A sceptical critique of Beischel and Schwartz (2007)

I came across this while checking to see whether there were any other sceptical blogs worth including in the wiki listing. 

It's a bit old (2010), but I thought it was interesting in that practically every criticism of the paper is fallacious:
https://skepfeeds.wordpress.com/2010/08/...t-hold-up/

It also seems to me that there's a glaring flaw in the protocol, which was missed by the blogger, but pointed out (though not very forcibly) by an anonymous commenter.

The link in the blog to the original paper is now broken, but a copy of it can be found here:
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/An...eb7a2f11b7

Here's an old Skeptiko thread from 2014 covering much of the same ground.
http://www.skeptiko-forum.com/threads/ro...-com.1191/

One of the participants comments "I love how every year or so we have another Beischel's Anomalous Information thread." 

I once looked into a more detailed Beischel mediumship paper from 2015 (seems a similar design to the one you linked to above IIRC) I couldn't really tell much from it...

I haven't seen that one. It didn't look as though it should have been too hard to modify the 2007 protocol to make it watertight. But having targets from different generations and giving their first names to the mediums seems an incredible blunder to make.