Talk:Edward Felten
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||||||
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] | ||||||
 |
This article is supported by the Science and academia work group. | ||||||
|
|||||||
 |
An individual covered by or significantly related to this article, Edward Felten, has edited Wikipedia as Ewfelten (talk ยท contribs) |
[edit] Comments
I added a brief mention of Java security, and some pretty extensive comment on the MS antitrust trial. Someone with more knowledge of Java security and Felten's contribution should maybe add more there. 14 Dec 2005.
The article about Felten ought to mention his work on the Microsoft antitrust trial, in which he was an expert witness, and perhaps some of his interesting work on Java security.
some comments about this article, by its subject and others, are here. regards, High on a tree 16:43, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Opinion of Wikipedia
- On his personal blog he expressed his personal opinion of Wikipedia as having a wide disparity between articles. [1] While most articles appear to be well written, with the possible exception of some very technical articles, small but significant facts appear to slip through the cracks. For example, his year of birth was inaccurately stated.
I would like to include something similiar to this in the article, but looking for input first. Perhaps this is out of place in an enclyclopedia: having a POV comment about itself present within. -b 09:43, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
- I think inclusion of this is probably justified, given that Ed Felten is known for writing about technology (though information about his writings in general seems to be lacking). Personally, I'd say stick it in if you can find it a comfortable home. --H2g2bob 03:04, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Comment from Ed Felten
This is Ed Felten speaking: The section of this entry on the Microsoft case is inaccurate and incomplete. For example, it mischaracterizes my testimony. (Note the weasel-word "essentially" in "Felten essentially argued ..."; in fact, I argued no such thing.) There are other factual errors in this section: for example, the research supposedly "undertaken by a pair of his graduate students" was done by a group including me but not including any graduate students. Ed Felten 19:46, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
- I've removed the mischaraterization and inaccuracy you mentioned - both were uncited. Who were the other people that participated in the research undertaken by the group including you but not any of your graduate students? Sirmob 06:13, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Assessed and infoboxed
Needs fleshing out in terms of background and family -- Avi 16:42, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
