Kevin Shepherd And The Wikipedia ArbCom Bans

Kevin Shepherd And The Wikipedia ArbCom Bans
In another Wikipedia related issue, Kevin Shepherd correctly stated that Joe Moreno (aka “SSS108”) and
Andries Krugers Dagneaux were banned from editing the Sathya Sai Baba-related Wikipedia articles (as were “freelanceresearcher” and “wikisunn”: Ref). Of course, Kevin Shepherd praised the arbitration committee when it came to Moreno's ban but was “disconcerted” with (and made excuses for) the same arbitration committee that banned Andries. It is also important to point out that that Andries was formerly banned on the Robert Priddy Wikipedia Article (Ref) due to violating the ArbCom ruling and two warnings from Wikipedia Administrators (Refs: 01 - 02). Moreno was never banned from editing the Robert Priddy Wikipedia Article. Enough said.

In his typically inaccurate ways, Kevin Shepherd had the audacity to say that Andries “had originally established the Sathya Sai Baba entry in Wikipedia on the basis of both pro- and contra- views being represented”. This is an absurd and total untruth. Andries included voluminous amounts of non-reputable and non-reliable sources in violation of NPOV, WP:BLP, WP:V and WP:RS and it was all removed in accordance with the First Mediation With BostonMA. For once, get your facts right, Mr. Kevin Shepherd.

Andries is a known POV pusher (Refs: 01 - 02 - 03 - 04) and other Wikipedia editors have accused him of the same bias and POV pushing that Moreno has. Andries was uncooperative and his failure to accept a second mediation attempt (Ref) pushed the issue into an ArbCom case (which he tried to escape). As a matter of fact, the First ArbCom Case fully acknowledged the problems with the Sathya Sai Baba Wikipedia Article and ruled (due to Moreno's thorough documentation about Andries Anti-Sai agenda):

“Negative information in an article or on a talk page regarding Sathya Sai Baba or organizations affiliated with him which is poorly sourced may be removed without discussion. The three revert rule shall not apply to such removal. This includes links to critical websites which contain original research or which consist of personal accounts of negative experiences with Sathya Sai Baba or organizations affiliated with him. It is inappropriate for a user to insert a link to a website maintained by the user (or in which the user plays an important role).”

Needless to say, this was a huge blow to Andries and Anti-Sai Activists (and they whined and hissed about it on their own Anti-Sai Websites). Don’t expect Kevin Shepherd to mention any any of these pertinent facts, which he lamentably failed to obtain despite his alleged in-depth research into this topic.

Kevin Shepherd And The US State Department

Kevin Shepherd Misrepresented Former US State Department Warning
Regarding the former US State Department warning, Kevin Shepherd said:

“The US State Department has been more sober than Indian politicians, issuing a travel warning after reports of ‘inappropriate sexual behaviour by a prominent local religious leader.’ That statement has been confirmed by officials as a reference to Sathya Sai Baba.”

Kevin Shepherd obviously does not care to update his website with current and accurate information. Since July 17th 2007, the US State Department has “soberly” removed all indirect references to Sathya Sai Baba from their official website (Refs: Truth Behind US State Department Warning - Official US State Consular Sheet).

It is very disturbing that Kevin Shepherd (like ex-devotees) misrepresented the former US State Department warning when he purposely left out the pivotal word “unconfirmed” in his quote. The former US State Department warning explicitly stated “unconfirmed reports of inappropriate sexual behavior by a prominent local religious leader”. Kevin Shepherd (wholly unconcerned with giving full and accurate citations) quoted only partial information that significantly changed the entire context to the original statement. Why would a serious researcher cite partial quotes for any other reason than personal bias and deceit?

In his July 2007 update, Kevin Shepherd said (in reference to UNESCO and the US State Department removing all indirect warnings against Sai Baba from their websites):

“This grave cessation of public warnings should arouse strong questions about official protocol, which can evidently be manipulated by an organisation whose activities have not been duly investigated.”

Actually, these “grave cessation of public warnings” should arouse strong suspicions that the former warnings were discovered to be based on inadequate or deceptive information. After all, Ex-Devotees boasted how they accomplished the Unesco Withdrawal and the US State Department Warning via an unremitting “e-bombing” campaign.

Kevin Shepherd went from calling the US State Department “sober” to implying that they were manipulated by the Sai Organization. This type of behavior is highly indicative of a conspiracy theorist that operates on the premise of paranoia and deceit when the truth does not argue in his favor.

The reason why Sathya Sai Baba and the Sai Organization have never been “investigated” is because all of the alleged victims have never followed the process of law and refuse (to this day) to file a basic police complaint against the guru in India. Therefore, the perception that Sathya Sai Baba is completely innocent of all wrongdoing is due to the apathy and non-credibility of alleged victims (who refused the offer of free “world-class legal resources” from Ex-Devotees). Don’t expect Kevin Shepherd to provide these facts, which he could have easily obtained had he contacted Joe Moreno (a Pro-Sai Activist he has written extensively against).