that... The second is "#1 CEO in the biotechnology sector" by the Thomson Reuters EXTEL survey. That is behind a paywall. Removing those two claims leaves us with just more press releases, primary sources and a business executive with no particular claim to notability. Having worked for lots of companies is not enough to pass WP:BIO. § FreeRangeFrog croak 02:07, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
 * *Delete " As the CEO of bioMérieux, Bancel grew the company despite the worldwide economic recession.[1]  This an unverifiable claim with misleading reference, Reference 1 leads to Moedrna Therapeutics web site, not an article to verify that Bancel grew bioMerieux despite worldwide economic recession.  Similar misleading references are found through out the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.34.105.47 (talk) 01:10, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
 * You can only "vote" once.--I am One of Many (talk) 04:16, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:48, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:48, 29 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete Ref 1 is Mr. Bancel profile at Moderna Therapeutics. It confirms nothing.  This profile could be a Conflict of Interest created by a paid agency or a friend.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.126.236.135 (talk) 14:20, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep If the World Economic Forum thinks this biotech CEO is notable, then I do too. The WEF Young Entrepreneur 2009 award is here: http://www.weforum.org/pdf/YGL/YGL2009_Honorees.pdf  I'm seeing a lot of sources that were removed or didn't make it past Google Search. Passes WP:BIO on inspection. NaturalScholar (talk) 15:27, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment Interesting. Using the search function here does not yield the name, either by year or searching by the last name. § FreeRangeFrog croak 17:06, 1 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment Thank you for your comment. What info did you type in ctrl+F search? On page four I see: Europe France Stéphane Bancel Chief Executive Officer bioMérieux. Where: http://www.weforum.org/pdf/YGL/YGL2009_Honorees.pdf It looks like you're looking at a different list year. Note that your url is to something else that doesn't name any honorees.NaturalScholar (talk) 19:04, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment There are over 260 people listed as honorees and I assume that the number is approximately the same each year. Does being one among so many listed each year make him notable?  I can find no write up about why he or the others are on this list.  Usually, honorees in any field have some writeup about their accomplishments that led to winning the honor.--I am One of Many (talk) 20:17, 1 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete "#1 CEO in the biotechnology sector" by the Thomson Reuters EXTEL survey - This claim cannot be verified. Young Global Forum is a membership club for Five Years http://www.weforum.org/community/forum-young-global-leaders.  It is not a notable accomplishment. Thomson Reuters EXTEL could be a notable accomplishment but it refers to Moderna Therapeutics web site and press releases. It is not a verifiable claim.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.85.228.95 (talk) 17:35, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
 * CommentBancel name or the company he worked for in 2011 is not mentioned in Thomson Reuters Extel Survey. I am highly spektical of this profile and intentions of person who created it. http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/08/idUS141774+08-Jun-2011+HUG20110608  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.85.228.95 (talk) 18:53, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep Real  notability is borderline.  His notability would be based on his prior status as CEO of bioMérieux before he left to start his own company, a company which is not yet notable. The article on bioMérieux that establishes its notability is very weak--the only thing that would really indicate importance at present is the sale of over 1 billion euro. It needs a check for refs; if good ones can not be found I will nominate it for deletion.  Nothing else is notable, neither his current firm or his various directorships.  I don't think we have ever accepted Young Global Leaders as a sufficient reason for notability, though it can add a little to other factors. Here, I do not see other major factors.
 * However, there are references, . There is no reason they would be inaccurate, and we accept such sources for the routine facts of things--financial journalists do not make mistakes when they say who has acquired what position. All of them are based to some degree on PR. Journalists write stories because they get press releases intended to do just that, but responsible journalists assess the importance of the person or firm in the industry  in deciding whether to run the stories.  So the question of being RSs for the purpose of notability is whether the articles reflect the true position of the individual in his industry, or just the activity in promoting his role in the industry. It is very difficult to tell this in borderline cases,  which in my opinion is one reason to be hesitant in using the GNG, and rely instead on objective criteria for notability.
 * I could equally well  with the same information   conclude as keep or delete, and in fact did a draft of it each way and thought about it to see where the balance would lie. Since our criterion is by firm consensus the sources as judged by GNG, ,and they are adequate as this field goes, it would be keep.  I am quite puzzled by the attacks upon the sources as untrue, when the worst they are likely to be doing is giving him disproportionate coverage. Sometimes in AfD discussions where there is such undue skepticism, there is an obvious motivation, but I can think of none here.  DGG ( talk ) 05:25, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment DGG very well argued for Weak Keep. However, I have comment about your sentence "I am quite puzzled by the attacks upon the sources as untrue..."  I was reading his current company review at the Glassdoor http://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/ModeRNA-Therapeutics-Reviews-E453959.htm.  The claims of data manipulation by current and former employees of his current company will put every reference and statement by him in doubt - It is my opinion, you may disagree.24.34.105.47 (talk) 11:10, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment I do agree; Glassdoor discovery makes Mr. Bancel claims questionable. Similarly, I do not find notability in his current company Moderna Therapeutics Wikipedia page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moderna_Therapeutics.  It should be nominated for deletion too.  I do not know, how to nominate a page for AfD.  Some reviewer may look at it.  Mr. Bancel page and Moderna Therapeutics page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moderna_Therapeutics refer back and forth to each other.  It should be nominated for AfD too, as it lacks notability.71.126.236.80 (talk) 13:29, 2 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete World Economic Forum is not a notable accomplishment. It is given to hundreds of people each year. It is paid membership forum.  I can think of no notability here except self promotion.71.126.236.80 (talk) 13:34, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep Subject is notable through the World Economic Forum honor and multiple reliable sources citing him as biotechnology CEO and board member. Polterg1 (talk) 14:57, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment Poltreg1, you are the creator of this controversial article.  I am not sure about the weight of your vote?  What the several reliable references you are referring too?  Your excessive promotional language may have been reason to nominate Mr. Stephane Bancel profile for AfD again.  Most of the references you quote are nothing but takes a reader back to Moderna Therapeutics web site's management page.  That is not a valid reference.72.85.228.95 (talk) 15:14, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment There are thousands of CEOs in the biotechnology field. Being another CEO in this field does not make him notable at all.  There are hundred of hundreds Economics Forum paid members, that does not make him notable.  Beside, Poltreg1 created Mr. Bancel controversial profile with questionable references, why should be vote on his own controversial article?  He could be source of Conflict of Interest (CoI)!!!  24.34.105.47 (talk) 16:35, 2 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep Bancel is notable. The results of the EXTEL awards are available at the following web page: http://www.extelsurveys.com/Results/ResultsHome.aspx?ID=781. You'll need to create an account to view the page. Once logged in you can follow the instructions below to access this result. 1) Under the results tab, select "previous" and then "EXTEL 2011." 2) Check "corporates" and "sector" at the top of the page. 3) Select "biotechnology" as the industry. 4) Stephane Bancel will be located under the CEO section of the results. Videditor (talk) 23:31, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment What is a purpose of keeping a record hidden behind a  secured area?  Then, I would not consider it a valuable/notable accomplishment, if public cannot easily verify it.  Is it one of those media "Reuters" advertising thing?  Anything hidden behind a media secured account is not notable for me. 24.34.105.47 (talk) 23:35, 3 July 2013 (UTC)


 * delete Extel is password protected and it gives no details. Also, anyone can nominate for survey award according to reuters. It is  not notable. There are millions of CEO like him in biotechnology. I donot find any thing notable about Bancel. 66.87.80.221 (talk) 01:49, 4 July 2013 (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.