A reliable blogger I am familiar with makes accusations against Wike claques. Is this common?

This [banning of views] is also true of many, many other Wikipedia claques. The Shakespeare section,to name an example of which I am extremely well versed, is controlled by an Alistair Crowley freak named Paul Barlowe and Tom Reedy ,the hired spin doctor for a much beleaguered Sheriff's department in Denton,Texas.They once banned some eighteen contributors(all better educated than themselves) within a matter of days.To add injury to insult Barlowe was in the habit of not only of banning his rivals and excising their contributions but, after waiting several weeks, re-publishing the deleted contributions as his own original research.
The third Shakespeare editor, calling himself "Nishidama" (but believed to be British political commentator Oliver Kamm) was in fact removed from editing the Mid-Eastern section due to his hysterical rants.And he runs a protective editorship over a notorious atheist activist and hoaxter(the Amazing Randi) who,in his eighties, was caught in a major scandal involving male teenagers.
Wickie is essentially a far left wing,vehemently materialist operation,with a morality to match, and should never be cited as an authority on any thing with checking its references one by one.Some editors will accept corrections but many others,like those cited above, will excise them as rapidly as posted and reverted to the original lying formats.