Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:19, 26 August 2007

The following Misplaced Pages contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view. THF (talk · contribs) / Ted Frank Ted Frank

Biography Stub‑class

Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography Stub This article has been rated as Stub-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.

Primary sources

Please be careful in adding primary sources. If we add all the opinion pieces Frank has written, it might overwhelm or bias the article. We need secondary coverage per WP:WEIGHT. Cool Hand Luke 21:32, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

OK. That Moore one is central to recent media coverage of guy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johanbach (talk • contribs) 21:34, August 25, 2007 (UTC)

No. It's not. Incidentally, be mindful of WP:SOCK. Cool Hand Luke 21:48, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

viewpoints?

Is this type of thing even appropriate for this kind of article? This really seems like a vanity article to me, but that is just my opinion. --Chuck Sirloin 21:51, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Nah, he is a notable far right American pundit. Johanbach 21:53, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Ugh, no, I dislike that section. Notable pundit or not, it has the terrible and easy possibility of turning into a place for Mr. Frank to simply be misquoted. If Mr. Frank is noted by multiple reliable sources as being critical of Misplaced Pages or of Mr. Moore, then include those references in prose. Otherwise, I support removal. --Iamunknown 21:57, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

This is on-target. The section reeks of WEIGHT problems. We could probably list dozens or hundreds of topics that he's spoken on, but we should only list those that have received reliable third-party coverage. Cool Hand Luke 22:15, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree. I already corrected one allegation that seemed to misrepresent the source. ATren 22:20, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Removed. --Iamunknown 02:14, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Copyright-free photo

This page could use a copyright-free photo. If someone is down in DC perhaps they could ask Ted Frank; they may be able to reach him through AEI's website. --David Shankbone 21:55, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I've removed the images. They could be easily replaced by free ones of acceptable quality in terms of encyclopedia use. --Iamunknown 21:58, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

When one becomes available the fair use ones can be replaced.Johanbach 22:00, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, does the article really need pics until then? Or indeed does it really need two non-free pics? --Chuck Sirloin 22:02, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

It positively can't have two, and even one is questionable. WP:NONFREE "Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available or could be created that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose." Question though: is C-SPAN public domain as a government work? I know the house and senate video is public domain, but am not sure about conferences. Cool Hand Luke 22:06, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok, the answer is "no". C-SPAN is apparently non-commercial, which we do not accept. Cool Hand Luke 22:09, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Conflict of interest

There is a clear CoI of editors working on this article, this applies to all sides and you all know what it is but lets not talk about it. Now its a real stub we should all not edit it and let wikipedia take its course OK. 23:34, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Saying "EVERYBODY STOP EDITING OK" and "let wikipedia take its course" is a direct contradiction. Most of the work on Misplaced Pages is probably at least somewhat of a conflict of interest-- interest is what makes people want to edit things --lucid 23:42, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

POV on documentaries

I think this article should include his POV on documentaries. The film industry and buisness industries (like Bloomberg) do not consider IMAX movies, reality movies (Jackass) or concert movies as documentaries. That is their 'standards'. Ted (with no expertise in film at all) wrote an article published in several RW sites with a list of documentaries including IMAX, Jackass and concert films to argue that Michael Moores movies were not in the top 5 but much lower. This is a notable POV to include. •smedleyΔbutler• 23:39, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

No, it's synthesis unless you have a source commenting on his allegedly notable POV. Cool Hand Luke 23:42, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Unless Michael moore or someone else complains about it and we can quote them, we can't say that. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 23:42, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I dont see why it cant be included in 'recorded viewpoints' but Im no expert. •smedleyΔbutler• 00:35, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

If it was included, we couldn't add lines about how x organization uses a different methodology. Moreover, the "recorded viewpoints" section is a WEIGHT disaster already without including primary documents he wrote himself with no outside commentary. Cool Hand Luke 01:15, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

• Okay, I think I understand the reasoning now. Thank you. •smedleyΔbutler• 02:37, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Nominated for deletion

He's simply not notable enough. Seems to be just a run of the mill lawyer. A good one to be sure but we don't have articles just because they are good. See Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Ted_Frank. --Tbeatty 03:02, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I was wondering when that would happen to this article. IMHO, he's borderline notable for being mentioned in the net.legends.FAQ -- but for some reason does not want that part of his life publicized. -- llywrch 05:08, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I was wondering about that. Do we have any reliable sources about this? Are you sure it's the same Ted Frank? The name doesn't seem so uncommon. I think it would be an interesting addition. Cool Hand Luke 12:52, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

The person mentioned in net.legends.FAQ made 17,000 usenet posts in 1993-1995 from University of Chicago servers, and claimed to be a law student there, which narrows things down quite a bit. What does that matter? People did a lot of things on usenet in the 1990s they would rather not relive.... Wikidemo 13:36, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

A citation to the book Internet Culture has recently been added to Troll (Internet). It looks like a reliable source. It seems he was of the two most "notorious" AFU trolls (which, the book explains, had a different connotation back then: the other notorious troll was snopes). Would the FAQ itself be a reliable source? Cool Hand Luke 14:51, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually, that's GREAT. Ted Frank was one of the most notorious trolls on usenet in the 90s? So notable. Let's add it immediately. Can anyone else dig up more on this? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 15:17, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Other Ted Frank

Interesting. Incidentally, another Ted Frank is president of Axentis. Comes up in news archives a lot—about as much as this Ted Frank, but with actual profiles of the man. I think it actually has a stronger claim for notability than this Ted Frank. Can we add a heading stating that Ted Frank might also refer to the president of Axentis? There's no need to disambiguate unless someone writes another article. Cool Hand Luke 13:42, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

• Articles with connected contributors
• Stub-Class biography articles
• WikiProject Biography articles