User:SSS108/Andries POV Pushing

This Thread Is Closed. Please Do Not Edit It:

This page was created solely for a Request For Arbitration regarding the Sathya Sai Baba Article: View RFA

List of articles in which Andries mostly cites links to his personal website and the websites of other Anti-SSB Activists and pushes his Anti-Sathya Sai Baba POV: ALL of these articles were created by Andries:

Beliefs and practices in the Sathya Sai Organisation; Prema Sai Baba; Sathya Sai Organization; Allegations against Sathya Sai Baba (which has been subsequently deleted/redirected); Beliefs and practices in the Sathya Sai Organisation; History and origins of the Sathya Sai Baba movement; Netherlands Sathya Sai Baba Article (which cites the original research to Andries Anti-SSB friends, whose names were removed off the English version for violating Wikipedia's policy on Wikipedia:Reliable sources and Wikipedia:No original research); Sri Sathya Sai Institute of Higher Learning; Tal Brooke (a fundamentalist Christian and critic of SSB who believes SSB is the Anti-Christ); Basava Premanand (a skeptic and critic of SSB: Andries soliciting an Anti-Sai website on: Ref, Publishing a link attacking me on: Ref); Materialization (Andries promotion of Anti-Sai links: Ref); David C. Lane (a skeptic and critic of SSB); True-believer syndrome (a skeptics terms); List of people who have been considered avatars; List of people who claimed never to sleep; Disengagement from religion

List of articles in which Andries pushes his Anti-Sathya Sai Baba POV:

Abraham Kovoor (a critic and skeptic of SSB); Wolf Messing (Andries promoting his personal website and an article by Nagel that is more about Sathya Sai Baba then Messing Ref); List of people who have been considered deities; Miracles (Andries attempted to start a section entitled "Contemporary Miracle Mongers", pushing his POV Ref); Post-cult trauma (Andries listed 6 Anti-Sai links, including his. Also listed his own personal story, "Calumny Confirmed": Ref); List of purported cults (Andries attempted to cite a non-reputable source and the original research of Alexandra Nagel Ref); Cults and governments (Andries added a link to the original reserach of Barry Pittard and negative information about SSB: 01 - 02); H. Narasimhaiah (a critic and skeptic of SSB); List of virgin births; List of parapsychologists; Apostasy (Andries added the lie that Basava Premanand was an Ex-devotee of SSB Ref); Swami Premananda of Trichy; Dialog Center (Christian Anti-Cult org whose founder Andries personally associates with and promotes on his Anti-SSB site); Debunk; among others.

• Admission from Andries on his Talk Page: "I have become a complete skeptic due to an unfortunate experience with and Indian guru called Sathya Sai Baba" (Ref)

• Andries promoted an Anti-SSB petition on both his Talk Page and the SSB Article. Also duplicated a section to an anonymous, unsourced and defamatory article dispersed by Basava Premanand (Ref 01 - Ref 02).

• Andries promoted Anti-SSB material on his talk page: (Ref)

• Andries soliciting his personal defection story on Wikipedia: (Ref 01 - Ref 02 - 03 - Ref 04)

Andries has subsequently claimed that he is justified in soliciting his personal defection story because it was (allegedly) mostly taken from a Dutch TV Show ("Tabloid") that he spoke on, against SSB. I have asked Andries to provide a transcript to his words in that show and am awaiting a response (Ref).

• View Andries English Contribution Tree
• View Andries Dutch Contribution Tree

Since the Contribution Tree feature can now only be divulged by the user him/her self, I have asked Andries to divulge his Contribution Tree so I can use it as evidence in the RFA. I am awaiting a response (Ref).

Andries contacted the thoroughly biased Guruphiliac webmaster and complained about an attempt to remove a website from the external links (which prompted the webmaster to urge his readership to complain and edit the Guru article). View Guruphiliac Post (still online as of Aug. 1st 2006). The relevant text reads:

It appears there's some wacki-folks attempting to whitewash the Wikipedia of guru criticism: link 1 There are attempts to remove Sarlo's website from the external link section in Wikipedia. Please let the Wikipedia editors know what you think about that at: link 2. Press the edit button. Also there are many attempts to move or to reduce criticism and assessment of gurus. Please let the Wikipedia editors know what you think about that at: link 3 Press on the edit button. Thanks to Andries K.D. (Link: Andries) for bringing this to our attention. Now go let those lamers know you want the contrast afforded by both sides of the story rather than just being force-fed the hagiographic nonsense that passes as reliable information for some men and all sheep about the lives of gurus.

This type of behavior and attempt to polarize views on the Guru Wikipedia article proves that Andries will go to great lengths to push his Anti-Guru POV by soliciting the assistance of someone who is thoroughly biased against Gurus. This type of behavior also shows that Andries agenda on Wikipedia is not to maintain a Neutral POV, but to push his POV.

Andries also published the following statement on the GuruRatings Yahoo Group (requires an Yahoo Account) at: link. The relevant text reads: "Please let me and other Wikipedia editors what you think of deletion of Sarlo's wesbite from the external links section. Comments please at link Andries"

On the Village Pump, Andries stated the following (View Original Comment):

I am a bit worried about some articles that have become largely uninformative because they are only used to push opposing POVs, see e.g. New_religious_movement#NRMs_and_their_critics and apostasy in cults. (I have to admit that I have been a POV pusher on the latter subject because I am an ex-cult member and I hate to be called a liar with regards to a very difficult experience of my life that I tried to tell in an accurate, factual way to others.) I do not think that either of these article break NPOV guidelines, but they are quite lousy anyway. Does anyone know how to prevent this? Andries 15:40, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

On the Administrator's Noticeboard, Andries stated the following, as recently as May 13th 2006 (View Original Comment):

Yes, I openly admitted that I was a POV pusher, but I wonder how other editors would feel if e.g. the article African American, Dutch people, or Swedish people stated that they cannot be trusted and do not speak the truth. I am not aware of any other article in Wikipedia that makes such generalizations. Andries 22:58, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

On Willmcw's Talk Page, Andries stated the following (View Original Comment):

Many opposing POVs instead of facts that make the article very uninformative. (I have to admit that I pushed my POV too because I find it very upsetting that some scholars make negative generalizations about a very diverse group of people to which I belong) Andries 01:59, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Here Andries Attempted To Change Wikipedia Policy So That He Could Link To Anti-SSB Pages That Contained Media Sources But On Whose Framed Page A Full Menu Of Anti-SSB Links Were Provided

• Here Andries Attempted To Change Wikipedia Policy So That He Could Link To Anti-SSB Pages In Which Non-Reputable References To Former Devotee's Retractions Could Be Made