QUOTE(a view from the hive @ Sat 24th February 2007, 1:59pm)
QUOTE(LamontStormstar @ Fri 23rd February 2007, 6:14pm)
Brandt's notable for mainly that Seigler(sp?) thing where Brandt found the guy's info.
I guess your definition of "notable" is something other than mine. I don't consider that notable at all.
There's a few things about Brandt that could be considered notable:
- was a draft resister who appealed his conviction and won;
- created NameBase;
- started Google Watch;
- exposed Brian Chase in the Seigenthaler controversy.
Note that I have no idea how rare the first thing actually is, I have no idea how many draft resisters were able to successfully appeal their convictions. Can anyone inform me?
Now, I'm a mergist; that is, I think that "
while much information may warrant inclusion somewhere, very little of it probably warrants its own article." The main reason I hold this view is that one of the biggest problems with Wikipedia is the large number of short pages with little context. Many of them could be merged together, with no other changes, and become quite good articles because there would simply be more context to help understand the information.
You'll note that much of the stuff that could potentially be notable about Brandt is not really about him at all, but about something else: about conscription, about Google Watch, about the Seigenthaler controversy. So really, it should be entirely feasible to move all of the Google Watch information into
Google Watch, move all of the Seigenthaler material into
John Seigenthaler Sr. Wikipedia biography controversy and so on. The rest is mostly self-referential and can be discarded.
Now I don't care enough about Brandt to have followed the whole saga around the article, but can recall if a serious merge proposal has been put forward before?