Is there any conceivable good reason for the NYT to publish the name in an article on the claimed topic, despite the author's wishes to the contrary? Can't think of any, unless the reporter was also misrepresenting the subject of the story or the angle he is taking.
Maybe, revealing the true (or full) name is seen as a journalistic contribution? (As in "I'm not just reporting on what is there for everyone to see, I also did some actual research. See, here's the real name nobody was meant to know." – Obviously, this would be more proof of an issue with professional self-esteem, rather than of anything else.)
