Talk:David Franklin (scientist)

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Science and Academia

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia'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 articles
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.

Microbiology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microbiology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Microbiology 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.MicrobiologyWikipedia:WikiProject MicrobiologyTemplate:WikiProject MicrobiologyMicrobiology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Possibly move to a separate "Franklin v. Pfizer" article?

I came across this article during new page patrol. At that time it was just the text of Franklin's entry in the List of whistleblowers. I've tried to flesh it out with details and references, but I don't know whether Franklin is notable for any other event. If not then (per WP:BLP1E) perhaps this article should be rebuilt as "Franklin v. Pfizer", covering the event rather than the person. - Pointillist (talk) 13:34, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pointillist You asked in 2009, and in 2012 a new user made Franklin v. Parke-Davis and another new user made List of off-label promotion pharmaceutical settlements. I just set up Marketing of off-label use and and Category:Drug advertising. All this content still gets regular edits. This is resolved.

Resolved

Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:33, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Lane, thanks for commenting. AFAICS David Franklin is still notable for only one event so this article should be merged into Franklin v. Parke-Davis with a redirect. Are you OK with that? - Pointillist (talk) 21:44, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pointillist I can agree that 90%+ of this article in its current form is not about this person and could be deleted but I am not convinced that this person does not meet WP:GNG. This person was the most key individual in one of the largest court settlements ever, and was featured in media over a period of 5 years that I see in sources. For such a big court case there are not many accounts published of this. The one event this person was involved with was a defining event in the lives of at least thousands of people, so this is not the sort of thing that is usually called "one event". However, I also recognize that sources which establish notability are not prominent in the current version of this article. Here are some sources which feature this person as the subject:

Vries, Lloyd (13 May 2004). "Drug Whistleblower Collects $24M". CBS News. Retrieved 13 April 2017.
Beck, Susan (10 August 2009). "Did Pfizer Intimidate a Key Plaintiffs Witness on the Eve of the Neurontin Trial?". The American Lawyer. Archived from the original on 10 August 2009. Retrieved 13 April 2017.
Lenzer, J. (22 March 2003). "Whistleblower charges drug company with deceptive practices". BMJ. 326 (7390): 620–620. doi:10.1136/bmj.326.7390.620.

That makes at least 3 times when this person was in the news - once for starting the trial, once for claiming intimidation, and once for ending the trial. The journal which published what I thought was the best narrative for the intimidation paper is down now but I found an archival copy.

I could agree with cutting this article down to just sources which feature this person as the subject, and also not having forked content which is already elsewhere, and also only including content which would be WP:UNDUE to post elsewhere. Right now I think that could mean cutting this to 3-4 sentences, something like "minimal bio, link to court case, intimidation claim, acceptance of settlement". Thoughts? I am not sure. Blue Rasberry (talk) 02:08, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed my mind about BLP1E applying to David Franklin, @Blue Rasberry. I appreciate there could be a valid article around his actions, motivations, persistence and eventual reward – perhaps along the lines of wikibooks:David Franklin, Parke-Davis, and Neurontin. Unfortunately, there's not much (non-paywalled) material to go on and no photograph in commons. - Pointillist (talk) 09:33, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pointillist I thought to write the person but I was unable to find any contact information anywhere. I could not find much online trace of this person. The court case was filed in 1996, and case was mostly resolved by 2004, and then lawsuits resulting from the settlement ended in 2014. I think this guy might be keeping low because anyone this key to an event like this in contemporary times would have an online presence. I cannot find an employer, university affiliation, or personal information of any sort. I am not ready to go forward, but for someone wanting a next step, there are former employers here (~20 years ago?) plus some institutions which granted awards to him. I expect that someone must know how to contact him. Franklin is still young and must be doing something.

I expect that if I could contact Franklin he might provide a photograph and some pointers to more information. Blue Rasberry (talk) 12:24, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

in my view this article should be redirected to the legal case. We don't have enough refs to justify this article. Jytdog (talk) 18:43, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]