Talk:Brent Corrigan and Huns: Difference between pages

Revision as of 22:58, 1 April 2006

Revision as of 19:26, 1 June 2007

Line 1:

{{otheruses2|Hun}}

==Request for Arbitration Resolved==

The '''Huns''' were an early confederation of [[Central Asia]]n [[Eurasian nomads|equestrian nomads]] or semi-nomads.<ref>[[Walter Pohl]] has remarked "early medieval peoples were far less homogeneous than often thought. They themselves shared the fundamental belief to be of common origin; and modern historians, for a long time, found no reason to think otherwise." (Walter Pohl, "Conceptions of Ethnicity in Early Medieval Studies" ''Debating the Middle Ages: Issues and Readings'', ed. Lester K. Little and Barbara H. Rosenwein, (Blackwell), 1998, p 16). In reviewing Joachim Werner's ''Beiträge zur Archäologie des Attila-Reiches'' (Munich 1956), in ''Speculum'' '''33'''.1 (January 1958), p 159, Otto J. Maenchen-Helfen noted with relief that "the author is not concerned with the slightly infantile question, 'who' the Huns were; he does not ask where the Huns 'ultimately' came from."</ref> Some of these [[Eurasian nomads|Eurasian tribes]] moved into [[Europe]] in the [[4th century]], most famously under [[Attila the Hun]]. Huns remaining in [[Asia]] are recorded by neighboring peoples to the south, east, and west as having occupied Central Asia roughly from the 4th century to the 6th century, with some surviving in the [[Caucasus]] until the early 8th century.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Brent_Corrigan#replying_to_request_for_comment

==Origins and research==

[[User:Natoma|Natoma]] 20:36, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

The research and debate about the [[Asia]]n ancestral origins of the Huns has been ongoing since the 18th century. To this day, [[Philology|philologists]] still debate which [[ethnonym]] from [[China|Chinese]], [[Persia]]n, or [[Armenia]]n sources is identical with the [[Latin]] ''Hunni'' or the [[Greek language|Greek]] ''Chounnoi'', in their attempts to clarify the Huns' origins and linguistic background.<ref name="Pohl">[[Walter Pohl]] (1999), "Huns" in ''Late Antiquity'', editor [[Peter Brown]], p.501-502 .. further references to F.H Bauml and M. Birnbaum, eds., ''Atilla: The Man and His Image'' (1993). [[Peter Heather]], "The Huns and the End of the Roman Empire in Western Europe," ''English Historical Review'' 90 (1995):4-41. [[Peter Heather]], ''The Fall of the Roman Empire'' (2005). [[Otto J. Maenchen-Helfen|Otto Maenchen-Helfen]], ''The World of the Huns'' (1973). E. de la Vaissière, Huns et Xiongnu "Central Asiatic Journal" 2005-1 pp. 3-26</ref>

Recent [[genetics|genetic]] research<ref name="Pohl"/> shows that the great [[confederation]]s of steppe warriors were not, in fact, an ethnically [[homogeneous]] people, but rather tended to be comprised of various [[Eurasian nomads|Eurasian clans]]. Hun identity is further complicated by the fame of the name, as many [[clan]]s apparently claimed to be Huns for the prestige of the name; similarly, Greek or Latin chroniclers may have referred to "Huns" in a more general sense, to describe social or ethnic characteristics, believed place of origin, or reputation.<ref name="Pohl" />"''All we can say safely''", says [[Walter Pohl]],"''is that the name Huns, in late antiquity, described prestigious ruling groups of steppe warriors''".<ref name="Pohl" /> These views come in the context of the [[ethnocentric]] and [[Historiography and nationalism|nationalistic scholarship]] of past generations, which often presumed that an ethnic homogeneity must underlie a socially and culturally homogeneous peoples.<ref>[[Michael Kulikowski]] (2006). ''Rome's Gothic Wars''. Cambridge University Press. Page 52-54</ref>

The genetic research and [[ethnogenesis]] approach is in contrast to traditional theories based on [[China#Arts.2C scholarship.2C and literature|Chinese records]], [[archaeology]], [[linguistics]] and other indirect evidence. These theories contain various elements: that the name "Hun" first described a nomadic ruling group of warriors whose ethnic origins were in [[Central Asia]], and was most likely in present day [[Mongolia]]; that they were possibly related to, or included in, the [[Xiongnu]] (the theory first suggested by [[Joseph de Guignes]] in the 18th century); that the Xiongnu were defeated by the [[History of China|Chinese]] [[Han Empire]]; and that this is why they left Mongolia and moved westward, eventually invading [[Europe]] 200 years later. Indirect evidence includes the transmission of the [[composite bow]], the so-called [[Hun bow]], from [[Central Asia]] to the west.

Nice one

This traditional narrative, of a westward movement of people triggered by a Chinese war, is deeply ingrained in western (and eastern) historiography — but the evidence is often indirect or ambiguous (the Huns left practically no written records). For a timespan of 150 years, there is no record of what happened between the time they left [[China]] and arrived in Europe. The last mention of the northern Xiongnu was their defeat by the Chinese in [[151]] at the lake of [[Barkol Kazakh Autonomous County|Barkol]], after which they fled to the western steppe at [[Kangju|K’ang-chü]] (centered on [[Hazrat-e Turkestan|Turkestan]] in [[Kazakhstan]]). Furthermore, [[China#Arts.2C scholarship.2C and literature|Chinese records]] between the [[3rd century|3rd]] and [[4th century]] suggest that a small tribe called [[Yueban]] (described as the remnants of northern Xiongnu) were distributed about the steppe of [[Kazakhstan]]. The recent genetic research presents a further challenge to the theory of a distinct ethnic-Hun origin.

[[User:Reedy Boy|Reedy Boy]] 20:38, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

One recent line of reasoning favors a political and cultural link between the Huns and the Xiongnu. The Central Asian ([[Sogdian]] and [[Bactrian]]) sources of the 4th century translate "Huns" as "Xiongnu", and "Xiongnu" as "Huns"; also, Xiongnu and Hunnish cauldrons are virtually identical, and were buried on the same spots (river banks) in [[Hungary]] and in the [[Ordos]].<ref>E. de la Vaissière, Huns et Xiongnu "Central Asiatic Journal" 2005-1 pp. 3-26</ref>

==Request for Arbitration==

I have opened an arbitration case to have the Brent Corrigan article locked until the legal dispute is finalized. Due to the sensitive nature of the release of his real name, as well as the allegations of underage sexual performance, I do not believe that Wiki should be involved in the dispute.

Ever since [[Joseph de Guignes]] in the [[18th century]] identified the Huns with the ''Xiongnu'' or ''(H)siung-nu'',<ref>[http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Hiung-Nu "Sir H. H. Howorth, History of the Mongols (1876-1880); 6th Congress of Orientalists, Leiden, 1883 (Actes, part iv. pp. 177-195); de Guignes, Histoire generale des Huns, des Turcs, des Mongoles, et des autres Tartares occidentaux (1756-1758)"]</ref> there has been a school of thought that the Huns were of [[Turkic peoples|Turkic]] origin. This theory is also supported by O. Maenchen-Helfen, on the basis of his linguistic studies.<ref>Otto J. Maenchen-Helfen. The World of the Huns: Studies in Their History and Culture. University of California Press, 1973</ref><ref>[http://www.kroraina.com/huns/mh/mh_6.html Otto Maenchen-Helfen, Language of Huns]</ref> [[England|English]] scholar [[Peter Heather]] called the Huns "the first group of [[Turkic peoples|Turkic]], as opposed to Iranian, nomads to have intruded into Europe".<ref>Peter Heather, "The Huns and the End of Roman Empire in Western Europe", ''The English Historical Review'', Vol. 110, No. 435, February 1995, p. 5.</ref> [[Kemal Cemal]], a [[Turkish people|Turkish]] researcher,<ref>[http://www.kessler-web.co.uk/History/FeaturesEurope/BarbarianHuns.htm "Europe: The Origins of the Huns"], by Kessler Associate, based on conversations with Kemal Cemal, Turkey, 2002</ref> bolsters this assertion with [[linguistic]] evidence, demonstrating similarities in words and names between [[Turkic languages|Turkic]] and [[Hunnic language|Hunnic]] languages. He also compares Hunnic systems of governance to those of Turkic tribes, again demonstrating similarity. Hungarian historian [[Gyula Nemeth]] also supports this view.

Once the facts are laid bare, then this account should, in my opinion, either show or hide his information. Until such time, I believe this serves no one except those who intend harm to Mr. Corrigan.

[[Uyghur]] historian [[Turghun Almas]] has suggested a link between the [[Uyghurs]] (a [[Turkic languages|Turkic speaking people]] who reside in [[Xinjiang]], [[China]]) and the Huns.

Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Current_requests

The so-called "[[White Huns]]" of [[Procopius]] were probably not related to the classical Huns.<ref>Columbia Encyclopedia</ref><ref>Encyclopædia Britannica</ref>

[[User:Natoma|Natoma]] 14:57, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

==Real NameHistory==

[[Image:Huns empire.png|thumb|300px|left|The [[Hunnic Empire]] stretched from the steppes of [[Central Asia]] into modern [[Germany]], and from the [[Black Sea]] to the [[Baltic Sea]]]]

Whatever one feels on the Brent Corrigan/under age/Cobra issue, there is no reason not to include his real name. Like any actor/performer, Wikipedia lists facts about them. The birth date, birth place, and birth name of actors are certainly appropriate information to list in an encyclopedia. Such a listing does not "take sides" in the on-going dispute regarding Mr. Corrigan. As an article with a NPOV, I hope basic facts can be left in the article. [[User:68.36.193.233|68.36.193.233]] 13:40, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

=== 2nd-5th centuries ===

Even if some online news media gave once Brent Corrigan real name, he has never agreed for his real name to be off public knowledge. Stage name for porn performer are here to protect their private life.

{{Cleanup|date=May 2007}}

Furthermore, the underage controversy isn't settled.

[[Dionysius Periegetes]] describes a people who may be Huns living near the [[Caspian Sea]] in the [[2nd century]]. By AD [[139]], the European geographer [[Ptolemy]] writes that the [[Khuni]] are next to the [[Dnieper River]] and ruled by [[Suni]]?<!--fact: Suni here WP - "occur in South-east Africa in dense underbrush. They feed on leaves, fungi, fruits and flowers"..:)-->. Ptolemy lists the "[[Chuni]]" as among the "Sarmatian" [[White Hun]] tribes in the second century, although it is not known for certain if these people were the Huns. The [[fifth century]] [[Armenian]] historian [[Moses of Khorene]], in his "History of Armenia," introduces the ''Hunni'' near the [[Sarmatians]] and describes their capture of the city of [[Balk]] ("Kush" in [[Armenian language|Armenian]]) sometime between [[194]] and [[214]], which explains why the [[Greeks]] call that city ''Hunuk''.

Until then, I think the presence of his real name on this page is inappropriate, not to say unlawful, for the respect of the right of privacy. (Not user, but reader)

Following the defeat of the [[Xiongnu]] by the [[Han Dynasty|Han]], Xiongnu history is unknown for a century; thereafter, the Liu family of southern Xiongnu [[Tiefu]] attempted to establish a state in western [[China]] (see [[Han Zhao]]). [[Chionite]]s (OIONO/Xiyon) appear on the scene in [[Transoxiana]] in [[320]] immediately after [[Jin Zhun]] overthrew [[Liu Can]], sending the Xiongnu into chaos. Later [[Kidara]] came along to lead the [[Chionite]]s into pressing on the [[Kushan Empire|Kushans]].

:I respect that opinion, but disagree. As a public performer - he chose to go into acting/pornography - his real name is not a protected secret. I can understand not listing his current address, his email, or anything else, but why is the real name of an adult public performer a protected piece of information? For any other porn performer, would you remove their real name too? Why don't we both stop reverting the page for a while and see what the rest of the WikiWorld thinks of this issue? My opinion - a person who voluntarily enters public life loses certain privacy rights - one of them is basic facts (name, age) about them. There is nothng unlawful about revealing a public perfomer's given name. (I am huge Brent Corrigan fan by the way and have tried to keep this page NPOV and fair - check previous edits). [[User:68.36.193.233|68.36.193.233]] 14:07, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Back west, [[Ostrogoths]] came into contact with the Huns in AD [[358]]. The Armenians mention [[Vund]] c.370: the first recorded Hunnish leader in the Caucasus region. The [[Roman Empire|Romans]] invited the Huns east of the [[Ukraine]] to settle [[Pannonia]] in [[361]], and in [[372]], under the leadership of [[Balimir]] their king, the Huns pushed towards the west and defeated the [[Alans]]. Back east again, in the early [[5th century]], [[Tiefu|Tiefu Xia]] is the last southern Xiongnu dynasty in Western China and the ''[[Alchon]]'' / ''[[Huna (people)|Huna]]'' appear in what is now [[Afghanistan]] and [[Pakistan]]. At this point deciphering Hunnish histories for the multi-linguist becomes easier with relatively well-documented events in [[Byzantine Empire|Byzantine]], [[Armenia]]n, [[Iran]]ian, [[India]]n, and [[China|Chinese]] sources.

::I agree to this opinion as to the public nature of his craft and thus the public nature of his name.

:::Indeed, I agree as well. Thus, I will try to keep this page as non POV as possible, and restore "vandalism" as soon as possible. [[User:Spheroide|Spheroide]] 18:39, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

=== European Huns ===

Obviously, [[User: Spheroide]Spheriode]] has something personal against Brent, why else would he be so insistent to include his real name in the entry? His real name was only made pubic by Cobra's unenforceable "writ of summons" which is basically a legal exploratory maneuver to gather depositions to determine if enough evidence even exists to justify a lawsuit. The file was made in an effort to acquire Brent’s valid ID for the purpose to legally release newly obtained content of Mr. Corrigan, not for verification of the claim he made on August 16, 2005. Had Mr. Phillips actually filed a legitimate suit, he too would have been required to provide testimony, an option which would not have been very attractive. A convicted felons claim and testimony carry little weight in a courtroom setting. (Unclean hands) Therefore, Mr. Corrigan’s true identity is of no concern to this entry as is Mr. Phillips or his background which probably does carry merit for inclusion. If the unnecessary disclosure of Mr. Corrigan’s does not halt, a detailed complaint outlining Mr. Phillips questionable background and negligent intent towards Mr. Corrigan. Furthermore a "Discontinuance without Prejudice" was submitted on Cobra's behalf in regard to the "writ of summons" the civil action used to reveal Mr. Corrigan's identity to the public. In other words, no action was taken. The only thing discovered from this proceeding was Mr. Corrigan's private information.

[[Image:HunSiege-ChroniconPictum.jpg|thumb|400px|A 14th century [[chivalric]]-romanticized painting of "the huns" laying siege to a city. Note [[anachronistic]] details in weapons, armor and city type. ''[[Chronicon Pictum]]'', 1360.]]

The Huns appeared in Europe in the [[4th century]]. Apparently originating in Central Asia, they first appeared north of the [[Black Sea]], forcing a large number of [[Goths]] to seek refuge in the Roman Empire; later, the Huns appearred west of the [[Carpathians]] in [[Pannonia]], probably sometime between [[400]] and [[410]], perhaps triggering the massive migration of [[Germanic tribes]] westward across the [[Rhine]] in December [[406]].

Thank you, signed, a concerned party.

The establishment of the [[5th century]] [[Hunnic Empire]] marks an historically early instance of [[horseback migration]]. Under the leadership of [[Attila the Hun]], the Huns achieved hegemony over several well-organized rivals by utilizing superior weaponry such as the [[Hun bow]], and a well-organized system of taxation. Supplementing their wealth by plundering wealthy [[Roman Empire|Roman]] cities to the south, the Huns managed to maintain the loyalties of a diverse number of tributary tribes.

:"Obviously, [[User: Spheroide]Spheriode]] has something personal against Brent" --> Not at all. Please have a look at the article history and note that I even wrote the initial version, long before any age concerns surfaced. I just feel strongly that factual data should be included, and a Real Name for those in entertainment is among that kind of data. Thus my continuing efforts in keeping this article NPOV and informative. [[User:Spheroide|Spheroide]] 00:20, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Attila's Huns incorporated groups of unrelated [[tribute|tributary]] peoples. In Europe, [[Alans]], [[Gepid]]s, [[Scirii]], [[Rugians]], [[Sarmatians]], [[Slavic peoples|Slavs]] and [[Goths|Gothic tribes]] all united under the Hun family military elite. Some of Attila's Huns eventually settled in [[Pannonia]] after his death, but the [[Hunnic Empire]] would not survive Attila's passing. After his sons were defeated by [[Ardaric]]'s coalition at the [[Battle of Nedao]] in [[454]], at modern day [[Nedava]], the Hunnish Empire disolved.

Then why do you remove the factual data and corresponding links that I added detailing the Mr. Phillip's identity and felony conviction. Please explain that? If that has no significance to this entry than Mr. Corrigan's true identity surely does not!

Memory of the Hunnish conquest was [[oral tradition|transmitted orally]] among [[Germanic peoples]] and is an important component in the [[Old Norse]] ''[[Völsunga saga]]'' and ''[[Hervarar saga]]'', and the [[Middle High German]] ''[[Nibelungenlied]]'', all of which portray [[Migrations period]] events a millennium before their written recordings. In the ''[[Hervarar saga]]'', the Goths make first contact with the bow-wielding Huns and meet them in an epic battle on the plains of the [[Danube]]. In the ''[[Völsunga saga]]'' and the ''[[Nibelungenlied]]'', King Attila (''[[Atli]]'' in Norse and ''[[Etzel]]'' in German) defeats the [[Franks|Frankish]] king [[Sigebert I]] (''[[Sigurðr]]'' or ''[[Siegfried]]'') and the [[Burgundian]] King [[Guntram]] (''[[Gunnar]]'' or ''[[Gunther]]''), but is subsequently assassinated by Queen [[Fredegund]] (''[[Gudrun]]'' or ''[[Kriemhild]]''), the sister of the latter and wife of the former.

:They should be part of a "Mr. Phillips"-like article, and not of this one. Feel free to create one. A wiki-link could be added, for example, to the Cobra Video page to the Brian Phillips-page. Please create a complete and informative, but most of all ''encyclopedic'' article if you do so, and not just a one-point-of-view one that serves no purpose but to name-and-shame. I'm looking forward to reading your efforts! [[User:Spheroide|Spheroide]] 00:31, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

==Successor nations==

:Please don't put the real name of the person in the document. If the name is not publicly known it should not be disclosed, because it is violating his privacy. [[User:Dr_Debug|Dr Debug]] <small>([[User_talk:Dr_Debug|Talk]])</small> 00:53, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Many nations have tried to assert themselves as ethnic or cultural successors to the Huns. For instance, the [[Nominalia of the Bulgarian khans]] may indicate that they believed themselves to have been descended from Attila. The [[Bulgars]] certainly were part of the Hun tribal alliance for some time, and some have hypothesized in the past that the [[Chuvash language]] (which is believed to have descended from the [[Bulgar language]]) is the closest surviving relative of the Hunnish language.<ref>[[Encyclopaedia Britannica]], [[1997]]: ''Turkic languages''.<blockquote>

::Fact of the matter is that his real name *is* publicly known, due to the dispute between Mr. Corrigan and Cobra Video. [[User:Spheroide|Spheroide]] 12:03, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

"Formerly, scholars considered [[Chuvash language|Chuvash]] not properly a [[Turkic languages|Turkic language]] at all but, rather, the only surviving representative of a separate subdivision of the [[Altaic languages]] probably spoken by the Huns."

</blockquote> </ref>

The [[Magyars]] (Hungarians) also have laid claims to Hunnish heritage. Considering that the Huns who invaded Europe represented a loose coalition of various peoples, it is not out of the question that Magyars were present among those ethnic groups as well. Until the early 20th century, many Hungarian historians believed that the [[Székely]] people (the Hungarians' "brother nation" who live in [[Transylvania]]) were the descendants of the Huns.

Thank you for your advice on creating an entry for the "Mr. Phillips"-like article. I will get to work on that immediately and will take extra precaution to assure the article is very detailed as well as historically and legally accurate. I will be sure to include a full compliment of links and articles for authentication and verification purposes.

The names "Hun" and "Hungarian" sound alike, but differ in [[etymology]]. The name "Hungarian" is derived from a Turkish phrase "onogur" which means "ten tribes", which possibly refers to a tribal covenant between the different Hungarian tribes that moved into the area of today's Hungary at the end of the 9th century.

I would appreciate your infinite wisdom and input on this matter since you seem to have specifically detailed knowledge of background of Cobra Video and its models. Are there any other studios in which plan to outline in the near future?

In [[2005]], a group of about 2,500 Hungarians petitioned the government for recognition of minority status as direct descendants of Attila. The bid failed, but gained some publicity for the group, which formed in the early 1990s and appears to represent a special Hun(garian)-centric brand of mysticism. The self-proclaimed Huns are not known to possess any distinctly Hunnish culture or language beyond what would be available from historical and modern-mystical Hungarian sources.<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4435181.stm BBC News - "Hungary blocks Hun minority bid" - By Nick Thorpe, April 12, 2005]</ref>

I find it hypocritical that Brent has asked people not to use his real name when he has links about Bryan's past directly on his site. These links provide Bryan's real name. If Brent were truly serious about his own privacy, he would remove those links about Bryan. He hasn't done that, and I doubt ever will, as he continues to play the role of victim, even after all the debate has pretty much subsid ed. Why should Brent's name be kept private, but Bryan's name be public? Is this at all fair? <small>&mdash;''The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by'' [[User:70.83.96.69|70.83.96.69]] ([[User talk:70.83.96.69|talk]]&nbsp;&bull;&nbsp;[[Special:Contributions/70.83.96.69|contribs]]) {{{2|}}}.</small><!--Inserted with Template:Unsigned-->

:Hmm. -- [[User talk:Ec5618|Ec5618]] 22:48, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

While there is no question that the Huns left descendants all over Eastern Europe, the disintegration of the Hun Empire after the death of Attila meant they never regained their lost glory. One reason was that the Huns never fully established the mechanisms of a state, such as bureaucracy and taxes, unlike the [[Magyars]] or [[Golden Horde]], who did. Once disorganized, the Huns naturally were absorbed by more organized polities.

Bryan was the one who first played the card that revealed Brent’s name by issuing the press release of the lawsuit, then added the links to his website in addition to sending text versions of the article to members (Cobra fans) in which he claims he has a data base of well over 10,000 If Bryan would remove all reference to Brent’s name and identity from his site, I am sure Brent would be happy to do the same.

==Historiography==

::1. First of all, a person's name is a highly relevant piece of information in an encyclopedia article that is about that person, so please don't argue that Brent's "true identity is of no concern to this entry". Wikipedia already lists the real names of porn stars ([[Jenna Jameson]], [[Billy Brandt]], [[Tommy Hansen (porn star)|Tommy Hansen]], etc.) so there's certainly no policy against it.

The term "Hun" has been also used to describe peoples with no historical connection to what scholars consider "Hun".

On [[July 27]], [[1900]], during the [[Boxer Rebellion]] in China, [[Kaiser]] [[Wilhelm II of Germany|Wilhelm II]] gave the order to "make the name 'German' remembered in China for a thousand years, so that no Chinaman [''sic''] will ever again dare to even squint at a German". This speech, wherein Wilhelm invoked the memory of the [[5th century|5th-century]] Huns, coupled with the [[Pickelhaube]] or spiked [[helmet]] worn by German forces until [[1916]], that was reminiscent of ancient Hun (and Hungarian) helmets, gave rise to the later derogatory English usage of the latter term for their German enemy during [[World War I]]. This usage was reinforced by [[Allies of World War I|Allied]] propaganda throughout the war, and many pilots of the RFC referred to their foe as "The Hun". The usage resurfaced during [[World War II]].

::2. He is a celebrity. (One I think about quite a bit, in fact... *drool*) As such, he does not have the same expectation of privacy as an average citizen.

<!--References needed. In modern [[Mongolian language|Mongolian]], "Hün" means "Person", which stems from the modern Mongols' strong identification with the historical Huns, who are known in modern Mongolian as "Hunu." Most Mongolians today consider the Huns to be proto-Mongols. In the development of the Mongolian language, an [[Altaic languages|Altaic]] language -- which is the family to which most scholars speculate the Hun language belonged -- the word for "person" is identical for the name of the tribe with which they identify their ancestors having belonged to, the Huns. A "Hun" is "a person" in Mongolian. This mirrors the American Navajos' use of the term 'Dine' to signify "person," as well as to refer to the entire tribe.-->

==See also==

::3. I'm totally sympathetic to Brent's plight here. i certainly wouldn't want my own real name to be made public in his situation. But his name is now a matter of public record. It doesn't really matter how it got to be that way. Printing a publicly available fact is not an invasion of privacy, and it certainly isn't illegal.

*[[Hunnic Empire]]

*[[Hunnic language]]

*[[List of Hunnic Rulers]]

*[[Hungarian history]]

*[[Xiongnu]]

==Notes==

<!--This article uses the Cite.php citation mechanism. If you would like more information on how to add references to this article, please see http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cite/Cite.php -->

<div class="references-small" style="-moz-column-count:2; column-count:2;">

<references />

</div>

==Further reading==

::4. There are no "personal safety reasons" here that any other celebrity doesn't have to contend with. Even [[David Letterman]] has stalkers. There are consequences of being a celebrity, not all of them desirable. If he were a witness in a mob trial trying to stay hidden, that would be one thing. But this is someone who voluntarily got into porn acting, and continues to do so even today (thank god).

*de la Vaissière, E. "Huns et Xiongnu", Central Asiatic Journal, 2005-1, p. 3-26.

*Lindner, Rudi Paul. "Nomadism, Horses and Huns", ''Past and Present'', No.&nbsp;92. (Aug., 1981), pp.&nbsp;3–19.

* Otto J. Mänchen-Helfen (ed. Max Knight): ''The World of the Huns: Studies in Their History and Culture'' (Berkeley, University of California Press, 1973) ISBN 0-520-01596-7

* Otto J. Mänchen-Helfen: ''Huns and Hsiung-Nu'' (published in ''Byzantion'', vol. XVII, 1944-45, pp. 222-243)

* Otto J. Mänchen-Helfen: ''The Legend of the Origin of the Huns'' (published in ''Byzantion'', vol. XVII, 1944-45, pp. 244-251)

* E. A. Thompson: ''A History of Attila and the Huns'' (London, Oxford University Press, 1948)

* J. Webster: ''The Huns and Existentialist Thought'' (Loudonville, Siena College Press, 2006)

*[http://www.donga.com/docs/magazine/shin/2003/10/28/200310280500015/200310280500015_1.html Huns leader, Attila is Koreans], shindonga, 2003 November (South Korean Monthly Magazine)

*[http://blog.naver.com/newid76/90014945602 Huns Bow = Korean Bow?]

*[http://www.geocities.com/ziadnumis/home Coinage and History of the White Huns- Waleed Ziad- Articles from the 'Journal of the Oriental Numismatic Society', 2004-2006]

* The History Files [http://www.historyfiles.co.uk/FeaturesEurope/BarbarianHuns.htm Europe: The Origins of the Huns], based on conversations with Kemal Cemal, Turkey, 2002 (address correction to Notes, above)

[[Category:Ancient peoples]]

::5. We can't exclude relevant, verifiable information purely because the subject of the article doesn't want it mentioned. Remember the congressional staffers who removed undesirable information about their bosses? [http://business.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13129-2032346,00.html] How is this any different?

[[Category:Ancient peoples of Russia]]

[[Category:Ancient Roman enemies]]

[[Category:Eurasian nomads]]

[[Category:Hungary before the Magyars]]

[[Category:Huns]]

[[Category:Germanic peoples]]

[[Category:Iranian peoples]]

[[Category:Turkic peoples]]

[[Category:Migration Period]]

[[bg:Хуни]]

::6. Now, all that being said, the last thing I want to do is hurt someone. Especially someone like Brent. (I repeat: *drool*) How about this as a (semi) compromise: add a sentence that states something like, "Brent's real name, not listed here, was released (against his will) [http://www.brentcorriganonline.com/blog/?p=32] in a lawsuit relating to his claim that he was only 17 during the time he was working for Cobra Video." Don't state his real name, don't link to the site that lists it. It's not a perfect solution, but it should make Brent happy in that it doesn't list his name and makes clear that it shouldn't be listed here, and it makes Wikipedia purists happy in that it makes clear that Brent Corrigan is not his real name and that his real name is publicly available for those who want to put the effort into tracking down the court documents. In fact, I'm just going go ahead and put it in the article now.

[[ca:Huns]]

[[cs:Hunové]]

::p.s. what the heck: While I'm at it, Brent, *please* don't make the mistake Brent Everett did and bulk up like that. Ugh! What was he thinking??? Muscular, pumped up porn stars are a dime a dozen. Embrace your twinkdom! -[[User:Bindingtheory|Bindingtheory]] 01:20, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

[[da:Hunnerne]]

[[de:Hunnen]]

[[et:Hunnid]]

++++++++

[[es:Hunos]]

So... this name issue is persistent. It's stupid, really. We all know his real name. Therefore, it should be in this encylopedia article.

[[eo:Hunoj]]

[[fr:Huns]]

Right?

[[gl:Hunos]]

[[ko:훈족]]

[[User:BernieD|BernieD]] 19:07, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

[[hr:Huni]]

[[is:Húnar]]

[[it:Unni]]

: Yes, his real name has been revealed in some news media. Now, as "public knowledge", it can be included in that encyclopedia, as it has been made for other porn actors. But the way his name has been thrown to the lions is somewhat dishonest, and clearly with intent to cause prejudice. And that bother me A LOT! Furthermore, with or without his real name, the article won't be more or less truthful (because it concerns his porn persona, not his private persona), and that's what is important. <s>So, I vote for NO REAL NAME.</s> --[[User:Sam67fr|Sam67fr]] 22:07, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

[[he:הונים]]

:: OMG, my opinion is so biased... OK, his name is known, and even if I don't like how he became known, it's now a verifiable content we can add (but shall we?)in this article. But there is no need to add it in each sentence as some users try to do. A one citation is enough! As I was saying before, it's an article about a porn perfomer, not an article about a private citizen.--[[User:Sam67fr|Sam67fr]] 13:26, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

[[kk:Ғұндар]]

:::: I see that "arbitration" has made it clear that his name should be included, or, at least, that it can be included. There's nothing prohibiting it. [[User:BernieD|BernieD]] 18:13, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

[[lv:Huņņi]]

::: So, really, what we're talking is not the fact of its inclusion but how it's included. I can agree with that. The Middle Ground! So, where should we put it? [[User:BernieD|BernieD]] 18:10, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

[[nl:Hunnen]]

[[ja:フン族]]

==Religion==

[[no:Hunnerne]]

An earlier edit of the article had listed Brent Corrigan as Jewish. Someone else removed it. I have been unable to find any verification that he is Jewish, but was curious if anyone else had seen something to that effect. [[User:68.36.193.233|68.36.193.233]] 13:40, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[[pl:Hunowie]]

[[pt:Huno]]

Then there is no reason, not to add Bryan's real name or his backgroud.

[[ro:Huni]]

[[ru:Гунны]]

==The continuing removal of relevant external links==

[[sk:Huni]]

The AVN-articles linked from this article give added insight on the age matter. In addition, both links together are quite NPOV since they shed light on the issue from two different pespectives. Thus, I think they should both remain in the article. [[User:Spheroide|Spheroide]] 00:27, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

[[sl:Huni]]

[[fi:Hunnit]]

== Proper action taken ==

[[sv:Hunner]]

[[tt:Hunnar]]

Thank you Dr. Debug we feel the appropriate action has been taken to safeguard Mr. Corrigan's identity while maintaining the integrity of the article. Due to the open source nature of this medium it is important certain precautions are taken for individuals protection.

[[tr:Hunlar]]

[[uk:Гуни]]

Thank you,

[[zh:匈人]]

== Mr. DeBug ==

This is ridiculous! There is no relevance whatsoever to this article in the significance to the importance of Brent Corrigan's true identity, other than the individual or individuals who are insistent in reverting it back. They are queenly aware that if under various search engines when "Brent Corrigan" is entered under almost any context the Wikipedia entry is one of the first few results. Therefore the inclusion of his true identity only serves the purpose of jeopardizing his safety. At this time, for Mr. Corrigan’s personal safety reasons, could you please remove the identity and keep it off? If not I am requesting the entry be removed or deleted all together!

Thank you, --[[User:66.75.43.6|66.75.43.6]] 10:34, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

I have removed it again today

[[User:Reedy Boy|Reedy Boy]] 09:04, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

== Request for Deletion ==

The request for deletion is there due to some people continually placing the stars legal name in the article. Reasons for this not being a good idea are obvious.

Also with this happening, the star doesn't want the article to be there, and therefore if it does get deleted, is there a way to ensure it stays like that?

Cheers [[User:Reedy Boy|Reedy Boy]] 19:49, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

*No, that isn't the way thinks work in Wikipedia. Famous people don't get to have their articles deleted just because they don't want them here, just like any other encyclopedia. There are other ways of dealing with an editing problem. An administrator can lock the article so that it cannot be edited, for example. I don't know, however, what the Wikipedia policy is on including birth names of people using pseudonyms. If there is no Wikipedia policy against it, then there may be nothing that can be done about it. You might want to review Wikipedia's policies, which you can find [[Help:Contents/Policies, conventions and guidelines|here]]. [[User:Zeromacnoo|Zeromacnoo]] 14:03, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

**Its more he doesn't want his real name adding for legal reasons. If it was possible to get an administrator to lock this article, so that people cant keep adding it, that would be great. How would i go about doing it? Would i just contact an admin? As for his name as mentioned above, hasn't been disclosed for legal reasons [[User:Reedy Boy|Reedy Boy]] 16:54, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

* You can request protection for an article. However, you should note that articles are rarely protected for long periods. Also, real names are generally included in articles. -- [[User:JJay|JJay]] 17:01, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

** How would i go about requesting it locking? [[User:Reedy Boy|Reedy Boy]] 21:05, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

* Page protection requests are made here [[Wikipedia:Requests for page protection]]. Your best shot would probably be semi-protection, which blocks anon access. -- [[User:JJay|JJay]] 21:12, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

==Unregistered users and the Changes they've made to the article==

Here are all the unregistered users who have edited this page, along with what they've done. Most of them are one-edit-wonders, who've never touched a page other than this one.

These 5 IP addresses remove Brent's name from the article. It seems likely that they're all different individuals.

*83.226.173.128

*69.248.102.13

*66.75.43.6

*213.54.133.118

*67.173.173.120

67.85.205.37 removes brent's real name and adds Bryan Philips real name.

As you can see, the following 7 IP's are probably the same user. He/she consistently adds Brent's real name to the article and make no other edits to any other pages:

*63.22.175.73

*63.22.252.126

*63.22.254.250

*63.22.191.91

*63.22.164.15

*63.22.176.71

*63.22.173.152

12.176.206.205 adds Brent's name via the yahoo group link.

141.43.144.10 adds Brent's real name

Made changes unrelated to this edit war:

*87.194.18.172

*194.159.73.69

==Policy==

Ec5618's edit to remove the birth name was accompanied by the comment "I'm not aware of any specific policy on this matter" (or something to that effect). If there is no specific policy saying that we should not include a performer's birth name, then why would it be removed? There ''is'' a policy that the subject of an article does not get to determine its content. If it's verfiable, and it is certainly relevant, it probably should stay in. I have, for the record, only once reverted the removal of his birth name, as far as I can recall, and do not edit anonymously. [[User:Zeromacnoo|Zeromacnoo]] 03:40, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

:Oh, don't misunderstand me. I agree that the name probably warrants inclusion. However, since a single anonimous editor is incessantly trying to add the name, I am left to wonder as to the motives of that editor. And since the article currently states that it does not include the name, this anonimous editor isn't very thorough, and seems only interested in adding the name. -- [[User talk:Ec5618|Ec5618]] 08:02, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

::I've been thinking the same way as Ec5618. It's clear that we have someone who is interested in nothing other than adding Brent's name, seemingly for malicious reasons. That's why I listed them all in the previous section Can we block that one editor? Is it possible to ban an IP range (63.22.x.x) from editing a specific page? Can we block unregistered users from editing a specific page (and even if we can, is it fair)? -[[User:Bindingtheory|Bindingtheory]] 14:19, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

:::Just for clarification, can we find the policy and site it on this talk page before we include his real name? [[User:CaveatLector|CaveatLector]] 22:20, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

I think the question, Lector, is "Is there a policy ''against'' including his real name?" If not, then I don't think there is a basis for deleting that information. Admins can ban individual anon IPs and ranges of IPs, although it is discouraged, and the bans are intended to be temporary. I think that the bans apply to all of Wikipedia, and not just to one page, though. All unregistered and new users can be blocked from editing an individual page: temporary page protectoin is possible in cases of vandalism, for example. But a violation of Wikipedia policy has to be determined before an admin would impose portection. For the record, I don't have a real problem with the compromise position that excluded the name but linked to an external site where the name oculd be found. It's not strictly within how I understand Wikipedia works, but if it makes peace, then it's okay. [[User:Zeromacnoo|Zeromacnoo]] 13:32, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

== Lock in real name? ==

Can anything be done to lock in the performer's reral name? If some fool was constantly deleting Marilyn Monroe's real name (Norma Jean Baker I think) or Elton John the information would be locked in.

== Skin Deep ==

Civilization is skin deep. Freedom of speech is as firm as a rubber band. It needs protection only when it serves you. The craving for smothering opposing opinions lurks in the deep darkness of every individual's mind. Whenever there is the slightest hint of power, the urge of censorship burns like wild fire. It is so tempting, isn't it, to get rid of the eye sore rather than accomodate it, even though facts take no side themselves.

"Expose their IP addresses, block them. Freedom for me and persecution for you becuause I am the righteous one, and I am even righteously outraged for your refusal to go away because you can certainly tell who I support in this case. Who gave me the right to rule the information flow? It doesn't matter."

Freedom of expression is to caricature someone's prophet while sentencing another to 3 years in jail for denying the Holocaust. Somewhere in this beautiful conutry, brilliant young minds are growing up on campuses to sustain just such tradition.

If the majority of population are gay, will they just persecute the other side?

I have never posted anything on this web site before and just stumbled on it this afternoon. I couldn't care less about the subject in this dispute. But the desperate effort of certain individuals to withhold neutral and common facts from the public is astonishing. But then again, we are all animals on this pale blue dot.

==Why Not Include Brent's Real Name ==

Ok, for real this time. Despite my attempts at a compromise, it borders on the absurd not to include a person's name in an article about that person without an extremely solid reason not to. "Brent doesn't want to list it here," and "Brent might get stalked" are not valid reasons. That being said, please list here any reasons you have NOT to include his name. We should evaluate those reasons as a group and come to a decision about this once and for all. If nobody has any good reasons, then we will just list Brent's name and defend against vandals who remove it. -[[User:Bindingtheory|Bindingtheory]] 04:18, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

:In my opinion, when a person has requested that their private information, which was not released in an entirely legal manner, be kept private and not be disseminated on the internet, that person has the right the their privacy, regardless of who the are or their standing as a celebrity, especially in this case where said person feels as though such an inclusion of their name would constitute a threat to their safety, regardless of whether or not it truly does. One could ask where this information stops. Posting a home-city? A telephone number? An address? I feel that, in concern for Brent's rights to his personal privacy, which nobody ever just 'gives up' by any stretch of the imagination, we should keep his name removed and defend against its inclusion. [[User:CaveatLector|CaveatLector]] 08:06, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

::Could you explain "which was not released in an entirely legal manner"? I am interested in this point -- it may be the one thing to convince me of your position on this this. Thanks. [[User:Zeromacnoo|Zeromacnoo]] 14:05, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

:::Brent claims on his site that the writ of summons was unenforcable and later invalidated. Is there any way someone can confirm this? Like I said before, unless we can CONFIRM a wiki policy that REQUIRES his name to be included, I feel as though we should respect his wishes and his fear for his safety, irregardless. [[User:CaveatLector|CaveatLector]] 02:19, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

::::CaveatLecor (or someone else), could you provide the link to the relevant part of Brent's site? Thanks. -[[User:Bindingtheory|Bindingtheory]] 03:10, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

:::::The following address should take you there, a post on his blog. Just for the record, the following site DOES contain sexual images. http://www.brentcorriganonline.com/blog/?p=32 [[User:CaveatLector|CaveatLector]] 08:54, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

His name was released in a VERY legal manner. It is on a Writ of Summons issued in Luzerne County Pennsylvania. Anyone can walk into the County courthouse (in Wilkes-Barre) and get it-it is a public document. This whole censorship debacle reeks of Stalinism when someone's image was airbrushed out of photos when they were purged.

Well then please by all means include Bryan Kocis aka, Bryan Phillips convicted felon for the Sexual Abuse of a Child (15 year old boy) back in 2002. The boy declared in a statement given to police that Mr. Kocis referred to him as his '''"prince"'''. That one got away but Brent unfortunately didn't. --[[User:66.75.43.6|66.75.43.6]] 16:31, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

:What does that mean, "Brent unfortunately didn't"? Brent lied about his age so he could get a job working in porn, and continues to work in porn even today, so he's hardly a "victim" in these circumstances. That being said, yes, obviously Bryan Phillips's real name should be listed in the article about Brian Phillips, which nobody has written yet. But right now, we're just trying to determine why we *shouldn't* include Brent's real name in the article. -[[User:Bindingtheory|Bindingtheory]] 17:41, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

The person or persons that seem to spend so much time adding Brent's name to the article should focus their effort creating the article/entry on Mr. Phillips aka Mr. Kocis and his colorful past if they were truly interested just in the integrity and authenticity of this piece? Rather than spend all their time in the exposure of a boy who made a highly very misguided decision as a minor, they would provide the article the balance they seek if they insisted on the same scrutiny of the adult who has shown an obviously suspect pattern of behavior. An adult who operates a business extremely sensitive and is susceptible to the potential sexual exploitation of children if basic precautions, research and confirmations are not performed. He has claimed that, twice two different minors deceived him within a two year time period of misrepresenting their age! He is clearly a reckless man who has only ill will toward Brent.--[[User:66.75.43.6|66.75.43.6]] 04:39, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

:Sean Lockhart is an ADULT man who operates his own porn site. His name is publicly available in court documents, newsgroups, message boards and a Yahoo group. Furthermore, Sean, on his own site, identifies Bryan Kocis by not only name but address. A case of the pot bitching about the kettle's blackness? I have no problem adding Bryan Kocis's name to the "Corrigan" page-if the Stalinistic fool who keeps deleting Sean Lockhart's name will cease and desist. -63.22.248.82 ''Comment edited by [[User:CaveatLector|CaveatLector]] in order to preserve the subject anonymity.''

::Ravings of [[Stalinism]] aside (the unregistered user who loves leveling that term as well as adding Brent's name to the article might want to read its entry and aquaint herself/himself with terms before s/he uses them), the points for not including Corrigan's real name still stand. His standing as an adult does not matter in this case, being an adult does not revoke rights to privacy, nor does running a website such as he does. No matter what sites are violating his privacy, Wikipedia should not follow suit. On a side note, including his name in the talk page (which I have edited out of your comment) seems to speak to your unwillingness to actually discuss this issue, as does your continual addition of the name to the article from an unregistered IP. Please either state your case lucidly and MATURELY. Perhaps we can act like adults here. [[User:CaveatLector|CaveatLector]] 21:58, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

CaveatLector, in your eyes, what *would* constitute a reason to include Brent's real name? Would it only be acceptable to you if Brent himself agreed to it? People who are the subjects of wikipedia articles don't get to decide what information what information is included and what information is left out.

To the unregistered user (63.22.x.x), please register for an account. It's free and anonymous and fast, plus your ip address won't be broadcast to the world anymore. -[[User:Bindingtheory|Bindingtheory]] 23:20, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

:To this extent, the subject of the article has expressed worry over his safety. Would we post his address as well, if it were released? I'm not quite sure why his real name is such pertinent information to this encyclopedic entry either, considering that all the work he has done has been under his alias...where does his real name actually have a place in this entry at this time? I think we should justify its inclusion before we justify its exclusion. Especially in this way it is included now (quote: "His real name is...")...shouldn't that real name be included bolded in parenthesis after his false name per wiki style? I also haven't yet seen the wikipedia policy that you are referring to, that subjects cannot affect the content of their articles...could I get a link? -[[User:CaveatLector|CaveatLector]] 02:40, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

I don't know if publishing BC's name will actually endanger him, but I feel his birth name should be excluded for other reasons.

I read earlier on this discussion page that there was no law protecting his identity, that he chose to be a public figure. In fact, there is a legal restiction against releasing a model's name, it is part of the same law that requires models be legal adults. BC entered into this profession with not only the belief, but the legal assurance that his birth name would not be released against his will. The Cobra representative could not release his true name except through a civil action.

I don't know the motivation behind the writ of summons, but, from a purely legal standpoint it was a useless gesture. The writ had no power whatever outside of the state in which it was issued, and it has been challenged and rendered moot. This does not mean that it never happened (I think that is called "expunged"), just that is has been legally recognized to be invalid. Since there is no legal reason to file a powerless writ, it makes me wonder if the accusations against the Cobra guy might not be valid.

It is possible that Cobra guy did it for the sole purpose of releasing the model's name without risking getting sued or prosecuted, perhaps in an effort to embarrass BC and damage his personal relationships outside of his profession. If, and I do mean if, that is the case, then the inclusion of the real name would be allowing the article to be used as a vehicle for the Cobra representative's agenda, and therefore the ulimate "POV".

Further, there is an argument that the birth name of BC is public record, making the comparison to the Cobra guy's name being public record. I do not accept this argument. There is a distinct difference: BC's name was released through legal papers filed for dubious reasons in civil court, against the subject's will. The Cobra guy's name is public record due to criminal prosecution and conviction, the result of his own actions. It does not seem equal to me to compare the two instances. Cobra guy could not have expected any degree of anonymity, like BC did. If BC's name were released from prosecution of the underage disaster, I would be in bed asleep now, instead of typing this.

The likelihood is that the release of his birth name was probably at least partially personally motivated. I know that Wikipedia should report facts, but it shouldn't be used as a weapon to personally attack someone. The bell has been rung, his name is out there for anyone who wants to find it, why not let them? The fact is that we have a precious gift that BC did not have: a choice.

Please refrain fom editing my posts on this discussion of Sean Lockhart and I will do the same. I am registering as a user. You Stalinists are not going to win this war. Lockhart's name is in the public ___domain and the genie will not be put in the bottle. Also, why does Lockhart, on his site put not only the name but the picture and ADDRESS of Kocis? If I can get ahold of Lockhart's address you can be sure that like Kocis' it will be put in the public ___domain. Something about the goose and the gander being equally treated. {{unsigned|63.22.226.18}}

:Please stop making personal attacks, and please stop forcibly adding the name. -- [[User talk:Ec5618|Ec5618]] 17:45, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

:Note that the user claims that he would illegally release private information that would undeniably put Corrigan at personal risk if he had it? There seems to be a personal issue here, but as long as the article remains without his name, I will refrain from editing this talk page. However, I would encourage admins to do so for the same reasons that his name should be kept out of the article. [[User:CaveatLector|CaveatLector]] 20:47, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Where in the law is it "illegal" to release a name publicly revealed in a lawsuit? Only in that strange parrelel universe known as Lockhartland? On Monday a multimillion dollar lawsuit was filed by Cobra Video against Lockhart in the U.S. District Court in Los Angeles-anyone can walk into the clerk's office and look at it. The story has hit the Associated Press and AVN with Lockhart's name prominently displayed. Game, set and match. Censorship loses. -[[User talk:Melbedewy|Melbedewy]]

:There's nothing on AP or AVN about it. -[[User:Bindingtheory|Bindingtheory]] 15:42, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

As of Thursday 9AM Eastern Time it is on the front page of http://gayvn.com. The article is titled "Cobra video ratchets up offenive against underage model"[http://gayvn.com/index.php?Primary_Navigation=News&Action=View_Article&Content_ID=260230] {{unsigned|Melbedewy}}

:Removed pasted article for copyright reasons. Included a link to the article. -- [[User talk:Ec5618|Ec5618]] 14:39, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

==Yahoo Fansite==

The yahoo "fansite" is not worth linking here. The entire site consists of 12 messages posted over only the last 3 weeks, by a total of (at most) 5 different people, all ''complaining'' about Brent, plus 1 photo of someone who doesn't even look like Brent, plus 2 links to sites that this article already links to. It's fairly obvious that someone set up the yahoo group specifically to hurt Brent by linking from the Wikipedia article. The group is actually named "Sean Paul Lockhart" rather than "Brent Corrigan," despite the fact that there is no group called "Brent Corrigan". What "fans" are going to even going to search for him under his real name?? Further, the yahoo group was created on January 28, which was '''coincidentally''' at the height of the controvery surrounding including Brent's real name in the wikipedia article. I repeat, it should not be linked from this article. Please discuss if you disagree. -[[User:Bindingtheory|Bindingtheory]] 04:55, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

*It was NOT set up "to hurt Brent by linking from the Wikipedia

article". It was set up to continue the lively conversation

on the matter that was obviously of interest to the members, but

cut short by the administration, of the JuicyGoo forum. That's

all. The site was set up by a fan of Brent, and if the only

posts there are anti-Brent, that is the fault of his fans alone

for not posting in support of him there. Let us hope that more

join and do so. Now stop removing my link to the group, or I'm

going to pull your tongue out

==Facts and verified content==

I've made some changes on this page because I believed there was a lot of babble and unverified claims. I may be new to Wikipedia, but I know for sure that, if you claim something, the claim must be verifiable.

Deleted - The claim about a lawsuit filed by Cobra Video concerning the age matter. No external link provided to confirm that claim. The link provided only speak about copyrights and trademark violation.

Deleted - Names of Sean Lockhart's business partners. The names are not quoted in the avn news article (link provided in external links).

Deleted - Multiple quoting of Jasoncurious.com report that had no relevance with the age matter. I provided an external link for everybody to read the complete article and thus provided a way for readers to make their own mind.

Deleted - Claim that "Lockhart had admitted publicly to forging his government ID's in order to work for Cobra Video". No link provided to a verifiable source.

'''''Kept - Link to an AVN article where the news media allege that Brent Corrigan told them he obtained a false ID in order to work in adult industry.''' (In this cas, Sean Lockhart/Brent Corrigan never admitted forging his ID, but obtaining one... slightly different... but different.)''

Deleted - Claim that "If this new License is proven to be valid, Sean Lockhart would have committed multiple felonies including fraud and misrepresentation." It's up to a court to decide if felonies have been committed... Until now (and up to my knowledge) no such decision has been made. Therefore, that claim is a mere opinion, and has not its place in an encyclopedia.

Fixed - External links to Brent Corrigan Blog (somebody put the link of Cobra Video in place) and added the Cobra Video website.

And some other minor changes !

--[[User:Sam67fr|Sam67fr]] 11:10, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

:* As some of you may have noticed, I constantly revert this page to its former state when anon user 24.54.90.231 insert "Neither Lockhart nor his lawyer have ever supplied evidence to support their allegation". The point of this paragraf is to explain what happens with the 4 videos removed from circulation, not to support a POV. Until now, only Cobra Video and its representatives claim that "no proof has been supplied". As this claim can not been verified, I assume that a Cobra Video supporter wants his POV to be prevailing. I will continue to edit this article as long as these attempts do. I'm open to suggestions. --[[User:Sam67fr|Sam67fr]] 19:07, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

'''All claims asserted in the updates provided from this IP address were reported and given in person in an interview by Brent Corrigan to the San Diego FBI field office on Feburary 3rd, 2006, including all copies of IDs and birth certificate. I assume if they were interested in arresting him or at least holding him for questioning pertaining the allegations claimed by Cobra, they could have done so then? --[[User:68.88.69.35|68.88.69.35]] 00:38, 22 March 2006 (UTC)'''

: Thank you for these insiders informations that are unfortunately not verifiable. As for your edition, I question its relevance with the subject of the article, to say the least. As you may have noticed, the article you edited is about Brent Corrigan, not about Cobra Video or its owner and his private activities. If you want to include informations about Cobra Video, use the Cobra Video article. If you want to include informations about Bryan Philips (or whatever his name is...), create an article about him. '''Before making any changes or creation, see [[Wikipedia:Verifiability]] and [[Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons]].''' Of course, you may want to consider the importance of such an article. But if you can provide informations about Brent Corrigan along with verifiable sources, feel free to edit the article. --[[User:Sam67fr|Sam67fr]] 07:11, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

== replying to request for comment ==

What's the problem? Could each side explain their case, preferably backed up with links to edit history and grounded in Wikipedia policy? I have no view on this guy(don't even know who he is), but just want to help enforce Wikipedia policy. Thanks, --[[User:Urthogie|Urthogie]] 20:24, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

*[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Brent_Corrigan&diff=45294418&oldid=45294353] <-- That's the question. Should the real name of this actor be in the article or not? One side says that stating the real name of celebrities is normal procedure on Wikipedia if it's verified. The other side says this celebrity doesn't want his name disclosed and is suing his promotional agency for disclosing it. [[User:SchmuckyTheCat|SchmuckyTheCat]] 21:38, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

::If what you're saying is correct then you seem to be the one in line with wikipedia policies. What trouble have you run into with the other editors? revert warring?--[[User:Urthogie|Urthogie]] 22:16, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

:::It's -not- my dispute. One of the editors was putting a demand in edit summaries to stop editing and then went to Arbcom because s/he thinks it's "illegal" to put the name in the article. I read the complaint there, came here and fixed up the article, and filed the RfC, since these editors don't seem to know how dispute resolution works. But, yes, it's obvious the name should be included in the article. I don't want to be involved in their revert war, so I left it in the same state as I found it, name removed. [[User:SchmuckyTheCat|SchmuckyTheCat]] 22:39, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

IMO, this article belongs on [[WP:RFD]], but if it stays, Wikipedia policy is undeniably that an appropriately-sourced real name should be included. -- [[User:Gnetwerker|Gnetwerker]] 22:36, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

*I assume you mean [[WP:AfD]], in which case feel free to nominate it. Wikipedia does seem to be a massive repository of information on porn stars though. [[User:SchmuckyTheCat|SchmuckyTheCat]] 22:44, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

--------------------------------------

SchumckyTheCat, if you're going to leave commentary on this issue, at least get the story correct. I did not say it was "illegal" to put the name in the article. I first said that knowingly and maliciously spreading the private name of a porn actor is prosecutable. Given the intent of several of the editors and their commentary in the history, as well as the revert wars from several months ago, it was obvious that there was a malicious intent involved, which is legally prosecutable.

I elaborated further with:

:I have opened an arbitration case to have the Brent Corrigan article locked until the legal dispute is finalized. '''Due to the sensitive nature of the release of his real name, as well as the allegations of underage sexual performance, I do not believe that Wiki should be involved in the dispute.'''

:Once the facts are laid bare, then this account should, in my opinion, either show or hide his information. Until such time, I believe this serves no one except those who intend harm to Mr. Corrigan.

and

:If the arbitration committee has no jurisdiction over content, who does then? '''Keep in mind, I have no qualms with the display of his real name as it is a matter of fact. It is my concern that Wiki has become the "battleground" for a dispute that is currently in the courts. Given that the release of a porn actor's name without prior consent, particularly when dealing with a potentially underage performer, is illegal, why bring further headache until this court case is resolved?''' This is why I requested the lock until the dispute is finalized.

and

:Porn Actors sign legal agreements with the companies they contract with to use pseudonyms. This is primarily for their protection, given their line of work. It is that reasoning which I am following. Cobra Video released the real name of Brent Corrigan in a newsletter to all those who had subscribed, as well as to AVN. That is potentially thousands of individuals, if not more, that became privy to that information. That act was illegal in and of itself and is currently in court from a counter-suit by the Corrigan team. '''Due to the potential legal problems, I don't think it would be wise to continue to place this information on Wiki, at least until the dispute is resolved. Once it's resolved, then people should do what they will given their own conscience. But at that point, the questions of legality would be answered.''' Have I explained my stance on this issue appropriately?

It should be duly noted that I asked for a lock only until the court case was resolved, in order to avoid any potential legal issues. But after that point, people should do what they will with Brent's real name as it is indeed a matter of fact available for the world, unfortunately. That was my reason for going to arb, i.e. to get the article locked until the court dispute was resolved. Nothing more, nothing less.

[[User:Natoma|Natoma]] 03:58, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

I've left commentary because this dispute about this article disrupted lots of other places on the Wikipedia, and YOU raised the issue at the Arbitration Committee, which attracted attention. So here goes:

#The legal issues have nothing to do with Wikipedia, or anybody else except the people named in the suit. That issue is worthless to this discussion.

#Releasing a celebrities name isn't prosecutable - anywhere (in the US), for any reason.

#He has a civil tort against his agency. Wikipedia is not party to that suit. There is no legal issue we have to care about.

#Contracts between porn actors and their agencies don't bind anyone else. What Cobra did might be reprehensible, but we just don't care, except to report the facts of the matter.

#Users, via policy and consensus have jurisdiction over content, which is why I put this on Request for Comments.

#The responses thus far are unanimous, there is no reason not to put the real name in the article. I agree though, it doesn't need to be repeated over and over. Once in the intro should be fine. There is a separation though, between his persona and real person. In the part discussing the legal case, it may be more appropriate to use his real name. So far, I neutralized that section by referring to "the actor" rather than the name.

[[User:SchmuckyTheCat|SchmuckyTheCat]] 09:27, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

:1) I didn't disagree with you leaving commentary. I disagreed with your commentary because you got the story ''wrong''.

:2) The comments left in the history section of this article clearly show an argument between the Corrigan team and the Cobra owner team dating back months in which they revert warred on this article over and over again. And then there are anonymous users who have done nothing but insert Corrigan's real name as well as the Cobra owner's real name, with no comments whatsoever. Not to mention allegations of child pornography, drugs, alcohol abuse, etc.

:''That'' is where the release of his name is prosecutable, because it's clear that this was done by the Cobra team. That then involves Wiki in the legal dispute, if it goes that far, as a matter of record.

:The rules that were quoted to me on the RFA page, and the ones that I read personally, stated that when revert warring on this scale happens over and over again, a legitimate request for lock, or close watch by global wiki editors, can be submitted.

:As I stated before, there is absolutely no reason for Wiki to be the battleground between those two parties, or 3rd party affiliates, i.e. fans, while this legal dispute is going on. We have absolutely no idea how this affects Wiki's involvement due to Corrigan potentially being underage at the time of his performances, as well as both sides in that dispute using Wiki as their personal sounding board in what should be a private legal matter.

:3) You say that this dispute disrupted "lots" of other places on Wiki. Erm, only two other places other than this article was "disrupted", and that was the RFA page and the redirect.

:4) In closing, I do not believe that it is Wiki's place to be the bludgeon tool of rabid fans of Corrigan and rabid fans of Bryan Phillips. Nor do I believe that it is conducive to what Wiki is ''supposed'' to be. There have already been cases where articles were locked in the past due to egregious content disputes that were reported in the news, such as when politicians send their lackeys to remove any "negative" comments about them.

:This warring had gotten out of hand and that's when I requested arbitration to lock the article until the court case was over.

:[[User:Natoma|Natoma]] 17:37, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

::Well, I'm glad you sought outside help. Sorry if I got some of the facts incorrect. Yes, large scale revert wars need to be cooled down. For future reference, the place to get a page protected is [[WP:Rfpp]] - which I did request for you. Reading up about [[Wikipedia:Dispute resolution]] might be helpful.

::There is still no legal issue for Wikipedia to care about. And you're absolutely correct that the participants in the legal dispute and rabid advocates from either side should not be using Wikipedia as a battleground. In that case their ''behavior'' might stand to get them blocked. Try to find an interested admin who might care to watch the article. [[User:SchmuckyTheCat|SchmuckyTheCat]] 18:26, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

:::Thank you Schmucky. All I wanted in this case was for my intent to be understood, i.e. that I'm interested only in protecting the integrity of Wiki as well as stop content wars where I see them. I'm glad that we have an understanding now. :) [[User:Natoma|Natoma]] 18:50, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

::::Yes, sorry there was any mis-understanding. Putting this flare-up on the arbitration board is like pulling a fire alarm. My reaction to put out the fire was to 1, neutralize the wording of the article and 2, Request for Comments so other experienced editors can also try to put in their opinion to the editors on this article. [[User:SchmuckyTheCat|SchmuckyTheCat]] 19:23, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

As I stated before, I see no reason (except moral, but that's not the point) why not to include the real name in the article. My only concern was how to include it. I agree with SchmuckyTheCat about the inclusion in the intro. That's how it's commonly done with any performer when the real name is known. I'm not sure about an inclusion in the "legal issues" part because only the pending law suit concerns the performer "real person". Maybe should we rewrite that part or stay with a reference to "the actor" or "the performer".

--[[User:Sam67fr|Sam67fr]] 09:50, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

:I don't want to see the revert warring, nor do I want to see the Corrigan/Cobra team using this place as their personal battleground, or their rabid fans using this as their personal battleground, as I've said before.

:Frankly, reading the history of this article is pretty disgusting imo, and is a big part why I requested the lock in the first place.

:[[User:Natoma|Natoma]] 17:37, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Lockhart is not "a potentially underage performer" but an adult whore who runs his own sexually explicit web site. Maybe we should censor Elton John's or John Wayne's real name too? Absurd. Lockhart's real name has been published in the media and this is in no way "prosecutable". Grow up-the name is not going away.

:He ''was'' "a potentially underage performer" at the time, which is at the heart of the legal dispute brought by the Cobra team. He's an adult ''now'', but that's not what the suit is dealing with is it? Given your comments about "growing up", you obviously have no comprehension of the point I was trying to make. [[User:Natoma|Natoma]] 17:37, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

People, people. Chill for a second. I see that the argument against putting his name here is that it might be a legal issue. Could whoever believes this please supply a link to any truly enforced law against the inclusion of this guys real name?--[[User:Urthogie|Urthogie]] 18:17, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

:That's the thing Urthogie. I don't know the legal ramifications as they pertain to Wiki as a conduit for this information. I only know the legal ramifications as they pertain to the Cobra/Corrigan team. One can extrapolate what the legal ramifications for Wiki ''might'' be, but it is uncertain.

:It is that uncertainty, as well as the use of Wiki as a battleground, that led me to want to nip this thing in the bud and put in a lock request until the dispute was settled in the courts. That's all. [[User:Natoma|Natoma]] 18:50, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

::Instead of lengthy arbitration, perhaps you should look up any relevant laws before you continue this dispute. Knowledge is power, y'know-- your case has no value until you prove that any law is being broken by the inclusion of his real name.--[[User:Urthogie|Urthogie]] 19:03, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

:::No no, you misunderstand. Me, or anyone else not affiliated with Cobra, including Corrigan's real name isn't illegal. It is the fact that Cobra's team are including his name that is the legal issue at hand. Because Cobra's team is blatantly doing so, as per the comments in the history log as well as the traceable IPs, that is where I see a potential problem coming as it pertains to Wikipedia. They are clearly breaking the law as it pertains to their contract, which is currently in court dispute. I just don't want to see Wiki potentially involved in that, and would rather it remain an impartial arbitor in this "war". Have I explained appropriately? [[User:Natoma|Natoma]] 19:08, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

::::Ok, so you're saying that Wikipedia is being used as a vehical for a personal dispute? If you can verifiably prove this, then they would in fact be in violation of [[WP:POINT]]. However, until you have solid evidence, I don't think arbitration could much help.--[[User:Urthogie|Urthogie]] 19:15, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

:::::There is no way to 100% verify my claim Urthogie. I have traced several IPs from both sides of the argument, and they are geographically almost identical to Cobra Video and Corrigan's current locations within the USA. Given the content of the history, one can ''strongly'' infer the obviousness of this article as a battleground between those two camps.

:::::Again, there is simply no way to prove it 100% without contacting the ISPs and verifying what I have seen. As you can guess, the ISPs would be very unwilling to provide that information. They'd only open a can of worms, particularly when it comes to dealing with organizations like the [[MPAA]] and [[RIAA]] This is a case of "If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck". [[User:Natoma|Natoma]] 19:20, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

::::The edit history probably does show a lot of violations of Wikipedia policy. As they are IP addresses and throwaway user names it isn't worth the time to pursue who and why they did what they did. So let's forget the past.

::::Let's move forward. We have general agreement that including the using the real name, which has been sourced and verified, in the intro paragraph, and using neutral phrases such as "the actor" in places where it would be inaccurate to use the stage name. Right?

::::Since the actions by "Cobra" appears to be insisting on including the name, that should neutralize their actions - we can stop worrying about it. The other edit warring behavior then is the removal of the real name. Wikipedia policy encourages the addition of notable information and I don't think there is a meaningful solution that makes that faction happy. The anonymous editors who continually remove the real name have not spoken up to defend that action. On Wikipedia, removal of sourced information that the community agrees is notable (such as the real name), is [[Wikipedia:Vandalism]].

::::Can we agree that removal of the real name from the intro paragraph is vandalism? If so, then the procedures on [[Wikipedia:Vandalism]] tell us how to deal with it. We can revert those changes without being accused of edit warring. We should put the vandal templates on the talk page of the accounts used to vandalize. We can put the article on administrators watchlists [[Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism]] and the username or IP addresses should get blocked. If it really flares up again into wholesale revert warring, [[Wikipedia:Requests for page protection]] may be warranted - we currently have a stable article to protect.

::::These steps should help get the article in line with Wikipedia policy and under control from revert warring. Discuss. [[User:SchmuckyTheCat|SchmuckyTheCat]] 19:38, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

:::::I am comfortable with this decision now that there is some oversight on this article. Thank you very much!

:::::p.s.: [[Cobra Video]] should also be watched as well as several of the anon IPs responsible for including Corrigan's real name in this article have gone to great lengths to remove Bryan Phillips' real name from that article. The same goes for anon IPs responsible for removing Corrigan's real name from this article, and including Phillips' real name in the Cobra article.

:::::That is also another "suspicious" feather in the cap of this "warring". [[User:Natoma|Natoma]] 19:45, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Ok. I suggest that you guys cancel the request for arbitration and simply treat removals of the name from the intro as vandalism. If the anons are incredibly persistent, I would suggest a request for comment or a partial page protection. I won't be here to help you with the vandalism, unfortunately, because I have a personal policy of avoiding anything relating to gay porn on the internet. Heh. Peace, --[[User:Urthogie|Urthogie]] 20:31, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

: If we agree that removal of real name in intro is vandalism, what about those who want to include that real name 4 or 5 more times in the article? --[[User:Sam67fr|Sam67fr]] 14:21, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

::I would agree that our current neutral wording referring to the actor rather than the stage persona is the result of consensus here on this talk page. But, I wouldn't go so far as to call it vandalism. We always [[Wikipedia:Assume good faith|assume good faith]] that a contribution is well-meaning. Some editors may be using the real name to distinguish from the stage name to distinguish the real life legal person who is being sued to prevent him from using the persona of the fictional person. In a large expansion of the article, it may make sense. '''However,''' we don't have to suffer for the benefit of trolls. Edits like this one [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Brent_Corrigan&diff=prev&oldid=45560889] that you reverted are clearly disruptive attempts to make a [[WP:POINT|point.]] I would revert it once or twice, but not [[WP:3RR|three times]] - the rest of the editors here will also revert such changes. [[User:SchmuckyTheCat|SchmuckyTheCat]] 17:24, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

1. Lockhart's year of birth-85 or 86- is very much in dispute.

2. The phrasing "Brent Corrigan (Sean Paul Lockhart 1986)" is stunted and awkward English compared to the complete sentences I use.

3. Some fool is STILL editing out the name every day, under either version. melbedewy