Rmf5

Not a Vanity Submission

Hello Friends:

I have posted a brief bio with an eye toward promoting easier and more widespread access to my research on telecommunications and Internet policy. I offer freely available and widely cited,unsponsored insight on compelling policy issues. You can find ample evidence of my scholarly contributions at the following sites:

http://www.personal.psu.edu/rmf5/ https://pennstatelaw.psu.edu/faculty/frieden http://bellisario.psu.edu/people/individual/rob-frieden https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=102928 http://telefrieden.blogspot.com/

I regularly consumer crow and humble pie, and won't object to deletion from Wikipedia.  On the other hand, I am an unsponsored researcher who attempts to make significant contributions to the applied and scholarly literature.

Advice

• that's not the way it works here,

You may be a worthy subject for an article, but if you would like the article to remain you must write it in the WP style, which includes:

• looking like an encyclopedia article not a CV
• Are you a full professor? Give your exact rank.
• listing college degrees with university and year -- and putting the university names in double brackets
• listing important awards, important memberships and offices held --a list is more readable than paragraphs
• listing books published as formal references style: Author, title, Publisher, year ISBN if possible.
• listing some major published papers, say how many total. Do not just link, list 4 or 5 of the most prestigious papers.

and, most important, giving some 3rd party sources. A website at a university etc. can be one, but it cannot be the only one. Book reviews are fine, or a newspaper stories. Print or web is OK, but not from a list or a blog. These is, very unfortunately, some prejudice against people from the academic world.

And, there is 'understandable feeling here against articles written by the subject or a member of his family, so it has to be a really solid article. See WP:AUTO and WP:COI The way you have presented and explained the article has already made it very hard to defend the article. You will need to make certain that the article is absolutely sound, contains no adjectives praising yourself, gives a reference to a published source for every position held, and if at all possible, links to a published article by someone else discussing your work.

If you do not do this right away, the article will probably be deleted in a day or two--though not by me. I started to arrange it, but you must do the rest. I apologize for not having the time to help personally. DGG 00:00, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Hello All:

As suggested I have edited the contribution to make it comport with the Wikipedia style. I am now presented with the view that the contribution constitutes a conflict of interest. I appreciate this concern and want to explain why I took the time to prepare the document. A junior colleague of mine in the College of Communications, Clay Calvert, has a bio in Wikipedia that has the following applicable categories: Jurist stubs | Living people | Pennsylvania State University faculty | American legal writers.

The thought occurred to me that I too fit into these categories and that the applicable categories would be more complete with my inclusion. I am living, I teach at Penn State, and I am an American legal writer who has made a significant contribution nto the literature.

I will ask Clay whether a third party prepared his bio. Additionally I am sure I could suggest someone else make the contribution. However such action might still constitute a conflict of interest.

So at this juncture I guess JDS has to make a call whether preexisting categories, such as American legal writers, would be more complete with my inclusion. To avoid any conceivable conlict of interest both Wikipedia and I would have to await some unsolicited third party contribution in the same manner as Who's Who decided to include me.

On the other hand I believe Wikipedia becomes an ever so slightly more comprehensive resource with a reference to me.--Rob 00:33, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Nomination of Rob Frieden for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rob Frieden is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rob Frieden (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Blue Rasberry (talk) 22:05, 29 November 2017 (UTC)