Please help me and Seth get our bios deleted Options

[Daniel Brandt]

My bio is up for AfD per my request, and so is Seth Finkelstein's bio per his request.

Please help us by voting to delete on these two AfDs.

[SqueakBox]

My bio is up for AfD per my request, and so is Seth Finkelstein's bio per his request.

Please help us by voting to delete on these two AfDs.

Good luck, you persuaded me http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=137152615

[Robster]

The comments by David.Monniaux on WP:BLP in the previous nomination, to the effect that "Wikipedia is not a newspaper. The bare fact that someone has been in the news does not in itself imply that they should be memorialized forever with an encyclopedia entry...." etc., should have been the last word on the matter. -

Quote-parking again... might want to keep this one handy the next time Daniel's article comes up for deletion.

That was quick.

I've dropped this quote on both AfDs. Let's see how quickly I get eviscerated for it.

[JTM]

My bio is up for AfD per my request, and so is Seth Finkelstein's bio per his request.

Please help us by voting to delete on these two AfDs.

I have to seriously question whether an AfD is the right way for you to approach this issue.

Alan Keyes, who I agree is a nutcake, nonetheless posed an interesting question in the 2000 presidential race: If the income tax rate is 20%, how much of your income does the government control? The answer is not 20%. The state controls 100% since you constantly have to justify to the government why you are entitled to keep the remaining income.

By allowing Wikipedia to use its forum to determine a "consensus" you have granted to Wikipedia the right to define what consensus means. Just from loking at the current vote, I can see already that the article is probably going to remain. This just makes it all the more difficult for you to get it removed in the future.

If I were in your position, I would simply bide my time. Politics and Wikipedia being what they are, it's only a question of time before faces change, cabals collapse, chaos erupts and you could probably find a friendly administrator to quietly take down the article while no one is looking.

[Somey]

None of that made any sense whatsoever!

[Kato]

I advise everyone to be vigilant and watch those keep voters very carefully for another farcical DennyColt or David Spart sockpuppet frenzy, of the sort which railroaded the last Brandt afd.

So far keeps have come from the below; (people with less than 1000 edits in bold)

*John254 - 7748 edits - most edits=31 to "Masturbation"
*Badlydrawnjeff
*Bogdangiusca - 30,025 edits - most edits=122 to "Transnistria"
*Shawn K. Quinn - 70 edits - most edits=4 to "Magnatune" record label
*DESiegel - 13766 edits - most edits=127 to "Contract bridge glossary"
*Jjay - 8077 edits - most edits=50 to "High school subcultures"
*ElbridgeGerry - 155 edits - most edits=4 to "PenAgain" claims he is located on East Capitol Street and works at the United States Capitol.
*SunStar Net - 3331 edits - most edits=9 to "Volkswagen Golf"
*h2g2bob - 4784 edits - most edits=115 to "Recording Industry Association of America" real name: David Batley
*Richfife - 1909 edits - most edits=59 to "Dawn of the Dead (2004 film)". Real name:Rich Fife. "Raised in Tucson, AZ and currently live in the SF Bay area. A computer programmer who's mostly worked in Video Games and streaming video."
*Javit - 1358 edits - most edits=12 to "Second Life". Real name:Cavit Erginsoy (pronounced 'Javit'). Living in: Southampton, UK.
*Oakshade - 3097 edits - most edits=30 to "Barbara Biggs" Voted keep on the Allison Stokke article with the logic "the world decides if something is notable, not Wikipedia editors." Tinkered with the Brandt article a few times. Heavily involved in afd process, usually from an inclusionist stand point. Seems to have no understanding of BLP sourcing issues. Previously blocked for 3rr.
*Mister.Manticore - 5765 edits - most edits=67 to "Classes in World of Warcraft". Another one of these weird afd wonks. Lurks around the deletion pages attempting to influence decisions towards inclusion. Very little productive work otherwise.
*R. S. Shaw - 4687 edits - most edits=68 to "Binary numeral system". Mysteriously added "One more editor in the hive" to his user page. Edits science yet dabbles in the Brandt article in his spare time. Demanded that the Brandt article include birthplace and date etc. Obvious axe to grind.
*Nick mallory - 4236 edits - most edits=162 to "England cricket team"
*R. Baley - 757 edits - most edits=150 to "Michael J. Fox"
*Resolute - 7669 edits - most edits=128 to "Calgary Hitmen"
*Haemo -5594 edits - most edits=69 to "StarCraft II". Real name:Jonathan Graves. "I currently reside in British Columbia, Canada, and am in my fourth (and a half) year of a Double Honors program at the University of Victoria in Mathematics and Economics. I have also been a teaching assistant at the selfsame university, in the Department of Economics, from 2004 to 2007, and have previously taught mathematical economics."
*Fordmadoxfraud - 4156 edits - most edits=30 to "Celebrity sex tape". Full identity details and photo can be found here.
*wwwwolf - 4949 edits - most edits=41 to Ultima VII. Real name:Urpo Lankinen. "In the electronic world, I go by nick WWWWolf or Weyfour WWWWolf. Officially, my job description at the moment includes being a student of Information Processing Sciences at University of Oulu, Finland."
*SakotGrimshine - 849 edits - most edits=30 to "Cow tipping" Aimless troll who actually voted delete on previous Brandt afd
*J Milburn - 7352 edits - most edits=Voltaire(musician). Administrator. "In real life, I am an English School pupil, from Ireleth, in Cumbria, England. I am currently 16, and studying for my GCSEs." More details and full name are found here.
*Zahakiel - 1928 edits - most edits="Creation Seventh Day Adventist Church". Real name:David P. Aguilar Jr. A PhD student in Computer Science, studying at the University of South Florida (USF) in Tampa, FL. Member of the Creation Seventh Day Adventist Church. Claims to be an author of published works.
*Latebird - 3458 edits - most edits=Mongolia. Single purpose account editing almost exclusively on Mongolia - comes from nowhere to comment on the Brandt article. Latebird writes "He became famous for pushing other people and organisations into the spotlight against their will." What nonsense is this?
*JamesMLane 11698 edits - most edits=301 to George W. Bush.
*DGG 11940 edits - Most edits=60 to "Open access". Administrator. Real name:David Goodman. Librarian.
*Seraphimblade 12588 edits - Most edits="Fabolous". Administrator. Name: Todd. Originally from Denver, Colorado, currently living near Seattle, Washington. Describes himself as a deletionist "World War II. The Roman Empire. Hell, even Britney Spears. These things are human knowledge in that they are important (or at least notable) to humanity as a whole. " Then votes keep on the Brandt article!
* Itub 2416 edits - most edits=46 to "Water model". Mostly edits science articles. Voted "Snowball Keep" when the votes were in favour of deletion! Despite that mathematical blunder, incredibly, Itub is a Monty Hall Problem enthusiast.
*Seventy Seven Thousand . OBVIOUS SOCKPUPPET. 7 edits. All related to the Brandt article dating back to February. Registered 2 days after DennyColt and a day before David Spart.
*David.Mestel. 4256 edits. Most edits=Arbitration report for wikipedia signpost. Secondary school student living in South-East England.
*Vadder. 216 edits. Most edits to "Fanboy". Describes himself as "a member of the Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians".
*WilyD 6237 edits. most edits=152 Scarborough, Ontario. Administrator. Inclusionist troll who argues to keep every piece of crap on the site. An absolute prick and an ignoramus. We certainly haven't heard the last of this guy.

If anyone cares to spend some time digging into the backstories of these guys to check for anomalies, they are welcome (with the obvious exception of Jeff, no introductions needed).

This post has been edited by Kato: Mon 11th June 2007, 8:17pm

[guy]

I've always found Jjay to be sensible and reasonable.

[Kato]

ElbridgeGerry, who has made very few edits elsewhere, seems to be fulfilling the Colt/Spart role of persistent footstamping to ensure the article remains. Watch his contributions very closely. Something is amiss here.

Oh, and respect is due to Squeakbox for voting delete. Publicly changing one's mind based on reconsideration of an issue is a highly admirable quality. Good for you Squeaky.

This post has been edited by Kato: Sun 10th June 2007, 12:45pm

[Somey]

Okay, just because it didn't make sense doesn't mean this stuff shouldn't be addressed point-by-point, if only for the record.

I have to seriously question whether an AfD is the right way for you to approach this issue.

Like he has a choice? You seem to be confused as to who's in control here.

Alan Keyes, who I agree is a nutcake, nonetheless posed an interesting question in the 2000 presidential race: If the income tax rate is 20%, how much of your income does the government control? The answer is not 20%. The state controls 100% since you constantly have to justify to the government why you are entitled to keep the remaining income.

Isn't that precisely why he's called a "nutcake"? Again, this is not the correct definition of "control." The state simply takes 20 percent, the idea that they "let you keep 80 percent" is just rhetoric to win votes, based on the so-called "tax-relief" issue. It has very little to do with reality, unless you're just someone who's obsessed with complaining about taxes.

By allowing Wikipedia to use its forum to determine a "consensus"...

Again, he has no choice in the matter. In essence, what's happening here is that a bunch of anonymous cybergoons are playing around with a man's reputation and livelihood simply because it amuses them in some sick way or other.

...you have granted to Wikipedia the right to define what consensus means.

He's granted them no such thing! He's just trying to get them to stop persecuting him, ferchrissake!

Just from loking at the current vote, I can see already that the article is probably going to remain. This just makes it all the more difficult for you to get it removed in the future.

It makes it more likely that he'll have to sue them, if that's what you mean. And every unsuccessful AfD just gives his case that much more validity, and provides yet more opportunity for the Keep Brandt Brigade to show how malicious they are, and have been all along.

If I were in your position, I would simply bide my time.

How long? Years? Decades? Does he have to die first?

Politics and Wikipedia being what they are, it's only a question of time before faces change, cabals collapse, chaos erupts and you could probably find a friendly administrator to quietly take down the article while no one is looking.

Would you take that bet if the article were about you? And you do remember what happened to the last admin that tried that, do you not?

[GlassBeadGame]

JTM may be simply expressing a lack of faith in the WP "community" and "consensus" being the correct means of getting any relief. Perhaps litigation or Board of Trustee intervention would be a better choice. Despite this, however, if Seth and DB request our assistance in a specific process I think we should do everything in our means to accommodate that request.

[Somey]

ElbridgeGerry, who has made very few edits elsewhere, seems to be fulfilling the Colt/Spart role of persistent footstamping to ensure the article remains. Watch his contributions very closely. Something is amiss here.

"ElbridgeGerry" seems to be one of those accounts that "hangs out" rather than contributes - i.e., I believe he/she is much more of a chatroom participant than an editor. Probably a sock puppet of someone, though... If WP were a real encyclopedia, he'd be the rough equivalent of Milton from Office Space.

Obviously, people like this have one goal in mind: Adminship. It's despicable, and the rest of them are so blinkered to their own reality, they don't even realize it's going on.

Oh, and respect is due to Squeakbox for voting delete. Publicly changing one's mind based on reconsideration of an issue is a highly admirable quality. Good for you Squeaky.

Agreed. We may have to rethink our own Squeaky policy after this one is over...

JTM may be simply expressing a lack of faith in the WP "community" and "consensus" being the correct means of getting any relief.

Perhaps, but "correct" once again implies that there's a choice involved here on his part. I could see "an effective means," of course... Hopefully that's what you meant...

Perhaps litigation or Board of Trustee intervention would be a better choice.

Litigation is probably his only "choice," which doesn't make it much of a choice! The Bored of Trustees isn't going to lift a finger. That's one of the problems with having those people "elected" from the "community" - if they don't adequately reflect the privacy-invading, cyberstalking values of the Keep Brandt Brigade, they'll simply be voted out and replaced with people who do.

Then again, the WP'ers could always surprise us this time, and take a real, positive step towards having Wikipedia join the ranks of respectable, civilization-friendly information-distribution entities... You just never know.

[Kato]

Nemeses MONGO, Sidaway and Slim have weighed in, showing insight and wisdom not evident elsewhere, to vote delete. In fact SlimVirgin's testimony is the wisest and most articulate on the page. When the users of this board are in agreement with the likes of SV, MONGO and co, then surely it is time to burn that miserable article to the ground and dance on the ashes. No amount of ridiculous DennyColt figures - or idiots who edit masturbating cow tipper articles - should be allowed to de-rail this noble process.

[Jonny Cache]

Nemeses MONGO, Sidaway, and Slim have weighed in, showing insight and wisdom not evident elsewhere, to vote delete. In fact SlimVirgin's testimony is the wisest and most articulate on the page. When the users of this board are in agreement with the likes of SV, MONGO and co, then surely it is time to burn that miserable article to the ground and dance on the ashes. No amount of ridiculous DennyColt figures — or idiots who edit masturbating cow tipper articles — should be allowed to de-rail this noble process.

I'm confused —

Is that (masturbating cow) tipper
or masturbating (cow tipper) ???

Jonny

This post has been edited by Jonny Cache: Sun 10th June 2007, 6:48pm

[Daniel Brandt]

Perhaps litigation or Board of Trustee intervention would be a better choice.

The Board of Trustees won't touch this. I asked for information on when and how to appeal to the Board on May 24. Cary Bass at the Wikimedia office issued a ticket number the next day (Ticket #2007052410020751) and replied that he was unable to address the issue of deletion of my biography, and "given the timing of your email with the holiday weekend, will not likely have anything before next week." There is a copy of my letter to Mr. Bass on my Talk page.

"Next week" came and went, with no response to this issue.

Meanwhile, Board chair Florence Devouard (aka Anthere) reported on June 4 that there was a face-to-face Board meeting in the Netherlands on June 1, 2, and 3. "Board members present for the three days were Kat Walsh, Florence Devouard, Erik Moeller, Jan-Bart De Vreede and Jimmy Wales. Oscar Van Dillen joined us saturday morning. Other guests were also present, including Carolyn Doran, our COO."

I presume that if the Board was at all inclined to take up my case, they would have discussed this at that time, and I would have heard from Mr. Bass on Ticket #2007052410020751 by now.

Ms. Devouard further reported that "We spent a large part of our time discussing what we perceive are the two most critical issues to solve very urgently, hiring a new ED [executive director] and a new legal person. A large place was given to a list of legal tasks, the future fundraiser and the audit (the fiscal year just ended last week)."

The Board is obviously rudderless, and with three Board slots up for election this month, they're not in a position to do anything at all for me.

The current AfD appears to be my only hope.

[JohnA]

The intrangent idiots are winning. A lawsuit is the only recourse left.

[SqueakBox]

The intrangent idiots are winning. A lawsuit is the only recourse left.

Not so.

[LamontStormstar]

and Slim have weighed in, showing insight and wisdom not evident elsewhere, to vote delete. In fact SlimVirgin's

Crum voted to delete, too.

[dtobias]

It, in fact, appears that just about everybody who's active in the great "BADSITES debate", on both sides, is voting "delete". Interesting.

[Chris Croy]

Seth's article is definitely getting the axe. Brandt's significantly higher profile than Seth(I did a quick search for "Daniel Brandt" on ProQuest and got 197 hits, about half of which were our Brandt) and he's spent two years deliberately antagonizing Wikipedia. Nonetheless, I'm going to guess Brandt's article will also go away.

[GlassBeadGame]

Seth's article is definitely getting the axe. Brandt's significantly higher profile than Seth(I did a quick search for "Daniel Brandt" on ProQuest and got 197 hits, about half of which were our Brandt) and he's spent two years deliberately antagonizing Wikipedia. Nonetheless, I'm going to guess Brandt's article will also go away.

It all depends on the decision rule they use. Choices are:

1. Burden of showing consensus on "Delete" the purported usual rule;
2. Burden of showing consensus on "Keep" which has been discussed in BLP reform but I do not believe it has been accepted as policy, or;
3. Lawless whim, the de facto decision rule of all WP "discussions."