The last attempt to delete the NameBase article occurred nearly four years ago. I still want it taken down.

Wikipedia-watch.org is now history — this is a fair trade, it seems to me.

The NameBase article is utterly incompetent and inaccurate. No, I'm not allowed to "fix it," nor am I interested in seeing a decent article about NameBase on Wikipedia. That's because Wikipediots will make it incompetent and inaccurate soon enough, even if it starts out half-decent.

To encourage its deletion, I have nullrouted all links on en.wikipedia.org that lead to NameBase content (there are about 100 of these). I will stop doing this if and when the NameBase article comes down.

So fix it, Wikipedia.

That is a shame - it was one of my favorite websites!

Even better: Shortly after Brandt posted the above, Seren ran over and started "fixing" the article.....

Some people just can't see: the joke's on them.

Was that a "shit eating grin"?

I would have thought that Daniel would like it kept just for the link to this article:

http://www.counterpunch.org/2003/01/03/sea...-daniel-brandt/


Believe me, it is very difficult indeed to buy good publicity like that.

NameBase looks like essential reading for conspiracy theorists. You just have to bring up a diagram this then decide not to be able to afford the sources and then one can claim that Larry O'Hara is a Searchlight agent creating ridiculous conspiracy theories that anyone can see through in order to hide how Gerry Gable is in league with John Pilger, David Icke and (via the oiuja board) Edward Heath in an attempt to defeat the Thatcherite lizardfolk. (She's not really dementing, that film is just part of the conspiracy.)

Speaking of namebase, Peggy Adler, (SPA account! OMG!), is yet another WP:AUTOBIO all-star

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bxzooo

Go Peggy!

Feel sorry for her "domestic violence" perp ex-husband getting all WikiJustice-ed up.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Bxz...mestic_Violence

Perhaps Danny shouldn't have been dumb enough to call attention to it, then. Calling for a marginally-notable article to be deleted while in the presence of ARSeholes is like painting your own bullseye.

Yeah what the hell? Was this talked about here?

[[Peggy Adler]]'s self promotion on WP (autobio, edited wikilink to it within the namebase article) is some sort of equal and opposite reaction to her old colleague Brandt. Unlike Brandt, she does meet notability due to the author thing.

Wonder if she knows Slim Virgin....

And whatever you do, do not put {{AUTO}} at the top of her WP AUTO BLP! She's even quicker on the draw than [[James Altucher]]'s home IP edits.

I can no longer offer to lift the nullroute if the article is deleted, because the entire NameBase site is now extinct.

In other news, Michael Suarez pasted dozens of items of content from NameBase to webcitation.org last month. He had an urge to show who is boss on this issue — me or Wikipedia. This was a copyright violation, and WebCite has properly taken them down.

You can thank DDoSers from encyclopediadramatica.ch for the death of NameBase (which took 27 years to deveop). Suarez, by the way, is an admin on ED.ch, where his user name is JuniusThaddeus.

I wasn't trying to show anyone who's bigger. I was fighting against discrimination. You were discriminating against certain groups by deciding who can or can't access NameBase and its information. Wikipedia, on the other hand, doesn't discriminate; it provides information freely to anyone. I used webcitation.org in order to indiscriminately provide access to anyone. I used webcitation.org so that those using Wikipedia as a starting point for research can make use of NameBase's information.

I stated my reason for using webcitation.org clearly enough in January:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...to_NameBase.org

As far as I'm aware, Encyclopedia Dramatica isn't responsible for the DDoS attacks.

"Wikipedia provides information freely to everyone" because that is what the people who own WP have chosen to do. If Brandt wants to restrict access to his site and the data he has compiled, isn't that his choice? Is this an "information wants to be free" argument? Sometimes I find it difficult to reconcile your WP and ED activities, since you come across as an intelligent guy, but I am beginning to suspect that it is simply an "end justifies the means"-type of crusade where WP is the good hand and ED is the bad hand that you use to advance your frei kultur goals.

Why pick on Daniel Brandt? Many sites have pay walls. Why pick on a relatively small website rather than a big time charger? Or are you frightened of say Rupert Murdoch?

NameBase has a registered copyright. Webcitation.org took it down after I sent them a letter with a copy of my registration certificate. It wasn't a DMCA because Webcitation.org is based in Canada, but there are international treaties concerning copyrights. Suarez could have checked this out before going on a copy-and-paste orgy, if he hadn't been so eager to qualify himself as an anti-Brandt EDiot.

Perhaps you intended to say "Wikipedia provides misinformation freely to anyone."

Interesting that Suarez is both an EDer and an advocate of the *rights* of Wikipedia. According to his WP Signpost the fact that people using WP are inconvenienced if something WP cites isn't available it is justifiable for him to violate copyright laws with a massive cut and paste job. But if WP users have the right to unfettered access to WP sources via Wikipedia, why doesn't Suarez also go on a massive cut and paste campaign to copy firewalled newspaper or journal articles? It's some courageous warrior who is willing to crusade for free access to a small, unfunded site but not willing to take on large media companies. Brave man, indeed.

I am grateful to Heat for agreeing with me so enthusiastically.

Brandt, at the rate you're going you may just tip the notability scales into getting your own BLP article restored. The Register and Betabeat, among others, have covered Scroogle's downfall in the last week or so.

Perhaps we'll see if the venerable Article Rescue Squadron, who rarely meets a subject matter it doesn't vote to keep, is interested.

My God, man, listen to yourself! Surely you can't possibly believe what you're saying? It's utterly absurd.

I mean, if you guys want to DDoS small websites that are trying to make the internet a better place in the face of increasingly widespread corporate and government control-grabs, shakeouts and buy-downs, then that's your call - but please, at least have the decency not to insult our intelligence like this. You're the bad guys at this point, that much is well beyond obvious by now.


As a contributor to both Wikipedia and its support site, surely you're familiar with the so-called "duck test"...?

I was at University not that many years ago. We had a library as many universities do. That library was not open to the public, just to staff and students and the occasional legitimate researcher who asked nicely. Is it not shameful that a University was discriminating against certain groups by deciding who can or can't access its private library and its information? I hope that no other university would try to do such a thing. I will not reveal its name or Mr. Suarez and his friends might picket it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Art...d_nomination%29

They're taking down the "Scroogle" article again. Although Thargor Orlando believes that the article was restored without a discussion, there was an undeletion discussion in February 2012.

I doubt that there would ever have been a Scroogle article had Daniel Brandt not been involved. It seems far from notable.