A computer scientist at the Australian National University
Brendan McKay, who goes by the Wikipedia username “Zero0000,” is the Godfather, the unofficial leader of the entire cabal of anti-Israel Wikipedia editors. Although he is not the most prolific or skilled editor among them, one thing separates him from the others: he’s a Wikipedia administrator. This means that he has vast powers that regular editors don’t have, such as the ability to block and ban regular editors and to delete edits and articles from the historical record. Moreover, administrators are greatly respected, so when they accuse general editors of editing with a pro-Israel point of view—as McKay repeatedly does—other administrators side with him, often blocking or banning pro-Israel editors.
Zero0000 Wikipedia Information
- Wikipedia User Groups: sysop, user, autoconfirmed
- Wikipedia Userpage
- Wikipedia Talk Page
- Wikipedia Contributions
- Wikipedia Stats
Brendan McKay’s information
Best of McKay’s (Zero0000) edits
McKay has removed factual and well-sourced content about Israel across tens of thousands of edits. Here are just a few examples.
In the “Refugees” section of the Wikipedia article Lausanne Conference of 1949, an editor placed this information:
According to Rev Karl Baehr, Executive Director of the American Palestine Committee, Alexander Galloway, then head of the UNRWA for Jordan, told him that “It is perfectly clear that the Arab nations do not want to solve the Arab refugee problem. They want to keep it as an open sore, as an affront against the United Nations, and as a weapon against Israel.” 
When McKay removed the content and added his own anti-Israel political spin, he added this comment for the reason of his edit:
[NOTE: The “rubbish” that McKay removed and is allegedly only advanced by “propagandists” was published in the Journal of Middle Eastern Studies by Alexander H. Joffe and Asaf Romirowsky.]
Remove rubbish again. Karl Baehr is not a reliable source and nobody cares what he claimed except propagandists.
Here was McKay’s “after” edit:
Transjordan was the first state prepared to resettle refugees, provided they had also free choice tot [sic] return to their homes.
What another Wikipedia editor said to McKay
During one discussion, an editor, Pilui3 said this about McKay (Zero0000):
For the record, his recent contributions show a continuing pattern of deleting any information that reflects negatively on the Palestinians, including impeccable sources such as Benny Morris, and amplifying anything that reflects negatively on the Zionists. Pilusi3 (talk) 22:33, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
More evidence of Wikipedia’s bias against Jews and pro-Israel editors
The following are two examples of McKay violating Wikipedia policies and facing no consequences while countless Jewish and pro-Israel editors have been wrongly blamed and subsequently banned for supposedly the violating the same policies:
Deleting another editor’s edits
From Wikipedia: “Contributing to the same page or discussion with multiple accounts: Editors may not use more than one account to contribute to the same page or discussion in a way that suggests they are multiple people.”
In the following example, McKay’s two accounts, “McKay” and “Zero0000,” made two edits in the Patria disaster article in order to remove content placed by another editor:
In this edit, an editor by the username Amoruso, added in the “See also” section, the name and link to the article, Lord Moyne.
In the article, it looked like this:
McKay then made this edit, reverting (deleting) Amoruso’s edit.
Amoruso then put the edit back, once again adding See also Lord Moyne.
Then, McKay used his other user account, Zero0000, (against policy) and deleted Amoruso’s edit. This was meant to make Amoruso think that two editors were against his edit, when in fact it was only one: McKay.
Any Wikipedia editor caught doing what McKay did would be banned indefinitely. No question. But here with McKay, a Wikipedia administrator possessing advanced privileges, nothing happened.
Violating policy to change consensus
Every Wikipedia article has a discussion page (aka: talk page) connected to it, where editors discuss, argue, and try to build consensus about article content.
The more editors with strong arguments choose to engage, the greater potential they have to sway consensus.
Editor Amoruso argued against McKay’s position.
Then, against the policy from not only not editing on the same page, but never to use two different user accounts to try and change consensus, McKay, signs in as Zero0000 and argues against Amoruso. Any editor caught doing that would be banned indefinitely. An administrator caught doing that would have his/her administration tools taken away. But since McKay is an ardent anti-Zionist and pro-Palestinian, he was not sanctioned in any way.
More coming soon