Talk:Stern Stewart & Co

This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Companies Low‑importance

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

Low This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

Germany: Munich Low‑importance

	Germany portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
Low	This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This redirect is supported by WikiProject Munich (assessed as Low-importance).

This title may need disambiguation[edit]

Sources on the split from Stern Value Management are sparse, but I have found this: http://www.vault.com/company-profiles/management-strategy/stern-stewart-co/company-overview.aspx

"Following a rebranding in 2013, Stern Value Management retained both Joel Stern's leadership and the EVA trademark. However, the Stern Stewart name lives on: a group of offices, headquartered in Europe, opted to retain the Stern Stewart name and operate as a separate firm following the rebrand. Presently, the two firms are not affiliated."

Most of this Google books search https://www.google.com/search?q=Stern+Stewart+%26+Co&btnG=Search+Books&tbm=bks&tbo=1 finds sources from prior to 2013, and thus seems more relevant to Stern Value Management prior to its name change. This article might be better parenthetically disambiguated with something like (2013 company) or (German company). And it seems likely to me that Stern Value Management would be the more notable of the two firms, but that's the one that's been deleted. Wbm1058 (talk) 13:36, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sources from Google Books[edit]

Anyone want to have a look at these? --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 01:18, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So again, these sources support the notability of Joel Stern and his Economic Value Added. Perhaps they support the restoration of the article about Stern Value Management (formerly Stern Stewart & Co before 2013). I disagree with the over-aggressive speedy deletion of that. At minimum it should have been done as a {{proposed deletion}}. The Stern Value Management article could probably be toned down to remove any marketing hype and just give the facts in a neutral manner. As to this 2013 European-based firm, I agree that sources supporting notability are somewhat lacking. The idea that this firm, which is not affiliated with the firm co-founded by Joel Stern, was co-founded by Stern in 1982 is misleading at best. It seems to me this firm was "founded" in 2013. But I don't think we should delete this, if the European firm is found to be not notable. We should redirect it to Stern Value Management, or, if that article isn't restored, redirect it to Joel Stern. Of course, that still leaves us vulnerable to someone re-creating the article about the new European firm, which led to making this such a "big deal" in my RfA, so if consensus is that only the older firm is notable, I volunteer to keep this on my watchlist. – Wbm1058 (talk) 12:29, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]