User:Durova/Complex vandalism at Joan of Arc

Complex vandalism at Joan of Arc - despite being a featured article, this page has seen intermittent problems with complex vandalism and POV pushing. Most of the more serious problems appear to originate from a single person - here called Editor X.

Editor X uses a randomized IP from an AOL account that originates in Reston, Virginia. User:Switisweti, User:Vyran, and User:Durova tracked occurrences of disruptive edits that followed similar patterns. A log of these IP addresses is available at User:Highest-Authority-on-Joan-of-Arc-Related-Scholarship/AWilliamson sock puppets. As the title suggests, these three editors suspect that this IP range represents the same person who formerly edited as User:AWilliamson and User:Center-for-Medieval-Studies. The same editor was active again in April - June 2006 and possibly at other times.

Traits of Editor X

Editor X uses an extensive knowledge about Joan of Arc to shift the article toward a devout Catholic point of view. Editor X's claims and edit summaries are often long and disingenuous. A typical example is the edit 18:12, 13 June 2006 by 205.188.114.46 with the comment Too much detail for the intro, I think. The literary works are covered in their own article. Editor X removed two names from an enumeration of writers who created fictional works about Joan of Arc; these two names were not minor authors as the note suggests, but William Shakespeare and Voltaire, the only two who portrayed Joan of Arc in a negative light. Numerous changes along these lines have prompted other editors to post POV templates and complain on the talk page. Much effort that could have gone into improving Wikipedia has been wasted undoing Editor X's damage.

Basic characteristics

Reston, Virginia AOL IP addresses.
Refuses to discuss changes on the talk page.
Deletes or alters material to enhance reverence toward Joan of Arc.
Pro-Catholic bias.
Fails to cite sources. If challenged persistently, cites unreliable sources or misrepresents mainstream sources.
Adds erroneous claims to other editors' cited contributions.
Alters existing footnotes to introduce errors.
Revert warring.
Spurious accusations of misconduct against other editors.
Rudeness.

Stylistic traits

Long edit notes.
Convoluted syntax.
Excessive use of passive voice.
Excessive punctuation.

Subtopics of interest

Although Editor X edits throughout the article, specific areas of interest include:

Joan of Arc's visions - advances the idea that her visions were divine guidance.
Joan of Arc's capture - asserts that Joan of Arc's ransom was disallowed, that Charles VII made some effort on her behalf, and suggests that her transfer into English custody was not outright purchase.
Joan of Arc's battles - obfuscates military achievements and suggests divine intervention.
Joan of Arc's clothing - censors any discussion of transvestism, suggests that she wore women's clothes when not in battle.

Other areas

Hundred Years' War - related articles.
Cross-dressing - has edit warred and vandalized related pages.
Homosexuality - religiously opposed to homosexual practice; advocates celibacy for homosexually oriented people
Catholicism - defends the faith, especially on pages that nexus homosexuality and Catholicism such as priestly abuse
Christianity - defends the faith, especially on pages that nexus homosexuality and Christianity

Dodging scrutiny

This vandal has been known to change certain tactics when other editors become suspicious. He largely abandoned Category:Joan of Arc under scrutiny, but continued the disruptive pattern at other articles that mentioned her in passing. For example, at List of people with epilepsy the vandal added unsupported information to a previously cited statement[1] and then degraded the existing medical reference by replacing it with a non-medical link.[2] Then on an account that was later banned as a confirmed sockpuppet, the vandal applauded the page's scholarship at its featured list candidacy.[3]

The vandal has switched between registered accounts that conduct lengthy disputes on talk pages, unregistered AOL IPs that conduct disputes through lengthy edit summaries, and quiet socks that specialize in deletion vandalism without comment. One such quiet sock was an impersonation account User:Durova., a use of full stop which mimics a masking pattern the vandal tried with User:AWilliamson. and User:Center-for-Medieval-Studies. and hard redirects to the latter two accounts' user pages and talk pages.

Consistent traits include the main nexus topics of interest. Favored strategies include deletion vandalism, edit warring, POV pushing, and misleading edit summaries. This vandal often makes vague and evasive claims to be an authoritative expert, although the same person has also used the trolling technique of posing as a new user to distract investigation. Note the deletion of a Wikistalking warning in this request for help.[4] The vandal's core beliefs appear to be stable and many of them are his own trademark brand of bad OR, which has provided a method of identification.

Misuse of references

Of special concern is a dubious reference work Editor X used in several places to support disputed claims during May - June 2006.[5] While this has the superficial appearance of a legitimate scholarly journal, as of August 2006 Google returns no results other than its own website, Wikipedia, and its mirrors. Allen Williamson (author and translator) and Virginia Frohlick (peer review) are not academics but amateur enthusiasts who maintain personal websites about Joan of Arc.[6], [7] The other two persons listed are even less notable.

As the Wikipedia username AWilliamson suggests, there is a high probability that Editor X and Allen Williamson are the same person. User talk:AWilliamson was blanked on 10 April 2006, but edit histories reveal that this editor has been active at Wikipedia on Joan of Arc-related subjects since 2004. Editor X's citation of the "Journal" Mr. Williamson wrote was nonstandard in that it avoided mention of the author's name. Similarly, the journal's bibliographic entry at Wikipedia listed not the author's name but the editor's name - a practice normally reserved for works of four or more authors. I (User:Durova) reverted and deleted this material in the belief that Editor X was Mr. Williamson attempting to circumvent WP:V by vanity publishing in order to cite himself. The content of the citations I deleted rehashed Adrien Harmand's work of eighty years ago.

Furthermore, a search at Google Scholars revealed no publications in academic history journals by Allen Williamson. A comparison search for Kelly DeVries (Associate Professory of history at Loyola College in Maryland and an expert cited in the article) produced 247 returns. This supports the conclusion that neither Mr. Williamson nor the journal he authored has any standing within the field of history.

Editor X displayed similar behavior in fall 2005 with misrepresented citations. On the edit Revision as of 13:21, 28 October 2005 by 64.12.116.197 with the summary, "Making some minor changes to a few points, with documentation given where needed or feasible," Editor X asserted the following without actual citation: "Several sources (such as the Morosini documents) state that Charles demanded that she be ransomed back to her own side, but the Burgundians refused." When confronted with a page referenced citation of a leading historian's refutation on the talk page, Editor X added other unattributed original research in an increasingly elaborate and imaginative defense, culminating in a footnote that misrepresented the opinion of the same historian: Revision as of 01:42, 30 October 2005 by 64.12.116.197, 09:37, 30 October 2005, Revision as of 09:41, 30 October 2005, 19:23, 30 October 2005, 22:07, 30 October 2005, 22:11, 30 October 2005, 00:37, 31 October 2005, 05:19, 31 October 2005. Although Editor X claimed to concede the point shortly after the last of these edits, a coy and unreferenced version of the same claims reappeared in 23:41, 15 April 2006 by 205.188.116.132 along with other complex POV changes and footnote alterations that introduced factual and citation errors. Several related blankings and alterations occurred at the subordinate pages Cultural depictions of Joan of Arc and Joan of Arc bibliography, which included removal of links to online texts and complete blanking of bibliographical entries for citations in the main article. Some of these alterations went unrecognized for four months, by which time they required considerable sleuthing to remedy.

Suspected origins of Editor X

The earliest (now blanked) user comment for User:AWilliamson is a welcome from 03:18, 9 October 2004. On 11 October 2004 the first non-botted comment regarded an edit to fifteenth century history. On 13 October 2004 another comment regards a deletion vote for an article AWilliamson created entitled, Joan of Arc (cross-dressing). Other conversations on similar topics follow. Also in October 2004 this editor went into mediation and received a blanking warning. In November 2004 this editor's blanking to Joan of Arc prompted article protection. Some of the history becomes difficult to trace: User:AWilliamson implemented a name change to User:AWilliamson. in April 2006 and blanked the remainder of his talk page, which already contained annotations of additional blanked posts.

Consistent patterns:

Interest in Joan of Arc.
Related interest in cross-dressing.
Clashes with other editors.
Blanking and deleting.
POV pushing.

Like the change from User:AWilliamson to User:AWilliamson., User:Center-for-Medieval-Studies became User:Center-for-Medieval-Studies. on 10 May 2005. The first edit by User:Center-for-Medieval-Studies was 2 June 2005, shortly after a sudden dropoff of activity by User:AWilliamson (the account became virtually dormant after 23 May 2006). This account edited a variety of articles related to the Hundred Years' War and edited two pages on transgender and cross-dressing, but made only one alteration to Joan of Arc. The character of the edits and username change make it a probable sockpuppet. User:Switisweti added a suspected sockpuppet notice on 19 November 2005, which User:Center-for-Medieval-Studies blanked on 9 January 2006.

Both of these accounts exhibit the same editing style, interests, and syntactical errors as the Reston, Virginia AOL IP range. The Allen Williamson Joan of Arc website is an AOL homepage. Editor X activity subsided for several months after User:Durova threatened to initiate a formal grievance with Editor X's service provider. From Cultural depictions of Joan of Arc: 20:19, 25 November 2005 You are now in violation of the three revert rule. Evidence of other improper behavior has been tracked. Reporting to Wikipedia and AOL.

Summary

Whoever Editor X actually is, this person has done extensive reading on the subject in both French and English and will likely return to alter Wikipedia's Joan of Arc article again. Although many of these distortions require similar expertise to dispute in detail, this person's consistent failure to observe WP:V makes it possible for a good editor to undo most damage. The most serious concerns are fraudulent citations and subtle POV pushing. All edits that resemble Editor X activity should be scrutinized.