The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

> Help

This subforum is for critical evaluation of Wikipedia articles. However, to reduce topic-bloat, please make note of exceptionally poor stubs, lists, and other less attention-worthy material in the Miscellaneous Grab Bag thread. Also, please be aware that agents of the Wikimedia Foundation might use your evaluations to improve the articles in question.

Useful Links: Featured Article CandidatesFeatured Article ReviewArticles for DeletionDeletion Review

> Brandt's article deleted, undeleted, stubbed, ad infinitum..., The BLP war era continues
Alex
post Fri 23rd February 2007, 4:36pm
Post #41


Back from the dead
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,017
Joined: Wed 24th Jan 2007, 4:39pm
Member No.: 867

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



So it's gone now. Deleted by Yanksox, speedily endorsed by our friend Gaillimh. Three cheers all round? cool.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Replies
thebainer
post Thu 1st March 2007, 12:27am
Post #42


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 81
Joined: Mon 27th Feb 2006, 12:06pm
Member No.: 13

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Somey @ Thu 1st March 2007, 5:47am) *

As I've often done, I just want to redundantly reiterate here once again that the only way the internal WP squabbling over this will ever stop is if the article goes away completely. Regardless of what anyone here says about it, there will always be sound moral justification for getting rid of this article, and little or no sound moral justification whatsoever for keeping it. To a large extent, this debate isn't ultimately about "content" or "notability" at all, or even about bad publicity or excessive internal squabbling. It's about morality, and the people voting to delete are the ones who are guided by their sense of morality - at least to a greater extent than the people who are voting otherwise. And sure, Daniel Brandt may be a mean ol' rotten SOB, but so are a lot of folks - and in my experience at least, they usually get that way because other people just won't let them get on with their lives in peace.


If you read the rest of what I wrote, you'll realise that really the majority of people who actually expressed an opinion about the article were in favour of deleting it. Hardly anyone thought the article should be kept; the rest wanted the deletion overturned because it was "out of process". I hate the bureaucracy as much as the next man but there was no way to ignore them without starting another giant shitfight. This time there is a mandate for a full debate (which won't be speedily closed) and I think the consensus is moving towards deleting the article.

QUOTE(Daniel Brandt @ Thu 1st March 2007, 7:14am) *

The thing that strikes me about this DRV, as well as the one or two AfD debates on my bio that allowed some responses instead of getting summarily aborted, is that most of those who vote on the inclusionist side are Wikipedians I've never heard of. They come out of the woodwork just for me, and know nothing about me or the history behind my bio. It's a video game, and those who happen to jerk the joystick in the right direction at the right time see that there's this Big Thing going on, and waltz right in. It's not like they have any of their own interests at stake, apart from their little joysticks driven by their little brains.


That's a fair assessment. Few of the "regulars" still want to keep the article. Also note that the vast majority of those in favour of keeping the article deleted were long-term users or admins.

QUOTE(Daniel Brandt @ Thu 1st March 2007, 7:14am) *

I predict that the upcoming AfD will be about 50/50, and the person closing it won't have the guts to delete on that basis. That's because there's a myth about "consensus" in Wikipedia, and "consensus" seems to be around 70 or 80 percent.


I plan to close it. I seem to do fairly well at closing otherwise controversial debates and making the result stick. I deleted Gregory Lauder-Frost's article, for example, when the debate was split 50/50 on the numbers, and when there had been dozens of previous conversations that didn't get anywhere.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
everyking
post Thu 1st March 2007, 7:10am
Post #43


Postmaster
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,368
Joined: Mon 27th Mar 2006, 7:24am
Member No.: 81



QUOTE(thebainer @ Thu 1st March 2007, 1:27am) *

QUOTE(Somey @ Thu 1st March 2007, 5:47am) *

As I've often done, I just want to redundantly reiterate here once again that the only way the internal WP squabbling over this will ever stop is if the article goes away completely. Regardless of what anyone here says about it, there will always be sound moral justification for getting rid of this article, and little or no sound moral justification whatsoever for keeping it. To a large extent, this debate isn't ultimately about "content" or "notability" at all, or even about bad publicity or excessive internal squabbling. It's about morality, and the people voting to delete are the ones who are guided by their sense of morality - at least to a greater extent than the people who are voting otherwise. And sure, Daniel Brandt may be a mean ol' rotten SOB, but so are a lot of folks - and in my experience at least, they usually get that way because other people just won't let them get on with their lives in peace.


If you read the rest of what I wrote, you'll realise that really the majority of people who actually expressed an opinion about the article were in favour of deleting it. Hardly anyone thought the article should be kept; the rest wanted the deletion overturned because it was "out of process". I hate the bureaucracy as much as the next man but there was no way to ignore them without starting another giant shitfight. This time there is a mandate for a full debate (which won't be speedily closed) and I think the consensus is moving towards deleting the article.

QUOTE(Daniel Brandt @ Thu 1st March 2007, 7:14am) *

The thing that strikes me about this DRV, as well as the one or two AfD debates on my bio that allowed some responses instead of getting summarily aborted, is that most of those who vote on the inclusionist side are Wikipedians I've never heard of. They come out of the woodwork just for me, and know nothing about me or the history behind my bio. It's a video game, and those who happen to jerk the joystick in the right direction at the right time see that there's this Big Thing going on, and waltz right in. It's not like they have any of their own interests at stake, apart from their little joysticks driven by their little brains.


That's a fair assessment. Few of the "regulars" still want to keep the article. Also note that the vast majority of those in favour of keeping the article deleted were long-term users or admins.

QUOTE(Daniel Brandt @ Thu 1st March 2007, 7:14am) *

I predict that the upcoming AfD will be about 50/50, and the person closing it won't have the guts to delete on that basis. That's because there's a myth about "consensus" in Wikipedia, and "consensus" seems to be around 70 or 80 percent.


I plan to close it. I seem to do fairly well at closing otherwise controversial debates and making the result stick. I deleted Gregory Lauder-Frost's article, for example, when the debate was split 50/50 on the numbers, and when there had been dozens of previous conversations that didn't get anywhere.


Due to the views you're expressing in this post, I think you shouldn't be the one to close it. Frankly, it sounds like you are set on deletion. If you want to do it yourself, you should set a percentage figure in advance for what it would take to delete, and hold to it absolutely. I propose 67%.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Daniel Brandt
post Thu 1st March 2007, 7:19am
Post #44


Postmaster
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,473
Joined: Fri 24th Mar 2006, 12:23am
Member No.: 77



QUOTE(everyking @ Thu 1st March 2007, 1:10am) *

you should set a percentage figure in advance for what it would take to delete, and hold to it absolutely. I propose 67%.

Okay, but I get 200 votes because I'm the subject of the article and I'm the one who has to live with it.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
a view from the hive
post Sun 4th March 2007, 4:23am
Post #45


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 90
Joined: Sat 30th Dec 2006, 12:42am
From: Milky Way Galaxy
Member No.: 768

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Daniel Brandt @ Wed 28th February 2007, 11:19pm) *

QUOTE(everyking @ Thu 1st March 2007, 1:10am) *

you should set a percentage figure in advance for what it would take to delete, and hold to it absolutely. I propose 67%.

Okay, but I get 200 votes because I'm the subject of the article and I'm the one who has to live with it.


But look at some of the "debate"

KEEP - Out of spite/karma. --Tom 00:06, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Keep Per SlimVirgin! --Kevin Murray 01:19, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- SlimVirgin made a rather compelling argument for deletion

How can you argue with such compelling and (in the case of the first one) "revenge" statements. Revenge is such a productive way to operate!
(disclaimer: that was sarcasm)

This post has been edited by a view from the hive: Sun 4th March 2007, 4:23am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
Alex   Brandt's article deleted, undeleted, stubbed, ad infinitum...   Fri 23rd February 2007, 4:36pm
gomi   Bravo. Now I want a box seat for the inevitable w...   Fri 23rd February 2007, 4:53pm
Alex   Bravo. Now I want a box seat for the inevitable ...   Fri 23rd February 2007, 4:55pm
Somey   ...I expect it'll produce a similar result. Si...   Fri 23rd February 2007, 5:12pm
taiwopanfob   I think there's actually reason for optimism ...   Fri 23rd February 2007, 5:42pm
thekohser   This is an excellent opportunity for Wales to ac...   Fri 23rd February 2007, 8:26pm
Anonymouse   Now it's on WP:DRV, and staying deleted. Here...   Fri 23rd February 2007, 5:41pm
No one of consequence   Well, so far they're holding a clusterfuck ove...   Fri 23rd February 2007, 5:45pm
Unrepentant Vandal   Well, so far they're holding a clusterfuck ov...   Fri 23rd February 2007, 6:25pm
Alkivar   Look Jimbo wading in is probably a bad idea... we ...   Fri 23rd February 2007, 8:35pm
anon1234   The best thing that could happen is a public disco...   Fri 23rd February 2007, 9:10pm
a view from the hive   The best thing that could happen is a public disc...   Sat 24th February 2007, 12:38am
LamontStormstar   Brandt's notable for mainly that Seigler(sp?) ...   Sat 24th February 2007, 2:14am
Somey   Brandt's notable for mainly that Seigler(sp?) ...   Sat 24th February 2007, 2:35am
a view from the hive   Brandt's notable for mainly that Seigler(sp?)...   Sat 24th February 2007, 2:59am
thebainer   [quote name='LamontStormstar' post='23493' date='...   Mon 26th February 2007, 7:32am
Somey   I dunno, Stephen... There seems to be almost no po...   Mon 26th February 2007, 5:02pm
Somey   But what about the time in 1997 when he balanced 1...   Sat 24th February 2007, 4:09am
a view from the hive   But what about the time in 1997 when he balanced ...   Sat 24th February 2007, 4:13am
Somey   Try the truth, it looks better :) Do you have reli...   Sat 24th February 2007, 5:21am
a view from the hive   Try the truth, it looks better :) Do you have rel...   Sat 24th February 2007, 6:27am
the fieryangel   Regardless of HOW the article was deleted, the fac...   Sat 24th February 2007, 11:01am
guy   Wikipedia tries to contain only factual informati...   Sat 24th February 2007, 11:33am
Herschelkrustofsky   Wikipedia tries to contain only [b]factual inform...   Sat 24th February 2007, 4:04pm
guy   No doubt I'll be accused of partisanship, but ...   Mon 26th February 2007, 8:29pm
Somey   No doubt I'll be accused of partisanship, but ...   Mon 26th February 2007, 9:24pm
Somey   As predicted, the article's back, with the DRV...   Wed 28th February 2007, 6:47pm
Daniel Brandt   The thing that strikes me about this DRV, as well ...   Wed 28th February 2007, 8:14pm
Truth Man   It's a video game, and those who happen to je...   Thu 1st March 2007, 3:48am
badlydrawnjeff   I'm pleasantly surprised, even if it's onl...   Wed 28th February 2007, 8:20pm
gomi   Doc Glasgow has quit, citing in part the Brandt wh...   Wed 28th February 2007, 10:20pm
a view from the hive   I plan to close it. I seem to do fairly well at c...   Thu 1st March 2007, 1:01am
Daniel Brandt   I plan to close it. I seem to do fairly well at c...   Thu 1st March 2007, 1:49am
Cobalt   Keep Per SlimVirgin! --Kevin Murray 01:19, 3 ...   Sun 4th March 2007, 5:33am
thebainer   Due to the views you're expressing in this po...   Thu 1st March 2007, 2:26pm
everyking   Due to the views you're expressing in this p...   Thu 1st March 2007, 3:14pm
Somey   It's probably pointless to discuss this like i...   Thu 1st March 2007, 5:37am
Jonny Cache   ... slim majority ... Good one !!! ...   Thu 1st March 2007, 5:44am
Daniel Brandt   How many votes in a slim majority ??? One, althou...   Thu 1st March 2007, 6:05am
a view from the hive   How many votes in a slim majority ??? One, altho...   Thu 1st March 2007, 6:50am
JohnA   If the Daniel Brandt article has been deleted then...   Thu 1st March 2007, 3:33pm
guy   If the Daniel Brandt article has been deleted the...   Thu 1st March 2007, 6:01pm
Jonny Cache   [quote name='JohnA' post='23863' date='Thu 1st Ma...   Fri 2nd March 2007, 5:06pm
Somey   The [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title...   Fri 2nd March 2007, 6:25pm
Jonny Cache   The [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?tit...   Fri 2nd March 2007, 6:54pm
JohnA   I find myself wondering what the point of getting ...   Fri 2nd March 2007, 9:58pm
Daniel Brandt   You should see what they're pulling now with m...   Fri 2nd March 2007, 10:51pm
Jonny Cache   You should [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiki...   Fri 2nd March 2007, 11:01pm
Somey   Yes, this is typical, even classic, Wikipedia. Evi...   Sat 3rd March 2007, 2:05am
Daniel Brandt   Somey, that was a brilliant summary. I guess it pa...   Sat 3rd March 2007, 4:35am
Jonny Cache   Somey, that was a brilliant summary. I guess it p...   Sat 3rd March 2007, 5:06am
Somey   Shall I interpret this to mean you don't see a...   Sat 3rd March 2007, 5:53am
Jonny Cache   Look, for you all know, there's wackos on Usen...   Sat 3rd March 2007, 7:04am
Alkivar   For whatever its worth Mr. Brandt... When this w...   Sat 3rd March 2007, 9:28am
Daniel Brandt   For whatever its worth Mr. Brandt... When this ...   Sat 3rd March 2007, 1:23pm
Somey   I just discovered that SlimVirgin is [url=http://e...   Sat 3rd March 2007, 6:36pm
Jonny Cache   I just discovered that SlimVirgin is resurrecting...   Sat 3rd March 2007, 7:24pm
The Joy   The only way Mr. Brandt's article will be dele...   Sun 4th March 2007, 12:25am
Daniel Brandt   This AfD was frontloaded with mysterious sockpuppe...   Sun 4th March 2007, 5:45am
Somey   This AfD was frontloaded with mysterious sockpuppe...   Sun 4th March 2007, 6:24am
Cobalt   My thoughts against this theory are, would you h...   Sun 4th March 2007, 6:03am
Anonymouse   Someone's offering a bounty for FA status on i...   Mon 5th March 2007, 1:27am
Somey   Someone's offering a bounty for FA status on i...   Mon 5th March 2007, 2:03am
Anonymouse   Someone's offering a bounty for FA status on ...   Tue 6th March 2007, 1:12am
Yanksox   Someone's offering a bounty for FA status on ...   Tue 6th March 2007, 12:22am
Anonymouse   [quote name='Anonymouse' post='24142' date='Mon 5...   Tue 6th March 2007, 1:23am
Somey   [b]FULL DISCLOSURE: I AM INDEED abeg92. :ph34r: ...   Tue 6th March 2007, 1:55am
Anonymouse   [quote name='Anonymouse' post='24260' date='Mon 5...   Tue 6th March 2007, 12:04pm
Truth Man   [quote name='Somey' post='24266' date='Mon 5th Ma...   Tue 6th March 2007, 12:51pm
Somey   I voted keep because of the ungodly huge list of s...   Tue 6th March 2007, 3:59pm
Daniel Brandt   For the record, less than an hour ago I added this...   Sun 11th March 2007, 9:25pm
Alex   Six minutes later, JoshuaZ deleted my comment and...   Sun 11th March 2007, 9:31pm
Yanksox   [quote name='Daniel Brandt' post='24810' date='Su...   Sun 11th March 2007, 9:57pm
Jonny Cache   For the record, less than an hour ago I added thi...   Sun 11th March 2007, 10:38pm
Somey   No. His personal opinion is irrelevant, the AfD is...   Sun 11th March 2007, 10:32pm


Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 20th 2 18, 7:35pm