Sunday, December 16, 2007

Stranger than Fiction: A Wikipedia conspiracy

Are you sitting comfortably and in the mood for something really sensational?

You are?

Then I’ll begin.

Regular readers will know all about the extremely nasty campaign of harassment against me which started after I critically reviewed a pro-war book by a neo-con hedge fund manager cum blogger called Oliver Kamm for the Daily Telegraph in December 20005. Details of the campaign can be found here.One arena where the campaign was fought was on the pages of wikipedia. My wikipedia entry was consistently maliciously edited: even on the night of 25th December, the smear merchants were at work. (and, on the same night also maliciously editing the page of David Cromwell of Media Lens).

The nastiest and most vindictive of all my wikipedia page editors was a certain ‘Elena Zamm’ Zamm, as I mentioned before, in addition to editing my page, also edited the pages of Oliver Kamm and a translator named Anthea Bell, but this time much more favourably. Who’s Anthea Bell I hear you ask? Why it’s Oliver Kamm’s mother! (After I highlighted her editing activites last month, Ms Zamm mysteriously, after a five month absence, suddenly sprung back to life, frantically editing lots of other pages; but after this was pointed out by reader phildav76, she suddenly stopped again- but don‘t worry Elena, I‘ve got records of all your wikipedia activity).

After several months trashing my wikipedia page, Elena Zamm and her mysterious pseudonymous jazz-loving associate 'Philip Cross’(more on him in a later post,) failed to get the edits they wanted- particularly the inclusion of a highly biased and inaccurate account of the legal action I was forced to bring against Kamm for defamation. So the tactic changed: the aim now was to get my page deleted on grounds of ‘non-notability’.

The editor who took the decision to delete my page- (and also to ban from wikipedia a friend of mine, Martin Meenagh, who had committed the heinous 'crime' of writing in, under his own name to argue that my page should not be deleted,) was a certain ‘slim virgin’ ('slim virgin' had also edited my page, always in a hostile way, on a number of prior occasions)> For someone who was supposed to be an impartial arbritrator in the matter, 'slim virgin' was, from the outset, extraordinarily ill-disposed towards me. Despite the fact that my work appears in British and overseas newspapers and magazines on average around twice a week, 'slim virgin' thought it "would be a stretch" to call me a journalist. (Interestingly she didn’t seem to have the same problem regarding the journalistic credentials of Oliver Kamm, a far less frequently published writer).

I can now reveal that Oliver Kamm, in his own name, was in contact with 'slim virgin'. On 5th July 2007, Kamm wrote to 'Philip Cross'.

I'd like to draw your attention to a note I've just put on the user page of [[User:SlimVirgin|SlimVirgin]], as it refers to you too. Thanks.[[User:OliverKamm|OliverKamm]] 13:01, 5 July 2007 (UTC

Click on the link here (scroll down to Kato's entry) for more and also to read Kamm‘s edits to his own Talk page.

Kato, on the link above, saw quite correctly, saw that 'slim virgin' was no impartial bystander and that she had a political agenda. But I’m not sure that even he could have imagined what sort of agenda.

After some great detective work by Daniel Brandt and Professor Ludwig De Braeckeleer, I'm pleased to inform that 'slim virgin' has now been outed. She is Linda Mack, who is now living under the nom-de-plume of 'Sarah McEwan' in Alberta, Canada. And her background? Please read on.

First, check the proof that 'slim virgin' is Linda Mack by clicking here and then clicking on the name ‘linda mack’- or by following the links here.

And, as I'm sure you'll agree if you read these three articles here, (and please, please do, I promise you won’t be disappointed) - it "would be a stretch" to call Ms Mack an unbiased editor or for that matter a normal, everyday member of the public.

So there we have it.

Oliver Kamm left a note for a wikipedia editor, whose impartiality was a complete fiction. The role of security forces and those associated with them in using wikipedia to smear and dispararge ‘undesirables’, to trash so-called 'conspiracy theories' and to propagandise for a highly politicised agenda was exposed this summer.

It seems that I too have been a victim of the same process.

UPDATE: You can read more of the remarkable story of 'slim Virgin' here.
And have a look at 'slim virgin's highly incriminating comments here too.

AND, a special extra treat: here's proof that our old friend 'elena zamm' was in contact with 'slim virgin' too:

Reply about your request
Thanks for replying so quickly SlimVirgin. I haven't made any edits since you posted your request and so long as that's what you ask then I won't edit any further on those pages and will comment just on the Talk pages. You're entitled to ask this from a user. However, I've tried to edit always in line with policies and I don't know what's swayed you to this request. I appreciate your efforts to calm things down though and it's good that these pages are being looked at thoroughly.
--ElenaZam 21:35, 12 March 2007 (UTC

ps Elena: if you think you'll just pop over to delete your communication to slim virgin, don't bother: a full copy has already been made.

UPDATE: Guess whose wikipedia page 'slim virgin' has recently been editing? (this time in a very benign fashion)
Go on, have a guess! The answer is here.


Anonymous said...

A point of clarification. That link does not disclose Kamm editing his own wikipedia page at all. It shows him editing the talk:oliver kamm page. That page which is for discussion of a wikipedia entry. I doubt Kamm would deny he 'edited' this - he's linked to that page himself, many times.

Anonymous said...

Also: all those pages displaying communication between ElenaZamm, slimvirgin and OliverKamm are in the public and Kamm has attatched his own name to many of them. They don't really class as 'finds' per se - they're public postings under the man's own name.

Anonymous said...

Thirdly: is it not a bit rich for you to complain that 'slimvirgin' did not reveal her biases? In all of those exchanges, Martin Meenagh never revealed his relationship to you, did he?

Sorry, Neil. But I can't see the grand conspiracy here. I'm far from a fan of Kamm's, but I can't see how posting something under your own name on a publicly viewable site like wikipedia can be at all characterised as duplicitous.

Neil Clark said...

Nice try Luke, but I think readers, after reading through all the material, will be able to make their own minds up on whether there has been a conspiracy or not.
I have revised copy to make it clear that Kamm was editing his talk page. They may be public postings: but ones which Kamm, given his penchant for writing about wikipedia, has seemed remarkably reluctant to talk about.
to equate the actions of martin meenagh, who only wrote in to argue (under his own name) that my pager should not be deleted, with Linda Mack aka 'slim virgin', a malicious editor, who has sabotaged not just mine, but thousands of other wikipedia pages for political reasons is absurd. I take it you haven't read all the articles about Linda Mack.
Mack, if the information is to be believed, and the evidence does seem to be very strong, has links to the British security forces. It also seems that the name 'slim virgin' hid a group operation- how else do we explain the fact that she was often on line editing entries for 36 hours on one go? and editing thousands and thousands of entries in such a short period of time. This, as others have argued points to the fact that the name 'slim virgin' was used as a cover for an intelligence operation.
This is a story that will not be 'buried', I assure you.

Anonymous said...

1. I'm a reader, with no conection to you or Kamm and made up my mind.

2. Yes, the slimvirgin thing is odd, but how was Kamm meant to know exactly what was going on? And why would you assume I hadn't read the links?

3. Kamm has linked to his exchanges with slimvirgin, on many an occaison.

Listen, I'm not in any way trying to say that this entire affair hasn't been in some way unpleasant or that there hasn't in some fashion been shenanigans occuring. Just pointing out some flaws in your reasoning. I don't think either you or Kamm come out particularly well from it all.

Phil said...

This is bizarre. Why do so many bloggers *really* take umbrage at what others write? There's some very, very thin skins out there.

Anonymous said...

Dear Neil,

This is rather a dangerous topic, don't you think? Considering that similar allegations (which I shall not repeat) have been made towards you regarding Wikipedia tinkering.

Bearing that in mind, Wikipedia generally does a decent job of balancing itself out. It's only when online opinionists with far too much time on their hands get involved that things get messy.

And what kind of user name is 'Slim Virgin' anyway?

(comment edited by moderator)
Roland Hulme

Neil Clark said...

roland: it certainly is a dangerous topic- for 'slim virign' and 'elena zam'.
The allegations you speak of come from a highly predictable source.

phil c: there are some very vindictive skins out there too.

luke: the 'you're just as bad as each other' line doesn't really apply here. If someone wrote a critical review of a book I had written, I wouldn't respond in the vindictive way Kamm did. He has spent the best part of two years attacking me on his one man smear sheet (I won't call it a blog), and in other forums too.
re-read the post: I did not say that Kamm knew 'slim virgin's real identity, only that he contacted her. I've heard of euphemisms, but to call what has been going on as 'shenanigans' is quite ridiculous.

Anonymous said...

So the zionazi gate keepers at "Ziopedia" are after your arse too.

Not so strange at all...

Anonymous said...

Very interesting, Neil and quite amazing. It's clear 'slim virgin' has an agenda and elena zamm most certainly does too. For me the most interesting observation was:

“The same SlimVirgin also holds a record of continuous editorial work lasting 26 hours, with the longest break in editing not exceeding 40 minutes. These statistics from Wikipedia's editing records suggests either a supernatural ability, or more likely that SlimVirgin is a convenient smoke screen for an entire team of specialists editing Wikipedia articles on behalf of intelligence services.“
on this url:

No one edits wikipedia for 26 hours on end, not even the most crazed obsessive. This is clearly a team effort.

Anonymous said...

I'm pretty sure you're wrong about the team editing thing, she's just likely underemployed and high on something or other, and very devoted to her "cause"...

Anonymous said...

A post on "Philip Cross" promised, but not delivered six weeks later. Do you or your curious supporter "Citylightsgirl" still think he is "Elena Zam?"


Neil Clark said...

oh, don't worry anonymous. 'Philip Cross' will be outed.

Anonymous said...

Your article is generally spot on, except that the alleged post by SlimVirgin, where she is recruiting allies to her animal rights agenda, is a forgery.

Anonymous said...

Your link to "Chip Berlet, SlimVirgin, and Wikipedia" is broken because the page has moved here:

Anonymous said...

And it has moved again, to this URL: