To sum it up, Adrian Dix's wiki page has been whitewashed and altered to make it biased, including the removal of key content from his past. Missing content from the page include a neutrality warning that warns readers the page contains biased editing/writing, as well as details of the Glen Clark memo scandal and Dix's subsequent resignation as Chief of Staff. An in-depth picture of the missing content is here.
Now, if this were the work of anonymous IPs, there would be no way of tracking who did what. It just so happens that it's registered Wikipedia member who have been editing the Dix article, namely a long-time Wikipedia editor who has also whitewashed other BC-political articles to reflect a pro-NDP stance.
From the second article:
Cleven is an extraordinarily prolific contributor to Wikipedia, having made more than 71,000 edits since he became a member in 2005. He is one of Wikipedia's 400 most active editors. Much of his work involves correcting and adding to BC Place names.
But Cleven also has a history of making changes to biographies — principally those of living politicians — that has brought charges that he's politically biased. He has acknowledged in several posts that he has a conflict of interest when it comes to editing some pages because of criticism he has levelled on other websites and in blogs.
In the last four days Cleven was responsible for removing references to Dix's memo-writing controversy five of the 10 times it was posted on Wikipedia by other users.
He also has edited references on Premier Christy Clark and former premier Gordon Campbell (in one case changing Campbell's job as a real estate developer to "real estate lobbyist". He is actively involved in shaping how information is relayed about the BC Rail scandal that plagued Campbell's government, and believes that mainstream reporting of the casino scandal that led to the fall of Glen Clark's NDP government is biased and shouldn't be used in any Wikipedia article about it.
A number of users have complained about Cleven to Wikipedia's conflict of interest board, and have criticized him in posts on the site. The user whose Dix notations Cleven repeatedly removed tried but failed to have him banned by Wikipedia.
Wikipedia is governed by a strong set of guidelines that dictate articles — particularly those involving living people or controversial subjects — must be written from a "neutral point of view."
In a posting on the website alternatehistory.com a decade ago, Cleven illustrated his views about the NDP and his disdain for the B.C. Liberals which had just been elected. He called them "the Carpetbagger Party" and wondered about an alternate history if the NDP had not squandered their time in government.
My conclusion? What a petty move by Cleven and other wikipedia users to add their own biases to articles and to censor information.