Wikipedia and Christian Abuse of Wikipedia

News 16 Feb 2007

The Christianity page is locked again.

A current area of disagreement concerns the Nicene Creed. This is a regular subject of contention. If you review the archives of the Christianity page you will find that the Nicene causes edit wars every few months,

The underlying reason for contention is the DWEEC view v the historians' view of the Nicene Creed. Here is a summary of the two views about the Creed - the statement of faith regarded by all mainstream Churches as central to Christianity:

DWEEC Version: The Nicene Creed dates from the earliest days of the Church and was formalised at the Council of Nicea in 324.

Historians' Version: (1) The Creed agreed at Nicea was formulated at Nicea and did not exist before that. It reflects orthodoxy at that date. (2) What is now generally referred to as the Nicene Creed is not the Creed agreed at NIcea (2a) In the Orthodox Church the "Nicene Creed" is a creed agreed at another General Council, over a hundred years after Nicea, and reflecting the latest version of orthodoxy at that time (2b) The Western Churches generally use a version of the "Nicene Creed" that was never agreed by any General Council and is thus technically heretical under the Cannons of other General Councils (5) This western version and the Churches that use it are widely regarded as heretical by the Eastern Churches.

The DWEEC version has the advantage of being concise, but the historians' version has the advantage of being demonstrably true, and much more interesting. It is not difficult to see why DWEECs prefer the shorter version - it conceals the fact that the Creed developed late, that it was changed to reflect evolving orthodoxy, that it was a cause of schism, and that modern Catholic and Protestant Churches alike have no substantial answer to the charge of heresy, by their own definition of the word.

Anyone interested might want to check the historians' view. Any book on the Creeds will do - "The Making of the Creeds" by Frances M. Young is cheap, authoritative and easy to get hold of. For a quick and easy check visit this webpage on the Filioque.

If you have any doubts about the DWEECs, we recommend that you try editing the Wikipedia Christianity page to represent accurately the position of the Nicene Creed and see what happens.

News 10 Feb 2007

We have just started this as a brand new web-site. The authors of doubleblue.info seem to have disappeared, so we've taken up their offer of picking up where they left off. We've started with their existing pages but expect to develop the site in our own direction.

Breaking News 26 June 2006

Not so much DWEEC news but there are continuing concerted efforts by a zealous Roman Catholic clique to keep numerous articles in line with their religious views.

Take a look for example at the contributions of Dominick and also at his talk page. His aim is clearly to suppress anything that does does not accord with the orthodox Roman Catholic view on a range of topics, including safe sex, Catholicism, Medugorje, Saints, Creeds, Jesus, Pope Benedict XVI, Miracles at Lourdes, Early Christianity and the Counter Reformation among many others.

The obsession with suppressing any evidence that Hitler was a practising Roman Catholic now seems to be a concerted long-term effort by the RC clique. We had initially assumed that this was an eccentric interest of Str1977, and seemed funny rather than sinister. It turns out to be more serious. Take a look for example here (under the second entry on "Hitler article") where you find innocent editors trying to work out why Dominick, Musical Linguist (aka AnnH) and Str1977 are pushing a POV on this topic.

We have done some research on the accusations made by Musical Linguist (aka AnnH) that this site contains deliberate errors and identifies Wikipedia editors by name. As far as we can tell, she can only be referring to the following minor points:

• On 19th April we stated that four users had been banned over the KMH03 Easter Affair namely: SimplePilgrim, HK30, Trollwatcher and Robert Steadman. It appears that Robert Steadman was already banned over another matter and we are happy to acknowledge our error. Only three editors were banned unfairly.
• A page on this site contained a link to a Wikipedia page that gave Musical Linguist's original user name. This has now been removed.

As far as we know, that's it. Musical Linguist, a regular reader of this page, has not been generous enough to tell us the details of any other examples.

To her credit Musical Linguist has not deleted an observation by Thomas Paine that you can read on her talk page under "Thought For The Day"

Breaking News 25 May 2006

Interesting discussions on Gio's talk page. On it Musical Linguist (aka AnnH) has contributed some characteristicly misleading observations.

Although it is difficult to be sure, her observations seem to be referring to the Wikipedia Review for the most part, but she has artfully mixed in references to this site, giving the impression that we are evil stalkers who have published personal information about her, which of course is not true..

On the same page there's yet more about the RC DWEECs' obsession with removing any evidence that Hitler was a practicing Catholic. Why do they care so much?

There's also a good piece on External Links being Suppressed - take a look at the link under discussion yourself. Serious fun.

Sources tell us that DWEECs are keen readers of this site, so we are now offering the opportunity for them to ask and answer questions that they cannot or will not answer on the pages of Wikipedia.

Here's a Starter Question.

Breaking News 23 May 2006

Our webservers are now up and running again after various attempts to disrupt them over the last few days, starting soon after our breaking news post of 20 May.

Giovanni33 has rescuscitated the text from Ooh Ah Misses re the vandalism of Trollwatchers talk page, so you can now read it on Gio's talk page.

On the same page Musical Linguist (aka AnnH) has claimed that there are innacuracies on this website - and mentioned one specifically. We are looking into it and will correct it if she is right.

She has also claimed that there is still personal information on this website which is not taken from Wikipedia. We're not sure what she can be referring to. Can anyone help? She makes further accusations which seem to suggest that this website has published personal information about her - but her text is ambiguous. We suspect tyhat she is really refering to the Wikipedia Review. (She has a habit - presumably deliberate - of running together true sentences in such a way as to suggest something that is not true. The reason we think that the technique is deliberate is that it only happens when she has an interest in misleading her readers - cf her earlier attempts to suggest that the three banned editors were proven sockpuppets)

Administrator and DWEEC sympathiser InShaneee has been accused of innappropriate conduct. See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents

Persecution of kV continues. He has a habit of asking for citations for questionable statements in articles, and when they are not provided he flags the articles as unsourced. This infuriates DWEECs, who have never had to provide citations before on the pages they "own". The article in question in this case is on Alestaire Crowly, but the DWEECs have joined in anyway. KV too features on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents

According to Pgk on Trollwatcher's talk history page, Trollwatcher's request to be unblocked has been turned down, though we can't find where it was considered. The entry reads "17:42, 18 May 2006 Pgk (Remove tag, situation was listed at WP:AN/I and consensus was block is OK)", but we can't find anything on WP:AN/I (aka Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents)

Nor can we see anything on Trollwatcher's talk page. Again, have we missed something? Can anyone help? Has the request really been considered, or just censored and covered up?

Breaking News 20 May 2006

New case study on systematic abuse by DWEEC Administrators .

Click Here for details

Breaking News 16 May 2006

The link to this site from Sparky's Talk Page has been "disappeared" by Musical Linguist (AnnH). Sparky has been given a misleading explanation of the KMH03 Easter Affair and has been threatened with a permanent ban if he refers to this site again.

Here's another sample of the sort of thing that is being deleted (not yet "disappeared" without trace). This example if from Giovanni's talk page (which you can resuscitate from Giovanni's Talk History Page). It's a bit difficult to follow as it refers to another earlier deletion:

"While on the Subject of Other Users' Talk Pages
"Have you seen Sophia's vandalism on Trollwatcher's talk page - take a look at the history. Note the reversions of his request to be unblocked and also the removal of perfectly reasonable text.

"Here's a copy of the offending text:

"The following message is for AnnH aka Musical Linguist, but as her talk page is protected it is impossible to post messages to her. I hope therefore that you will not mind if I post this on your talk page where she is likely to see it.

"To Musical Linguist. About a month ago you made serious accusation against a number of Wikipedia editors, accusing them of being implicated in the harassment of another editor. As you know harassment is a criminal offense, and you have no doubt acted accordingly.

"Several of the editors have expressed surprise that they have not been contacted by any law enforcement agencies investigating this criminal matter. They say they are as keen as anyone to get to the bottom of this, and are prepared to assist any criminal investigation underway. They have asked me to ask you to indicate which law enforcement agency is carrying out the investigation. Contact details for the officer-in-charge added below this message would be appreciated.

"Many thanks for your help in allowing these editors to assist the police in their criminal investigations, clear their names, and possibly track down the real culprit behind this scandal. Intermediary 19:09, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

"Pretty scary, uh? Ooh Ah Misses 12:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Indeed. One wonders what what reason there can be for suppressing this question rather than simply giving a straightforward answer. Failure to give an answer simply feeds growing speculation.

"It is easy to tell a lie, but it is difficult to support the lie after it is told " (Thomas Paine)

KV has been winning an intellectual argument but losing an edit war with all the main DWEECs (Str1977, Tom Harrison, Musical Linguist (AKA AnnH), Wesley, Storm Rider, and Myopic Bookworm.

He has now raised a Mediation Case (2006-05-15 Christianity) at Wikipedia which makes interesting reading.

Breaking News 15 May 2006

More DWEEC attempts at censorship. Take a look at the entries for May 13 on Sparky's talk history Page. Note the entry by Dweec, reverted by InShaneee, a known DWEEC sympathizer, then restored by Sparky with the comment "Christian Abuse of Wikipedia seems to be something we do see ...".

[note: the entries have now been "disappeared" by Musical Linguist, but at least this time she left a note of what she had done on Sparky's Talk Page. ed 16 May 2006]

[note 2: InShaneee was also involved in the harassing and banning of Alienus]

Christian abuse of Wikipedia is not restricted to DWEECs. Jason Gastrich represents the more militant wing of the movement blatantly promoting his religious faith. Only half the subtly of Str1977, yet it still proved difficult to stop his systematic abuse. Take a look at the amount of evidence that was needed to get him banned from Wikipedia: Request for Arbitration (compared for example to the flimsy evidence against the DWEEC critic HK30).

Jason seems to have attracted his own dedicated critics. This independent site is devoted to his world view and practices http://www.durangobill.com/JasonGastrich.html.

Breaking News 14 May 2006

The DWEECs appear to have a new way of abusing Wikipedia. What they are now doing is regarding any inquiry about the KMH03 Easter affair as being made by John1838. This gives them the right in their own eyes to revert it. The latest examples are all by Tom Harrison. See here (Christianity Talk Page), here (Giovanni's Talk Page), and here (Trollwatcher's Talk Page) here.

John1838 sounds a more plausible candidate than Andrew Morrow for the role of "Puppetmaster", except that it's difficult to see how he can simultaneously live in eight different countries covering three continents - as we know from correspondence and the DWEECs must know from their intense interest in IP addresses.

The big questions are why would Sophia and Tom Harrison want to revert questions like these? It is beginning to look as though the story about criminal harassment really was merely a fiction designed to justify banning editors regarded as enemies, as Intermediary and Mediatrix already suggested.

Note incidentally Tom Harrisson's use of the "m" to indicate a minor edit, his failure to give reason for the reversion, and the tampering of other text to dissuade readers from making further inquiries. A particular irony is that his deletion on Giovanni33's talk page occurs in the middle of a discussion about how wrong it is to delete entries on other users' talk pages.

Also of interest is this page which purports to give evidence that Ooh Ah Misses is none other than John1838. It says "It is suspected that this user might be a sock puppet or impersonator of John1838. Please refer to contributions for evidence". But if you click on the link to see the evidence you get to this page, which offers not the slightest hint of evidence.

One final point of interest is that this technique of pretending that various people are all really one person is a well established form of abuse on Wikipedia. More to follow on this as it turns out to be much more widespread than you might imagine.

Breaking News 12 May 2006

Both Giovanni33 and kV are putting up great fights on the Christianity page, winning arguments, and reducing the DWEECs to their last redoubt: declining to accept edits on the grounds of style. Recommended reading for Str1977 in action.

It turns out that our informant was wrong about John1838's Wikipedia talk page having been deleted. Here it is for all to see: John1838 Talk

Breaking News 10 May 2006

The owner of this domain name has advised us that she is being stalked by persons as yet unknown. As we were borrowing it temporarily in any case, we will be closing the current site in the near future.

If you don't mind the risk of being stalked by DWEECs and would like to take it over, please contact the webmaster. Alternatively, if you would like to maintain your anonymity, you can simply copy all the source html and set yourself up. You are welcome to do so without further notice.

Breaking News 9 May 2006

A number of readers have reported a new DWEEC technique for eliminating dissent. At least three different Wikipedia editors have been banned as sockpuppets of Andrew Morrow.

Needless to say, this abuse has been carried out by a DWEEC administrator, this time Tom Harrison.

The consequence is that the banned editors are unable to sign onto Wikipedia using either their normal log-in names or their IP addresses, and consequently are unable to voice their dissent.

Please let us know if this has happened to you too.

If you wish to criticize the DWEECs or abuse by DWEEC Administrators like AnnH or Tom Harrison on Wikipedia pages, you might want to do it using a new ID and a new IP address, since Tom Harrison is likely to block you as a sockpuppet too if you voice dissent or ask uncomfortable questions.

Can anyone suggest why Andrew Morrow has been selected, other than that he recently posted an interesting entry on the Wikipedia Review pages as part of a discussion thread prompted by this site?

Breaking News 8 May 2006

Following Musical Linguist (aka AnnH)'s accusations that several Wikipedia editors were complicit in the stalking and harassment of another editor, a number of people have started to wonder what has happened in the period since the accusations were made. Since Musical Linguist and Essjay both stated that criminal offenses had been committed, one obvious question for those involved at the periphery was "how can I help the police with their inquiries?".

An editor called Intermediary posted a request addressed to Musical Linguist on a number of pages, including the talk pages of Trollwatcher and HK30 (SimplePilgrim's page had already been deleted).

This request was reverted by Sophia, claiming that it was "inflammatory". She has reverted it several times on Trollwatcher's talk page. Here is a copy of the exchange on that page as it stood at 22:59, 7 May 2006 (UTC):

The following message is for AnnH aka Musical Linguist, but as her talk page is protected it is impossible to post messages to her. I hope therefore that you will not mind if I post this on your talk page where she is likely to see it.

To Musical Linguist (AKA AnnH). About a month ago you made serious accusation against a number of Wikipedia editors, accusing them of being implicated in the harassment of another editor. As you know harassment is a criminal offense.

Several of the editors have expressed surprise that they have not been contacted by any law enforcement agencies investigating this criminal matter. They say they are as keen as anyone to get to the bottom of this, and are prepared to assist any criminal investigation underway. They have asked me to ask you to indicate which law enforcement agency is carrying out the investigation. Contact details for the officer-in-charge added below this message would be appreciated.

Providing specifics on this page would also have the great benefit of dispelling suspicions that your claims about criminal activity are no more than a fiction designed to stifle the editors concerned, all of whom you have banned indefinitely, and all of whom by coincidence have criticized what they see as your systematic editorial bias and abuse of your Administrator privileges.

Many thanks for your help in allowing these editors to assist the police in their criminal investigations, clear their names, and possibly track down the real culprit behind this scandal. Intermediary 19:09, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

The above text has been removed three times by Sophia. I'm not at all certain why, as I am perfectly happy to see it here, and she has been asked repeatedly not to interfere with this page. As an exception I would be interested to hear her rational for not classifying Musical Linguist's accusations of complicity in criminal activity as a personal attack, but then reverting a request to be able to help in the criminal investigation that Musical Linguist must surely have instigated on the grounds that this request does constitute a personal attack. Good luck Sophia, this doesn't look like an easy one. Trollwatcher 22:59, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

..........................................................

This has since been reverted again, this time by Telex who reverted it at 23:08, 7 May 2006 giving no reason for the reversion, but marking it as "minor". The whole episode can be seen on Trollwatcher's history page.

Incidentally, as the history shows, Sophia also twice reverted Trollwatcher's request to Administrators to consider unblocking him, which seems highly irregular.

HK30 does not appear to be aware that a similar message was posted to his talk page by Intermediary and then deleted by Sophia, then restored by Mediatrix, and again deleted, this time by Tom Harrison (a known DWEEC).

Breaking News 5 May 2006

SimplePilgrim has been disappeared - written out of wikipedia history, 1984 style. Amongst the items of interest that have gone are:

• a defense showing that Musical Linguist's accusations against him cannot have had any substance
• a very funny entry pasting Sophia and her inexplicable desire to play handmaiden to Musical Linguist

John1838 has also been disappeared, along with his talk page which contained the first systematic analysis of the DWEEC phenomenon, and on which two pages of this website are based.

RIP John1838 and Simple Pilgrim, †May 2006.

Breaking News 26 April 2006

There is a currently a concerted attempt by a number of hostile administrators to have the Wikipedia administrator Alienus banned. In fact one of them has already banned him without good cause for 72 hours.

It may just be significant that Alienus is the only Administrator so far who has so far explicitly recognized the existence of a "Christian cabal". See this Wikipedia Administrator's page where war is raging. [since disappeared 10 May 2006]

Discussion also continues at the Wikipedia Review pages. which appear to be where all normal Wikipedia editors end up sooner or later. The following Administrators have been identified as reasonable people, so you might want to invite them to help Alienus out

• Talrias
• Everyking
• Karmafist
• Sjakelle
• Dan100
• Peyna
• Kappa
• Capitalistroadster
• Tom Lillis
• OwenX
• Interiot
• JHMM13
• Gator1
• Linuxbeak
• Jeffrey O. Gustaffsen
  

A number of corespondent have pointed out that the DWEEC problem is not an isolated case. It is just one example of an Asymmetric Controversy.

Evidence that censorship doesn't work. This website's traffic is currently doubling every two days.

Breaking News 23 April 2006

Essjay has not only removed references to this site, he has now banned all links from Wikipedia to the Wikipedia Review pages. - where an interesting discussion is now in progress.

AnnH's claim to have been on a Wikibreak since the beginning of Easter is compromised by her History page which shows that she has been editing and censoring at her normal rate.

Breaking News 21 April 2006

Apparently in an attempt to stifle debate, an Administrator has added this website to the list of websites regarded as spam by Wikipedia. This means that all links to this site from Wikipedia will automatically be deleted. The Administrator in question is Essjay. By coincidence he is another devout Christian and God's spokesman. He announces on his user page "From the One Who Was, Who Is, and Who Is To Come, Grace, Light, and Peace be with you all."

Since this site is not spam, the matter has been picked up and discussed on the Wikipedia Review pages.

Separately, a number of links to this site from Wikipedia pages have been removed anonymously without comment or explanation.

AnnH has gone on Wikibreak - something she always claims to do after blocking users without good cause. This gives her the excuse for not responding to them.

Breaking News 19 April 2006.

At least four editors have been banned from using Wikipedia by one of the main DWEECs, Musical Linguist (AKA AnnH), who has several times in the past been accused of using her Administrator privileges to censor discussion

The four users are SimplePilgrim, HK30, Trollwatcher and Robert Steadman. All four were banned for making reference to this site - or possibly for allegedly contributing to it - the accusation is not clear. kV has received a warning for doing the same. It is not known why the others were not warned. As far as we can tell, no evidence has been presented against them, they have made no admissions, and the only way for them to appeal seems to be through AnnH. (persecutor, judge, jury and court of appeal all in one).

This appears to be another case of the DWEECs trying to suppress any information about their activities, rather than anything else as, as far as we know, no-one has consciously broken any Wikipedia policy and AnnH could easily have pointed out any small technical infringement if she had not wanted to use it as an excuse to stifle criticism. From information provided to us it seems that the real problem was that the links were provided along with a question as to whether the message recipient agreed with the sentiments expressed on this site or not.

If you are a Wikipedia editor and are sympathetic to the objectives of this site, if you find it odd that editors can be barred from Wikipedia without recourse just for raising questions, or if you just want to support the right to free speech, then please do anything you can to get the bar lifted on these four users. Please let us know if you are aware of any other victims. And please let as many people as possible know about this site - eg through e-mails or by adding links on other sites and directories.