On 2/24/07, William Pietri william@scissor.com wrote:
I hesitate to bring up something that's apparently pretty contentious, but let me ask one small question.
Rob Smith wrote:
The problem is *why *the Brandt bio was created in the first
place. This
was *before* BLP, and strong evidence exists it was created with
malicious
intent to defame Brandt, using a questionable source. This evidence has been reviewed, presumably at the Foundation level.
Do you feel the current article doesn't meet BLP and other standards?
Thanks,
William
Yes. The article was created primarily so nested criticism in another article could be removed, using a source citation to allege Mr. Brandt was associated with, or somehow aligned with an entirely unreputable organization. In fact, that claim remains in the PIR article, although I have thoroughly documented the source of the claim is ( a ) self publishing, ( b ) violates WP:ATT Questionable and self published source.
a ) the slanders in PIR wiki entry are cited to a self published source, Chip Berlet, *Right Woos Left: Populist Party, LaRouchian, and Other Neo- Fascist Overtures to Progressives, and Why They Must Be Rejected*, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Political Research Associates, December 16, 1991.
( b ) the genesis of *Right Woos Left* was Chip Berlet, *Right-wing Conspiracists Make Inroads into Left*, The *Guardianhttp://www.publiceye.org/rightwoo/rwooz9.html *(NY), September 11, 1991 http://www.publiceye.org/conspire/hulet.html, p. 3.
( c ) the *Guardian* is the subject of Chap. 9, p. 125http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=58647856of *Nazis, Communists, Klansmen, and Others on the Fringe: Political Extremism in Americahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazis%2C_Communists%2C_Klansmen%2C_and_Others_on_the_Fringe *, John George and Laird Wilcox, Prometheus Books (Buffalo, New York), 1992, ISBN 0-87975-680-2.
Brandt's bio was created *prior *to BLP, and a different standard was used to determine notability. BLP was created largely out of the Siegnethaler/Berlet/Brandt/Marsden controversies. Mr. Brandt was never afforded the opportunity for fair input into his article, not knowing the reason *why* it was created. All he knew was he work up one morning and had been smeared.