Nick Clegg has mocked Grant Shapps after Wikipedia blocked a user account over suspicions that it is being used by the Conservative party chairman “or someone acting on his behalf” to edit his own page and those of rivals.
The deputy prime minister said he believed Shapps’s denials but then suggested the contested account going by the name of “Contribsx” could have been run by Michael Green – the alter ego used by Shapps to write a series of get-rich-quick guides.
Asked for his views, Clegg said: “Well, Grant Shapps has fervently denied that he had anything to do with it. He himself does not have the time apparently to edit his own Wikipedia entry. I’m prepared to believe him. It could have been someone else. Michael Green for instance.”
On Tuesday, Lib Dem former leader and campaign chief Lord Ashdown released a joke press release describing Shapps as “quite simply a colossus”, while footnoting that it had been “edited by Contribsx”.
A Guardian investigation found about a third of the contributions made by this user were to Shapps’s own Wikipedia entry while the rest are made up largely of unflattering changes to the online pages to senior political figures – including prominent figures in the Tory party such as Philip Hammond, the foreign secretary, Justine Greening, the international development secretary, and Lynton Crosby, Conservative election campaign strategist.
Wikipedia says that “sock-puppetry” – creating a fake online identity “for an improper purpose, such as to mislead other editors, disrupt discussions, distort consensus or avoid sanctions” – is not permitted.
Conservative colleagues rallied round Shapps. Nicky Morgan, the education secretary, said it was not something that he would do, while Nadine Dorries, a Tory backbencher, said she was 100% certain that Shapps was not behind the account and believed he had been set up.
However, David Cameron was less fulsome in his defence when asked if he had full confidence in Shapps, saying: “Grant does a great job, he’s made a very clear statement and I’ve got nothing to add.”
Speaking on LBC Radio, the London mayor, Boris Johnson, said Shapps had said it was nonsense and row was “completely trivial” compared with the things the Conservatives are talking about.
Shapps has come out fighting following the story, telling the BBC it was “categorically false and defamatory” as well as “the most bonkers story I’ve seen in this election campaign so far”.
Speaking to the BBC’s news channel, Shapps said “nobody has ever been authorised to make such changes”. He said he would be writing to Wikipedia’s HQ in California to complain as well as taking legal advice on whether any false statements about an election candidate have been made.
“One editor, who for all we know is part of a Labour/Guardian smear campaign, has given a statement to the Guardian from which they seem to have based an entire story. “A simple look in my diary shows I was elsewhere,” he added.
Wikipedia has banned Contribsx and said any evidence of future attempts to cover the user’s tracks would be investigated immediately.
The site’s administrators, selected Wikipedia volunteers who patrol the site, told the Guardian they “believe that the account Contribsx is a sockpuppet of Grant Shapps’d previous accounts on Wikipedia … and based on the evidence the account is either run by Shapps directly or being run by someone else – an assistant or a PR agency – but under his clear direction.”
When the Guardian first approached Shapps, saying that this user account would be closed down because Wikipedia said it was linked to him, a spokesman for the Conservative party said: “This story is completely false and defamatory. It is nonsense from start to finish.”
When Shapps was sent a detailed exposition of the changes made by Contribsx – including posts critical of cabinet colleagues such as the chancellor, George Osborne – the Tory chairman did not respond. Later, on Tuesday night, he said it was “categorically false and defamatory”.
“It is untrue from start to finish, and was quite likely dreamt up by the Labour press office. Sadly it is typical of the smears coming from those who would rather not debate policy and substance,” Shapps said.
Wikipedia relies on about 70,000 people each month who edit the articles for a worldwide readership. With 18bn page views and nearly 500m unique visitors a month, only Yahoo, Facebook, Microsoft and Google are more popular websites than Wikipedia.
