Changes

Berlet complained about criticism in his Wikipedia biographical entry,<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Cberlet/Archive_2005-06_2005-08#Red-baiting_Lie_Article.21</ref> and the organization he is associated with, [[Political Research Associates]].<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Political_Research_Associates&diff=prev&oldid=24242896</ref>  One critic was blasted in the article mainspace by Berlet with an unsourced, unspecified rebuttal as being "unethical;" when an editor asked if the charge could be substantiated he was rebuked with a charge of "harassment."<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Chip_Berlet/Archive_2#Laird_Wilcox</ref> Another reliable source in the article read,

Berlet complained about criticism in his Wikipedia biographical entry,<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Cberlet/Archive_2005-06_2005-08#Red-baiting_Lie_Article.21</ref> and the organization he is associated with, [[Political Research Associates]].<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Political_Research_Associates&diff=prev&oldid=24242896</ref>  One critic was blasted in the article mainspace by Berlet with an unsourced, unspecified rebuttal as being "unethical;" when an editor asked if the charge could be substantiated he was rebuked with a charge of "harassment."<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Chip_Berlet/Archive_2#Laird_Wilcox</ref> Another reliable source in the article read,

{{Cquote|one leftist writer mentions Berlet’s 'crusade' against Progressives who stray from Berlet's ideological fever swamps by working with non-leftist groups. In a fascinating conclusion, the leftist commentator warns that Berlet 'may try to undermine your work and isolate you.' <ref>[http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=10352 Chip Berlet: Leftist Lie Factory], By Chris Arabia, FrontPageMagazine.com October 16, 2003.</ref>}}

{{Cquote|one leftist writer mentions Berlet’s 'crusade' against Progressives who stray from Berlet's ideological fever swamps by working with non-leftist groups. In a fascinating conclusion, the leftist commentator warns that Berlet 'may try to undermine your work and isolate you.' <ref>[http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=10352 Chip Berlet: Leftist Lie Factory], By Chris Arabia, FrontPageMagazine.com October 16, 2003.</ref>}}

Berlet stated, "This complaint was written by Daniel Brandt,"<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Cberlet/Archive_2005-06_2005-08#Red-baiting_Lie_Article.21</ref> and a Daniel Brandt entry on Wikipedia soon was created. Brandt describes himself as an "accountability activist"<ref>[http://www.pbs.org/mediashift/2006/04/your_take_roundupbelievers_neg.html Believers, Negativists Debate Wikipedia’s Trustworthiness], by Mark Glaser, 20 April 2006. Retrieved from pbs.org October 29, 2007.</ref><ref>[http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Daniel_Brandt Wikiquote/Danial Brandt#Sourced]</ref> and claims he originally began working with Wikipedia editors in good faith during October 2005 but any biographical information he revealed was spun against him to depict him in a negative light.  Brandt states,

Berlet stated, "This complaint was written by Daniel Brandt,"<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Cberlet/Archive_2005-06_2005-08#Red-baiting_Lie_Article.21</ref> and a Daniel Brandt entry on Wikipedia soon was created. Brandt describes himself as an "accountability activist"<ref>[http://www.pbs.org/mediashift/2006/04/your_take_roundupbelievers_neg.html Believers, Negativists Debate Wikipedia’s Trustworthiness], by Mark Glaser, 20 April 2006. Retrieved from pbs.org October 29, 2007.</ref><ref>[http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Daniel_Brandt Wikiquote/Daniel Brandt#Sourced]</ref> and claims he originally began working with Wikipedia editors in good faith during October 2005 but any biographical information he revealed was spun against him to depict him in a negative light.  Brandt states,

{{Cquote|I soon realized that it was also about Berlet, who was still bent on undermining me. Berlet was using Wikipedia as part of his political agenda, and he was successful in this.<ref>http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=5641&pid=21441&mode=threaded&show=&st=0&#entry21441</ref>}}

{{Cquote|I soon realized that it was also about Berlet, who was still bent on undermining me. Berlet was using Wikipedia as part of his political agenda, and he was successful in this.<ref>http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=5641&pid=21441&mode=threaded&show=&st=0&#entry21441</ref>}}

Berlet's biography underwent an extensive revision with most of the substantive NPOV criticism cut out.  The revising editor commented, "I kept Daniel Brandt, not because I feel he's a credible source, but because there's so little published criticism of Berlet, that I felt I had to retain something."<ref>Chip Berlet/Talk, SlimVirgin 00:19, 7 January 2005.</ref> This is an extraordinary statement, coming from the same author of several of Wikipedia's core content and citation policies, including '''Wikipedia:Reliable Sources''' and '''Wikipedia:Biographies of Living Persons.'''<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ABiographies_of_living_persons&diff=31947681&oldid=31753956</ref> Brandt remarked, "I soon discovered that she had slimed me in defense of Chip Berlet several months earlier."<ref>http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=5641&pid=21441&mode=threaded&show=&st=&#entry21441</ref><ref>http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=6666&pid=23072&mode=threaded&show=&st=20&#entry23072</ref><ref>The same author had previously stated 23:47, Jan 4, 2005 (UTC) "I removed Daniel Brandt. He's not a credible source"</ref>

Berlet's biography underwent an extensive revision with most of the substantive NPOV criticism cut out.  The revising editor commented, "I kept Daniel Brandt, not because I feel he's a credible source, but because there's so little published criticism of Berlet, that I felt I had to retain something."<ref>Chip Berlet/Talk, SlimVirgin 00:19, 7 January 2005.</ref> This is an extraordinary statement, coming from the same author of several of Wikipedia's core content and citation policies, including '''Wikipedia:Reliable Sources''' and '''Wikipedia:Biographies of Living Persons.'''<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ABiographies_of_living_persons&diff=31947681&oldid=31753956</ref> Brandt remarked, "I soon discovered that she had slimed me in defense of Chip Berlet several months earlier."<ref>http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=5641&pid=21441&mode=threaded&show=&st=&#entry21441</ref><ref>http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=6666&pid=23072&mode=threaded&show=&st=20&#entry23072</ref><ref>The same author had previously stated 23:47, Jan 4, 2005 (UTC) "I removed Daniel Brandt. He's not a credible source"</ref>

Brandt is also a registered user at Wikipedia, hence '''No Personal Attacks''' and '''Civility''' clauses apply, in addition to '''What Wikipedia is Not''', a vehicle for propaganda, advertising or self-promotion. '''Wikipedia is not a battleground'''.<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:NOT#Wikipedia_is_not_a_battleground</ref>

Brandt is also a registered user at Wikipedia, hence '''No Personal Attacks''' and '''Civility''' clauses apply, in addition to '''What Wikipedia is Not''', a vehicle for propaganda, advertising or self-promotion. '''Wikipedia is not a battleground'''.<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:NOT#Wikipedia_is_not_a_battleground</ref>

[[Image:25may2006cberlet2.GIF|thumb|300px|right|]]

[[Image:25may2006cberlet2.GIF|thumb|300px|right|]]

 

 

<!--The entry alleging Daniel Brandt's Public Information Research is [[politically profiled]] as being aligned with [[Holocaust denial]] and cited to Political Research Associates, a self published source. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Information_Research#_note-0] The self-published source states these charges first appeared by the same author, Chip Berlet, in a questionable and extremist publication, the ''[[Guardian]]''. [http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/orgs/american/ftp.py?orgs/american//political-research-associates/right.w.left] The questionable and extremist publication (''Guardian'') is the subject of Chapter 9, ''Nazis, Communists, Klansmen, and Others on the Fringe''. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazis%2C_Communists%2C_Klansmen%2C_and_Others_on_the_Fringe], by a mainstream publisher ''Prometheus Books''.  The same author of questionable and defamatory material cited himself (Berlet) when inserting the questionable and extremist material into the Daniel Brandt article. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Daniel_Brandt&diff=55132392&oldid=55131921]-->

<!--The entry alleging Daniel Brandt's Public Information Research is [[politically profiled]] as being aligned with [[Holocaust denial]] and cited to Political Research Associates, a self published source. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Information_Research#_note-0] The self-published source states these charges first appeared by the same author, Chip Berlet, in a questionable and extremist publication, the ''[[Guardian]]''. [http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/orgs/american/ftp.py?orgs/american//political-research-associates/right.w.left] The questionable and extremist publication (''Guardian'') is the subject of Chapter 9, ''Nazis, Communists, Klansmen, and Others on the Fringe''. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazis%2C_Communists%2C_Klansmen%2C_and_Others_on_the_Fringe], by a mainstream publisher ''Prometheus Books''.  The same author of questionable and defamatory material cited himself (Berlet) when inserting the questionable and extremist material into the Daniel Brandt article. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Daniel_Brandt&diff=55132392&oldid=55131921]-->