Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a232554ed8b7a0ea

Jump to content

Talk:David Franj

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Page semi-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 2 months ago by 331dot in topic How to suggest a change

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on David Franj. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:25, 7 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Conflict of Interest and unreliable sources for serious claims

A edit was published which states that David Franj commited hate speech on social media by a anonymous account. These claims were sourced by broken links to Facebook. I am not sure if these links were always broken however. A temporary account reverted these changes, only for it to be unreverted by various members of the community. A account sharing the same name as David Franj again removed these claims. Mustbeotherwise (talk) 18:05, 25 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

This speculation is dangerously libellous. Unless there are legally verified, published sources with evidence a person is in fact guilty of hate speech, innuendo in such posts and open discussions in these edit sections is highly misleading. Any person should not have the onus or burden of having to defend themselves after the fact when libellous, unsubstantiated, unchecked claims are so easily put forward. To state 'conflict of interest' when a party amends false and unchecked allegations is further injury to the person being targeted. I strongly suggest that unless there is factual legally sourced and based evidence displaying that a person, in this case David Franj, is guilty of hate-speech, then any innuendo and discussions on this profile should immediately be wiped. In my opinion, David Franj should seek legal advice for criminal defamation against wikipedia and certain contributors. Montana Maguire (talk) 01:57, 29 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

Request for Comprehensive Recognition of David Franj (David Frangiosa)

Formal Update Regarding the Career and Professional Credits of David Franj

A Request for Formal Amendment of Professional Records and Industry Recognition for David Franj

A Request for the Verification and Formal Inclusion of Career Milestones for David Franj

A Request for the Systematic Correction of Professional Documentation Regarding David Franj.

How to suggest a change

I've rolled up all the verbose and incoherent nonsense above. Here is my advice for anybody who wants to suggest a change.

  1. Work out what the proposed change is. Express it in the format "change X to Y".
  2. Keep the requested change simple. If you think a lot of things need fixing then let's take them one by one, not as one huge request that nobody can understand.
  3. Explain why the change is beneficial briefly and in your own words. If you paste a heap of badly formatted crap out of an LLM everybody will just ignore it. If you paste the same nonsense as before then it will get you no further than before.
  4. Provide Reliable Sources to support the changed text. Make sure that they are Reliable by our definition. Don't try to deluge us in links that don't meet the definition of a Reliable Source. (Note that the previous attempts to deluge us in links to a site seemingly about royalty payments (I assume, I don't have a login so I can't see what the content is) is a perfect example of an completely unusable source.)
  5. Don't be a sockpuppet! If you have already had an account blocked for abusing Wikipedia then your next account is going to get even shorter shrift. If you have abused Wikipedia in this way then we don't really care what you think about this article.
  6. Don't make bumptious, pseudo-legalistic threats or try to stand on the claimed authority of some organisation or other. We don't care about that. Nobody gets to own the article. If the change is coherent, valid and supported by Reliable Sources then we will make it. It it isn't then we won't. Focus on the merits of the request not on trying to sound important or intimidating. --DanielRigal (talk) 10:33, 7 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
Don't be a meat puppet, either. If colleagues or superiors have been blocked, you will be, too. The first person blocked needs to get unblocked. 331dot (talk) 11:28, 7 May 2026 (UTC)Reply