Billmasen is something of an unknown quantity in these parts. He ran unsuccessfully for ArbCom a few years back, but otherwise has not been on the radar screen. He just did a total re-write of the "Views of Lyndon LaRouche" article, which has been a topic of discussion here because of the contention of the famed Will Beback/SlimVirgin tag-team that LaRouche is not a reliable source for his own views. Billmasen, however, is taking it to the next level. Although he quotes WP scripture in his talk page rationale, he largely ignores it in practice, leavening the article with his own editorial commentary (what is called, in polite company, Original Research.) I think it is possible that he is essentially acting as a stalking horse for WB, who will defend Billmasen's edits in the traditional way, i.e., by banning anyone who tries to revert them, but will then go all Pontius Pilate and claim that he doesn't necessarily agree with the defamatory nature of the re-write, but someone else did it so it he (WB) need not accept responsibility.