User:Kuru/archive-6

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Primavera (software)

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article Primavera (software) (an article that you have shown some interest in previously), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (end template). Will you have a look? If this company merits an article then please remove the prod, but I believe the article doesn't present as much more than advertising as it is. Kind regards, --Greatwalk 13:26, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sockpuppetry

Hi Kuru, I thought you should know that User:Hellayeah was created by User:Modderscansuckmyballs, and that they also created User:Mynameistylerdurden. Thought you should know so that you can block the third one I mentioned. I believed these are all socks of User:Wrestlinglover420 who has a vendetta against me for getting him blocked for disruption (for the fifth time, first time I'ver reported him, though). Thanks for all your help. Bmg916SpeakSign 01:15, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Done. Gee, it's nice when they create sock accounts while they're still logged in. Kuru talk 01:19, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Block Requested: 12.240.50.241

User has been warned several times. After giving final warning, he vandalized my page here and here D-Hell-pers 23:29, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Done. Let me know if switches IPs. Kuru talk 23:34, 31 March 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Please advise.

Kuru,

Thanks for your info on the appropriate ways in which to add content (relating to my recent posts on the Recruiter page). Please clarify for me though, if Koya Consulting is in fact a well-established, legitimate retained executive search firm (http://www.koyaconsulting.com), and if there are many other retained executive search firms listed on those pages, and if many of those firms also have their own company pages in the Wikipedia, how is a new company page created or how can information about a given company be added to a given page?

To be clear, I did not intend to advertise for Koya Consulting, and I knew about the nofollow links, I just felt that Koya Consulting was another retained search firm that could be added to Wikipedia just that way that a number of others already are such as,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egon_Zehnder_International

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korn/Ferry

After all, if MaidPro (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MaidPro) is referenced in Wikipedia, why can't a well-established retained search firm such as Koya Consulting be referenced?

Please advise. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bluecircle (talk • contribs) 17:45, 3 April 2007 (UTC).

Thanks for asking. The guidelines for adding an article on a corporation can be found at WP:CORP. In a nutshell; multiple articles from reliable independent sources (not press releases) must be included and all information must be neutral and cited. The articles you have listed above are very, very poor articles and could certainly be improved (or proposed for deletion). Adding the "list of major players" is simply introducing opinion into an article and creates an unverifiable list which will eventually grow into a simple 'directory'. If you want to create an article on Koya, I'd be delighted to review it and/or clean it up if you'll remind me. Kuru talk 00:02, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:68.39.163.15

Please review 68.39.163.15 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log). You were the blocking admin, and he appears to have started vandalizing again as soon as his block expired. He goes around making incorrect data and statistical changes to hockey articles that take a long time for people to verify and revert. Please consider blocking again. Thanks --Mus Musculus 14:30, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

That's unbeleivable; the most annoying kind of vandalism. Thanks for the heads up. Kuru talk 22:15, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Grid computing entry need to allow inclusion of info on others contribution...

Hello,

I have added following statements: --- One such solution is Gridbus Toolkit from the University of Melbourne, Australia.... --- to enhance what is written on Wikipedia page. I am wondering why you deleted it.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.250.25.210 (talk • contribs).

That article is a complete mess of random plugs and promotional material. Adding another section with bullet points lauding a specific vendor is not necessary and simply serves to promote. There is already a link to your site on the page as it is. Kuru talk 12:28, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Trouble Seeing Watchlist

Kuru,

Maybe you have a clue of what is going on. My watchlist is not updating with rv's I have been doing lately. I refresh browser, go to another page and then back to watchlist ... but it still only shows the edit before mine by the previous editor. Any ideas if this is a known glitch? D-Hell-pers 05:31, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Not sure. There is a "Hide my edits from the watchlist" option in the "my preferences" tab at the top of your page. If that is not it, you may want to drop a message at the technical help desk and see if someone there has seen this. Kuru talk 12:20, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Just an update, my edits are now showing (hours later) in some "delayed" response. I will still take up your advice later when I get second with technical. Right now, I must take a final. Thanks D-Hell-pers 14:17, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for reverting

Thanks for reverting his vandalism on my talk page. This user kepts on going and going on multiple articles on Canadian politicians - I've requested an RFPP for many of the articles so he can stop. Thanks again!--JForget 22:13, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hhhh7, Gjnkr puppets

Hi there, I believe the original account is an IP 24.9.112.49 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • WHOIS • RDNS • trace • RBLs • http • block user • block log) which "contributed" the same vandal edits as the above two puppets. It may be an open proxy, though, since the IP was blocked earlier. Flyguy649talkcontribs 03:51, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I had not seen the IP - I had just assumed Hhhh7 was the first account. Well, at least he was trying to communicate at the start there. He just didn't listen to the responses. Kuru talk 04:26, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Is self vandalism the same as vandalism?

[[1]] This is a new user. On their own user page, they left nonsensical sexual terms. Is this vandalism. I'm writing to you because you just reverted some vandalism that I was in the process of doing. My opinion? I think self expression is ok, even if dumb.VK35 04:00, 7 April 2007 (UTC) No need to respond to me. I'll look to see what you do or don't do.VK35 04:01, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

I usually don't worry much about what people put on their user or talk pages unless it's a personal attack of some kind - and usually not even then unless it's part of a pattern of unconstructive edits. That's certainly an odd edit and not a promising sign... Kuru talk 04:22, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Heads up about Zombie stuff

I've explained the shitstorm of the zombie situation at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#An upcoming indef-block. I've pretty much covered everything in my initial posting, but I just thought I'd give you a heads up about it, given your (somewhat peripheral) involvement in the situation. EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:22, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree with your prediction; I'm just not seeing anything rational there that will change with discussion, but we'll see. Hopefully we can keep the editing to the article's talk page until the issue resolves. I think I've reverted 100 "dragons are real" statements from the dragon article over the last year, but I've never seen persistence like this. Interesting. I've watchlisted the article, and of course I've read the books, so I'll try to assist as is needed. Kuru talk 21:38, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I wasn't vandalizing

You warned me for vandalizing Peanuts. I was trying to fix vandalism, so I reverted the page back one edit, but that edit had vandalism as well. I was just trying to fix the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.180.14.252 (talk • contribs)

Aye. I just saw the fairly huge profane paragraph that you reverted back - I can see now that you were trying to fix another set of bad edits. Looks like it's all cleaned up now. Thanks for the help and apologies for the confusion. Kuru talk 23:36, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] TNA wrestling spamming

It's part of an ongoing yet failing campaign by everyone's favourite spammer User:JB196, see the ANI report for details, just in case you felt like blocking on sight. Thanks. One Night In Hackney303 01:27, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Aye, thanks for the backfill. I had already blocked the lot that had spammed Eagle's page - seems to be quite a few more. At least he's not trying to be subtle. Kuru talk 01:30, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
No problem. You'd think he'd have now worked out that the spamming isn't going to get any site blacklisted, yet he still wastes his time. One Night In Hackney303 01:33, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
You missed one. Thanks. One Night In Hackney303 01:35, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Sorry - blinked my eyes to go back and tag the socks. Blocked that one, too. Kuru talk 01:36, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User talk:81.79.0.39

Mayhaps, the little monkey could use a talk-page lock? HalfShadow 02:26, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Ha! I did it two seconds before you posted this... :) Kuru talk 02:27, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Damn you and your coffee-assisted reflexes. It is coffee, right? HalfShadow 02:29, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Si, si. That and Skittles. Kuru talk 02:31, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Sockpuppet: Mister Joker1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log) HalfShadow 02:33, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mister Joker

Hi, I, like you have encounterd this vandal, Mister Joker, from reverted his/her vandalism, and wanted to know if the hoskmask could be using multiple ISPs to evade the block, and if more serious measures than ACBs and talk page protections could or should be taken.--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. (talk • contribs) 03:08, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

I guess it doesn't matter at this point. He/she seems to have stoped altogether.--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. (talk • contribs) 03:44, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Yup. To be honest, the best method is often to just let them get bored. It takes them more time to go through all of the effort to vandalize then it does to simply revert it and block the account; most of the time they just wander off. If it becomes a chronic problem, then we can get someone with checkuser rights to look at the IP range involved and handle it that way. That's a pretty rare step, from what I've seen. Such is the flip side of 'the encyclopedia anyone can edit'.  :) Kuru talk 03:49, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] About User:That girl over there

I've discussed with Zero about how this username violates WP:U. He has replied: "Username falls under offensive usernames (possibly a sex-related username)." Is this explanation valid? Sr13 (T|C) 04:03, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Dunno, is it some sort of british or aussie slang? Certainly does not seem to be 'possibly sex-realted'. Kuru talk 04:06, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Not British slang, AFAIK. Jon Harrop 20:44, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:Requestion

So what can we do about this guy? He claims to be removing spam but, from his talk page, he has a lot of people up in arms having removed all content by anyone who has linked to any site he considers spam, and for removing all links that share a domain with anything that he considers spam.

In my case, he has removed a link to free content on my company's site that was added by someone else (not us), and he has removed the link to my PhD thesis from the Wikipedia page about my Hilbert-Hermitian wavelet. In both cases, his justification is that the links point to pages hosted on ffconsultancy.com and he is claiming that I used IP addresses from all over the world to add these links in an attempt to advertise. My only conflict of interests here is a vested financial interest in seeing my book listed among the other OCaml books.

Given that I found a lot of interesting content (free videos about research, e.g. on molecular biology) from the links that Requestion removed because they pointed at specific and relevant pages hosted by the University of Washington, I must assert that he is reducing the quality of many pages. Jon Harrop 20:44, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

My apologies, I had not had the time to dig through the history of the article or the contribution histories in question; I have been on the road. I would rather do a complete job of assuring that I understand the nature of the conflict than to make any more off the cuff remarks that would further inflame the situation. Kuru talk 12:28, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Thank you. The situation is already being remedied by others but I'd welcome your opinion. Essentially, Requestion believes that it is his job to remove all content related to anyone he believes to be a spammer, and he believes a lot of users to be spammers. In the case of the OCaml page, Femto settled things by deleting many external links and all references to books on OCaml. While I am not sure that this improves Wikipedia, I do appreciate that fact that Femto was fair and did not target only my work as Requestion did.
Requestion also deleted the citation to my PhD thesis from the Wikipedia page about my PhD research (the Hilbert-Hermitian wavelet because it is hosted on the same domain as my book, which he considers spam despite the fact that it was added to the book list by someone else. There is clearly no merit in this. My PhD thesis is the only source of detailed information on that subject. To my surprise, Femto has questioned my credibility as an author and a researcher. I have listed the peers who reviewed and examined my work in response.
Also, Requestion believes that many other users are me. I think it is fair to say that (unlike him), I have been entirely forthcoming in stating who I am and what I do. I am rather concerned at the prospect that Requestion is actually someone that I have had a feud with in the past. I'd be interested to know his real name. BTW, he cited a Wikipedia page that lists the users who have added links to our domain. I notice that many people are missing from the list. Is this because they do not show up as having contributed if their contribution was reverted by him? Jon Harrop 16:02, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
The list of users that Jdh30 refers to is at User_talk:Requestion#Jdh30_Warnings. All the users that I am claiming to be Jdh30, except possibly 2 low edit SPA's, are definitely Jdh30. Now it is possible that other people added ffconsultancy.com links in the past but I didn't delete those links and I have no knowledge of those links. The purpose of my list is to document Jdh30's spamming activity. It is not intended to be a complete ffconsultancy.com domain addition list. I'm a surgical spam fighter and I only delete links if I can attribute them to a spammer. (Requestion 18:02, 9 April 2007 (UTC))
I've got to weigh in on Requestion. I find his claim to be a "surgical spam fighter" a bit annoying. His talk page shows that once he has any site in his target, he removes all links to a site - no matter who has made the link. I've seen very informative links made by third parties to several sites to be blanket removed by Requestion. He removes targeted links that are in the "external link section" and leaves a wholesale of similar links standing. If he really cared about linkspam, he'd remove them all on an equal footing. Check out his work list at User:Requestion/s. Looks like a list he scans to make sure that no links from his targets are ever allowed back - independent of the party that places them there.
I used a remote IP address to post this - to avoid being tracked & have all my contributions voided by Requestion. From his talk page, he's vindictive.
Thanks for the informative warning. If anyone wants to get up to speed on this quickly, I've collated some information on my talk page. Perhaps the most amazing thing that I've seen here is two anonymous users (Requestion and Femto) questioning my credibility in the context of my own PhD thesis.
Anyway, these guys are deleting all of my work from Wikipedia and they have far more time than I do, so I'm out of here. Jon Harrop 05:35, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Again, apologies for my lack of time lately to sit down and step through the issues here. From what I've seen so far, you have been aggressively adding some links solely to promote products which you have a financial interest in. While I assume that you've added these links in good faith and were not aware of our external link or conflict of interest policies, you seem to have continued to add these links even after having been warned and directed to the appropriate text; possibly in reaction to the abruptness of the warnings. I would ask that you please stop adding links which are not appropriate - specifically the link directly to the "purchase page" for you book, or to the minor digg submission promoting same.
I replaced my book in the books section of the page about OCaml when it was deleted by Requestion. So I cannot have been any more aggressive in adding the link than he was in deleting it. Note that the only coherence in his edits was to delete all references to my work, and not to remove all inappropriate links (he deleted only my book and left the others). Moreover, he deleted all reference to my original work from pages about academic research that I have done. My PhD thesis is not a product and is the only reference for further information on that subject. Jon Harrop 08:08, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
What I would rather spend more time on is your actual contributions and links to your site used as references to content added. This falls squarely into the realm of 'content dispute', and happens a million times a day here. Wikipedia operates on the assumption of verification, and not on the authority of specific editors. If you're frustrated by having to defend your additions against "disgruntled schoolkid[s]" and "anonymous users", you may indeed by participating in the wrong medium; this is an open forum where anyone may edit regardless of pedigree. Someone of your education should very easily be able to defend your additions and provide secondary cites; with, of course, the presumption that you have the time to do it - I am painfully aware of what a rare commodity that is. Kuru talk 12:44, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
How is aggressively deleting all references to only my work a content dispute and not vandalism? Jon Harrop 08:08, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

Hello. --Kim Bruning 21:44, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Howdy, howdy. :) Kuru talk 02:05, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Block Request For Gooma3

Had Final Warning by another user here whose discussion page was then vandalized here. D-Hell-pers 21:53, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

This appears to clearly be a vandalism only account and has been blocked per your request. Thanks. Kuru talk 12:23, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Thank You D-Hell-pers 19:04, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] link removed: Bookkeeping

Hi there,

I noticed you removed a link to Bookkeeper-For-You.com from the bookkeeping article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bookkeeping

I see external links to online bookkeeping services are offered here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_bookkeeping

Would this be an appropriate place for a link to Bookkeeper-For-You.com?

Please note, the sites already linked to are commercial enterprises, whereas Bookkeeper-For-You.com is a free service provided as a gift to net users.

Thanks for your advice. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pub4you (talk • contribs) 23:31, 8 April 2007 (UTC).

I'm not Kuru but I just saw your question and wanted to comment. I added some of my PhD thesis onto Wikipedia (see Wavelets) a few years back. I thought that if the content developed constructively from there that I would add more to Wikipedia. However, I have found that other contributors degrade my content on average (often deleting it entirely). Part of the problem is that the Wikipedia admins are challenged with both improving the content (e.g. by asking for citations to justify claims) whilst also preventing spam (removing citations). I am now in the situation that many questions on the discussion pages of wavelet-related Wikipedia pages are answered in my PhD thesis. The statements that I made have been challenged and citations requested, but the citations that I added have been branded spam by Requestion and deleted. Ironically, one of the pages now has a request for an expert to edit it. Moreover, Requestion went on to delete all links to all websites on our domain and alleged (incorrectly) that I was personally responsible for all of them.
I can see that this is an inherent problem with Wikipedia. An editable encyclopaedia seemed like a good invention but, basically, you get what you pay for. In summary, you can reference external content that is relevant and exciting but there are a growing number of users deleting valid content at an already alarming rate. So my advice is don't bother editing Wikipedia articles. If you're looking to garner interest in your work then do something that a disgruntled schoolkid can't screw up: start a blog or post articles to news sites. Jon Harrop 05:17, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi Pub4you, thanks for asking about your link. External links in wikipedia are used to improve upon the content of article by offering resources that cannot or should not be added directly to the text. I'm afraid that links existing solely to drive traffic to your site, however free or altruistic the content, are not generally allowed. I cannot see any material on the site that could be used as a reference or an extension of the article; it is solely a service. As such, the link would seem to be self-promotional. Please real our policy on external link when you get an opportunity. Kuru talk 12:22, 9 April 2007 (UTC)


Thanks guys,

"So my advice is don't bother editing Wikipedia articles."

Yes this is the heart of my question. Is it worth it to contribute here, when there are so many other ways to give away free content and services?

Please understand I'm not outraged, or anything like that. But I do notice that links to competing services are left in place, while mine is deleted, and the question is dodged. Not a scandal on anyone's part, just a classic sign of any project built upon volunteer effort.

Honestly, I'm too busy making free stuff for folks to have time to join a community where these kind of debates will go on endlessly.

Anyway, please don't take offense, none intended, just trying to be honest.

Best of luck to you all, I'm off to greener pastures.

[edit] Thank you again

Thanks again, Kuru, for your quick revert of vandalism to my talk page. I do appreciate that, as always. --JFreeman (talk) 12:07, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Not a problem! Kuru talk 12:23, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Random message

You warned me about adding nonsense to the Alamo page but I have never even been to that page. Frankly your message was offensive and I am not sure where you got your information, but I never even visited the Alamo page (until now) let alone make changes to it. I am sure you work hard to keep wikipedia accurate and am also sure your work is appreciated but please double check before you accuse someone of something. The only pages I have edited were for grammatical reasons and those were usually pages on T.V. shows and cartoons. Thank you for your understanding, -the guy you accused —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 204.56.209.98 (talk) 14:09, 9 April 2007 (UTC).

It may come as a bit of a surprise that the warning dated six months ago was probably intended for some other Aggie. You can see the edits here if you're at all interested. Kuru talk 00:40, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Nice, I enjoyed the subtle put down. Ironically I am hoping to attend Texas A&M this fall. I noticed shortly after posting that my IP address was used not my account (which I have forgotten as I have not used in in several months). Also, the message dated six months ago appeared the day I posted to your talk page as a "new message." This message was not there the day before I posted. Also this was the first message "I" had received and as such was unaware that they were dated. Sorry to show my ignorance, but I'm sure someone out there will get a laugh out of it.

sincerely,

the future aggie

P.S. please note the use of quotations is intended to highlight irony not to be sarcastic. I was pathetically attempting to be humorous. (by the way, I was also accepted into Baylor this year (I'm told it is the Harvard of Texas))

Sorry if I came off too snarky - you have to understand that I'm from a different institution in Texas, and I'm surrounded by Aggies. Aggies who must be mocked. I promise you'll get used to it.
Truth be told; it's a fantastic system, especially the science related schools. Baylor is excellent as well, although 'Harvard of Texas' is a touch of puffery. Good luck in your future studies. Kuru talk 00:33, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Block Request for 24.106.140.254

Repeat Vandalist, who has recently come off a block and began vandalizing again. User's Discussion Page that shows multiple warnings and blocks, and User Contributions showing that the last 10+ edits have been nothing but vandalism. D-Hell-pers 14:14, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Its much quicker if you post it to AIV, because Kuru isn't on wikipedia all the time (or is he?). --KZTalk• Contribs 23:46, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Heck no, I work for a living. As to the block; that one is a rotating IP (it's reassigned every time someone disengages their Roadrunner modem). The old warnings were more than likely issued to someone other than the current vandal, and they do not seem to have vandalized since your final warning. If there was some sort of pattern to the vandalism that was constant over time, or if it was high volume, I would be delighted to block it. Looks like it was just a drive by. Kuru talk 00:00, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

He is at it again. Two More Vandalized Pages Listed D-Hell-pers 21:25, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What to Do

I found this on the recent changes page. According to the user, his only intent is to destroy Wikipedia and recruit others to help him. What to do? Sr13 (T|C) 00:21, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Looks like he was indef blocked before he even edited, or more probably there was a deleted article. Since he's not using the talk page to request an unblock, I've just cleared it off. If he does it again, I'll protect the page for a short period. Thanks for the heads up. Kuru talk 00:03, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
He just reverted your edit and started over again. The talk page needs a full protect. --KZTalk• Contribs 11:30, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:71.196.7.135

Please advise that you warned this user to cease spam several months back and he continues to post spam links everyday and I am tired of fighting him. Thanks WarEagle93 17:00, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up - it's pretty clear it's the same user and the same spam. I have the IP watchlisted now, but please let me know if he starts up again. Kuru talk 23:56, 11 April 2007 (UTC)


[edit] User: 63.215.29.23

Thanks. Gimmetrow 04:26, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Not a problem. :) Kuru talk 12:40, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removal of Boxing Rebels

You recently removed my entry for Boxing Rebels, stating the reasons below:

(It is a very short article providing little or no context (CSD A1), contains no content whatsoever (CSD A3), consists only of links elsewhere (CSD A3) or a rephras)

Would it not be a reasonable idea to at least contact the contributor and explain the situation before removing the entry?

It was my first attempt at creating a proper wiki entry, and yes it was short, but it wasn't finished, I was planning to add to it over time.

'Providing little or no context, no content whatsoever'. Hmm, I'm not sure what this means. I explained why the forum was created in the first place (context), and tried to give some idea what forum is about(content). Obviously this is not good enough for the incredibly high standards here.

As for the last phrase of your statement, 'consists only of links elsewhere' that's just nonsense. There was one link, which was referencing a quote used in the entry.

I am trying to write a serious wiki entry, but it seems I'm not going to be given the chance.

YuriG 12:13, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

The version of the article I deleted was not created by you. It was created solely by User:Wiki352534, with one nonsense sentence which he then blanked. It was then tagged for deletion by another editor, which I performed. There is no correlation to your remarks above and this deletion. Your previous version of the article was actually deleted by User:NawlinWiki; you can read the deletion log here. The version he deleted was complete nonsense as well, and was deleted under our G10 attack article criteria - you can read that here. If you wish to recreate the article, I would strongly suggest reading our policies on neutral point of view and our guidelines on notability. Kuru talk 12:39, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Boxing Rebels

Kuru,

Many thanks for you swift reply. I apologise for blaming you for deleting the article, yours was the last name on the list and I had no idea that it had been vandalised previously.

Is there any way I can see what was actually deleted? I was working on it for much of yesterday, and when I left it it was still intact.

I accept that parts of the original article may not have been up to the standard required, but as I stated before I am trying to write an article that fits within the guidelines meted out by wikipedia.

YuriG 14:02, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

hi u recently deleted my post for the providence black repertory comapny..i have permission to use the text that i was trying to post...should i send u an email to: permissions-en@wikimedia.org from the company's email address stating that i have permission?

thanks 4/14 05:04, 15 April 2007 (UTC)



[edit] Young Perry Alsbury

I see you are interested in Texas History, I have just noticed and thought you might want to know that the page for Y.P. Alsbury one of the five men who burned Vince's Bridge at the Battle of San Jacinto is being considered for deletion because he is "Not Notable". Under this criteria how can most of the other heroes of the Texas revolution be considered "Notable" either. They may not be notable to someone in New England, but to a Texan they are very notable. -Timu

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Kuru"

[edit] SpyLocked

Hopefully you can help me again.


The article apparently has links that I have attempted to remove, but others have always replaced diff, after warning them diff, and a misunderstood response by one person on my position diff. The links seem to be a violation of WP:SPAM, because the companies hostng the links also attempt to sell (although free) products that help remove SpyLocked. Wikipedia should not withhold sites to tools that remove SpyLocked. The rest of the article seems all right thus far.

An opinion on the situation would be nice... Sr13 (T|C) 07:01, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Looking at it now. I'm not familiar with that type of article - that whole category of articles seems to have a pretty serious spam problem, but I need to look through them first. Kuru talk 23:43, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removing a reference to an academically oriented article.

I'm more than a little puzzled about the removal of the reference in this edit:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Enterprise_resource_planning&diff=124458601&oldid=124432525

It is absolutely clear that although the article is focused on SAP, the SAME concepts can and SHOULD be generalized to all ERP applications.

Please explain the reason for removing the reference. The fact is that more companies that implement ERP solutions (no matter WHO the vendor is) should be focusing on business benefit... That is the object of the article, in spite of its title. And there is no attempt to see any software or service anywhere in the article. In fact, it ends with very specific steps that any company can take with ANY ERP application.

Before simply deleting the reference, how about taking the time to thoroughly read and understand the article, and the fact that it can be generalized to ANY ERP application?

http://www.r3now.com/modules.php?name=news&file=article&sid=4

Thanks...

23:03, 20 April 2007 (UTC)23:03, 20 April 2007 (UTC)23:03, 20 April 2007 (UTC)23:03, 20 April 2007 (UTC)23:03, 20 April 2007 (UTC)24.74.135.19

I have added your removals back until I can get a clearer understanding of what specific rule or what specific issue you have with the content of the article. Absolutely NOTHING is being sold, directly or indirectly. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.74.135.19 (talk • contribs).

You added the link into the middle of an article by "hotlinking" existing text. The article itself is simply a very brief opinion piece that is uncited and not "academically oriented" - it adds little content to the article. I can promise you that I read and examine all links before I act on them. Your second edit was to add the same link along with poorly written teaser text to another article. Please feel free to add content to the articles that is cited by actual reliable sources. Kuru talk 23:14, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dear Kuru, since you have set yourself up as the "ERP Guru" please give a full bio / background of your qualifications...

I would consider the fact that I spent several years as the SAP knowledge manager for a good size U.S. National Consulting firm, and have close to 13 years of ERP SPECIFIC implementation experience, and have noted an article with an academic orientation and specific examples a pretty compelling reason that it is sufficient.

Further, the whole orientation of the site for the reference is to help business get the MOST out of their ERP implementation... Period... Nothing to sell, just free information from many years in the trenches.

However, I note that about 3/4ths of this "piece" is not referenced to anything, academic or otherwise. So it begs the question, should it ALL be deleted?

Please note your specific qualifications and credentials, and a reference to your resume or vita.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.74.135.19 (talk • contribs).

I'm sorry if you feel this is the proper forum to promote your advice articles. Again, please feel free to actually add content to the article or to improve the material that is already there. You may want to read our guidelines on conflicts of interest before you do so. Kuru talk 23:38, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Block

Hi, I found Wikipedia last week and have added information and edited some pages. I have also added links and information about the Anaheim Visitor Center which is located across from Disneyland. Although it is a commercial site for our family business, so is Disneyland and hundreds of other sites within Wikipedia. Each time I have returned to the page or looked up other information, my links have been changed, deleted or in some other way updated to be directed to a wrong address by user Monotonehell. I wrote him a letter on his page and asked him to please contact me if he were going to make these changes so I could understand what I was doing wrong. Instead, he did it again on a page where the letter "e" was added after ".com".

I have access to many computers but would rather understand the malicious attack from this person who won't bother contacting me but continues to make changes (I even included my phone number to make it easy on him).

Knott's and Seaworld are commercial sites, too and they sell tickets - so, why one site would be allowed and another not seems very arbitrary. This is the same with hundreds of other sites on Wikipedia.

I am not a vandal and included Monotonehell's name to make a point. I looked through history first to be sure these sites were replaceable and nothing I did was un-doable or I wouldn't have done it.

I'm also not computer literate and had to work for about 10 minutes to figure out how to contact you so, anything I do will be, I'm sure, harmless.

So, please be kind enough to reply. I'm sure you can do a lot more ill to me than I can to you or this site.

Thank you.

Tom tourismtommy@yahoo.com—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tourismtommy (talk • contribs).

You created an article soley to promote a small,local commercial entity which consisted of nothing but the location of the enterprise, contact information and some random factoids about Anahiem. This was deleted, twice, as blatent advertisement. You apparently did not like the guidelines that were presented to you, so you began to randomly delete articles of amusement parks and continued to do so after many warnings - I assume that is the 'block' you are refering to. I have not blocked your 'account', only the IP address you were vandalizing with. My presumption is that you will cease blanking articles, and it will not be necessary to block your main account. If you need further assistance on articles for companies, please refer to our guidelines on the topic and feel free to ask any follow up questions here. Kuru talk 18:27, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for repairing Tourismtommy's tantrum, the poor fellow obviously doesn't understand what an encyclopedia is. Perhaps if he'd follow some of the links to policy and guidelines that many people have attempted to tell him about he may understand the notability difference between Disneyland and a family owned tourism office. Also he should stop misrepresenting his business as "official" and as part of the Disneyland Resort. I've replied to his concerns on the Disneyland talk page as he keeps editing under anonymous IPs so I have no where else to reply to him. --Monotonehell 10:01, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Stephen King

You asked why I moved the Stephen King sub-articles into the main article?

I think that the bibliography should be on the main page like most other authors here, but there's no reason other than that really. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Adam B. Sheets (talk • contribs) 02:58, 22 April 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Stephen King II

No other reason. I saw that at the bottom, but even if it is changed back to the sub articles, in my opinion that section should be right below the biography.

Also, why not leave the changes I made, but delete the film section? The reason being that most of the films listed there were not written by King himself, therefore my changes are more relevant, in my opinion. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Adam B. Sheets (talk • contribs) 03:05, 22 April 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Sorry

I see what you're saying and I agree. I'm sorta new at this and I should have discussed it first, you're right. However, I still think that King's screenplay and teleplay credits should be in the template and that the current film and TV section of the article has little relavance to King himself. Anyway, sorry for the abrupt changes and I'll try to do better next time/

[edit] A very Californian RfA thanks from Luna Santin

 Thanks for your support in my not-so-recent RfA, which succeeded with a final tally of (97/4/4)! I've never been able to accept compliments gracefully, and the heavy support from this outstanding community left me at a complete loss for words -- so, a very belated thank you for all of your kind words.

I have done and will continue to do the utmost to serve the community in this new capacity, wherever it may take me, and to set an example others might wish to follow in. With a little luck and a lot of advice, this may be enough. Maybe someday the enwiki admins of the future will look back and say, "Yeah, that guy was an admin." Hopefully then they don't start talking about the explosive ArbComm case I got tied into and oh what a drama that was, but we'll see, won't we?

Surely some of you have seen me in action by now; with that in mind, I openly invite and welcome any feedback here or here -- help me become the best editor and sysop I can be.

Again, thank you. –Luna Santin

Only slightly late! Coincidentally, I noticed you ran into one of the users I helped get an account for on unblock-en-l, just the other day. Small wiki, after all. Glad to see you're still as active as ever. – Luna Santin (talk) 00:39, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Autoblock

Thanks! I can edit the articles now. Since I do not know much about templates, I would like to tell you that the banned IP address in question (129.69.36.89) is a proxy server at Institute of Thermodynamics and Thermal Engg.[2] at University of Stuttgart. Thus, it would be good if it be treated like other public IP addresses are handled in case of block.--Scheibenzahl 11:21, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Blocking

How do you block people? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Intermisun7 (talk • contribs) 15:33, 23 April 2007 (UTC).

To block someone, you have to be a wizard who has a red, shiny button, which you press to magically remove people's edit buttons.... Seriously though, you need to be an administrator to block other people. --Kzrulzuall Talk• Contribs 05:12, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re:IP 207.74.115.21

Hello. I am a user who attends the school that IP Address 207.74.115.21 belongs to, and I have talked to two admins that blocked the IP. Now, I have no control over what my fellow students add to Wikipedia, but I have attempted to have the page labeled as belonging to an educational institution so as to stop the IP from being blocked. I don't really are whether or not I can use the IP, as I can always log in, but I was, to sum up, wondering if something can be done to recognize the page as belonging to a school so as to protect it. Thanks, --tennisman sign here! 16:39, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I'll add the educational shared template to the page. It is merely advisory, however - I don't have any problems with issuing soft blocks for continued vandalism to schools. Kuru talk 16:48, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:Young n***a, etc.

Please be aware that the user is back under a slightly altered version of that name, as well as continuing to harass under an IP address; further, a new user has zoomed in on this narrow discussion topic right away, which seems suspicious.[3] Wahkeenah 17:25, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Advice on full protection?

I've been trying to stop the edit warring in MDS International and asked Shell Kinney for advice because Shell had stepped in earlier during an AfD on it. I've been trying to steer editors to discussing the dispute and finding sources, but with little effect so far. I'm thinking the next step is article protection. Shell appears to be on wikibreak. If you have some time, a bit of quick advice would be appreciated. --Ronz 18:24, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Looking through the history now. Yeesh. Kuru talk 22:28, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
My feelings exactly. Thanks for taking a look. Zzuuzz is also helping. I also opened a COIN after one of the editors made legal threats for the second time. --Ronz 22:46, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Having a hell of a time figuring out the time line here; "wiki-chat" is not terribly conducive to postmortem evaluation of a discussion with what looks like five or six SPAs. I'm thinking that stubbing the article may be the best course. Kuru talk 22:57, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
I gave up trying to figure out the editors' perspectives, though I'd like to stop Jeanclauduc from making the legal threats. Instead, I just started pointing out the lack of reliable sources, the original research, and the biased editing. --Ronz 23:41, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I've started an AN/I that you'll probably want to contribute to. --Ronz 16:56, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Just chimed in. I simply cannot fathom Jeanclauduc's posts, so I hate to take any actions based on his edits. Clearly, he's upset about some of the seriously inappropriate material that was on the article. Hopefully, Fayssal can run point on the translations. I think there's still one attack site link that needs to be zapped as well. Kuru talk 01:12, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I can't fathom them either. Thanks for the help! --Ronz 01:49, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dragon article discussion

A relevant discussion is going on at Talk:Dragon#External_links. Your input would be appreciated. Thanks. Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 20:49, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Will read through it and chime in. Thanks for the heads up. :) Kuru talk


[edit] Re:Ginóbili!

Yes, I was aware of who made the spelling changes; my message at the talk page was not directed to you. Thanks anyway for your message. Good wiking, --Mariano(t/c) 11:51, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Aww..

No fair, at least I'm not putting things like "my butt" and "poopy" in it, as someone else has. I guess that's just funnier than light-hearted satyrical humor. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Guyfawkes22 (talk • contribs).

Point conceded. Kuru talk 03:15, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Animanga Domains

Hi, you deleted the article for Animanga Domains, but as it was being deleted I was working on much more content about the history, future, and significance events in it's history and it's accomplishments. I feel with this information it would have very much been worthy of having an article, so may I recreate it or is there no point? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by NotBuchanan (talk • contribs) 03:58, 30 April 2007 (UTC).

As it was written, there were no claims to meeting WP:WEB. You can certainly recreate the article, but please start by reading that link first and finding some secondary sources to support the notability of the site. Kuru talk 01:52, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Good Bull story

Thought you would get a kick out of this joke and story. — BQZip01 — talk 21:26, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Just the kind of stories I'd expect from an agriculture school.. :) On a less sarcastic note; my deepest thanks for your service. Kuru talk 01:24, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lebo Thug (talk · contribs)

I originaly did report Lebo Thug, having vandalized after his final warning, but after I made the report, I came accross an additional warning by someone else, so the reason I ended up withdrawing the report, was to assume good faith the user would stop.--U.S.A. cubed 01:07, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

But I also faied to read the last vandalized page by the user.--U.S.A. cubed 01:11, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Based on the type of vandalism and the user's history, I think your final warning and original AIV report were correct. AGF goes out the window with posts like the one to Picaroon's page. Thanks for the heads up. Kuru talk 01:13, 6 May 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Trolling?

Is this edit on their own talk page considered trolling? I reverted it because it seemed misleading, because it looked like other editors wanted that user to continue vandalizing and other inappropriete edits, which is not the case.--U.S.A. cubed 02:43, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Coelacan has semi-protected the page. That resloves that.--U.S.A. cubed 02:59, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ciber bullying

Dear Kuru,

This dispute with User Requestion might interest you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Requestion#Please_stop_indiscriminate_mass_destruction Can You advise me how to reach a reasonable settlement ? --81.241.75.18 18:55, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Now this is really funny. User:81.241.75.18 is completely oblivious to the fact that Kuru deleted [4] [5] [6] some workforall.net linkspam and even warned User talk:81.242.58.154 who then spammed [7] [8] the same articles again 8 hours later. What are they thinking? And now they ask for advice?
The workforall.net dynamic IP address individual is now User talk:Bully-Buster-007 who appears to have a Special Purpose Agenda (WP:SPA?) of disrupting my open spam cases and causing me grief. I'm guessing but I think 81.241.75.18 found their way here because of this AIV edit [9] on User talk:Jdh30 which is another difficult and currently open spam case of mine. They seem to be canvassing everybody [10] [11] [12] [13]. It is crazy. I apologize for indirectly sending all my troublesome spammers your way! (: (Requestion 02:18, 9 May 2007 (UTC))
Dear Kuru, in this dispute User:BozMo who also seems involved in the disputed spam project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam. gave User:Bully-Buster-007 a one week block without prior notice. Do you think such a one week block without prior notice was justified? The people of the disputed spam project also erased harrasment warnings 1,2,3 and 4 on User:Requestion 's Talk page without consent such as one could still find them at the bottom of this version: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Requestion&diff=129820239&oldid=129818613 and also here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk%3AWikiProject_Spam&diff=129841114&oldid=129822621 Are all these methods used by the spam project legitimate? Did User:Bully-Buster-007mishandle the dispute or act uncorrectly ? It looks very much like a cover up operation to me. Are there methods to unblock or protect User:Bully-Buster-007 ?— 87.244.130.114 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at 19:59, 10 May 2007 (UTC).
refer to User_talk:Bully-Buster-007--Hu12 20:58, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Can you cite your sources to the changes you have made?

With regard to the article Accountancy, I note that you have amended/extended the following paragraph under the heading "Modern accounting/accountancy":

According to critics of standard accounting practices, it has changed little since. Accounting reform measures of some kind have been taken in each generation to attempt to keep bookkeeping relevant to capital assets or production capacity. However, these have not changed the basic principles, which are supposed to be independent of economics as such. In recent times, the divergence of accounting from economic principles has resulted in controversial reforms to make financial reports more indicative of economic reality.

What is the source of your opinion? --Gavin Collins 07:53, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

If you see the edit summary here, Kuru reverted a deletion that looked like vandalism. It wasn't his opinion, nor did he add it. --Kzrulzuall Talk• Contribs 08:02, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Kzrulzuall is correct. An IP removed roughly half of the paragraph and in the middle of a sentence, leaving a fragment that made it clear the deletion was accidental or a test. Since there was not edit summary to provide a hint as to the editor's intent, I simply chose to restore the text in its entirety. I hold no opinion on the content. Kuru talk 12:07, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
I see what you are doing, and although the edit runs against minor comments left on the discussion page, the reviesed paragraph makes more sense.--Gavin Collins 13:07, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] manu

how do you get ahold of an admin? there is no button anywhere, i was just being bold.T ALK•QRC2006•¢ʘñ†®¡ß§ 23:10, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

You should always be bold; please don't let my note dissuade you from making changes in the future. The two easiest ways to get an admin to perform a move where there is already a page at the destination is to A) put a request on Wikipedia:Requested moves, or B) simply tag the existing destination page with a speedy deletion tag, {{Db-movedab}} in this case, then do the move yourself. Kuru talk 00:42, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair Credit Reporting Act, Fair Debt Collection Practices Act

Kuru,

You edited links to InfiniteCredit.com that I posted on the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and Fair Credit Reporting Act. I am not a spammer anymore than than the link to Creditboards.com is and I am upset that you seem to think I am and have threatened me with banning. I posted that InfiniteCredit.com could help with understanding FDCPA and FCRA rights which it can. It is no more spam than any other self-help link for any other topic on Wikipedia. I am not a vandal nor a spammer. You can access my email at blitzkim@yahoo.com and have my ip addy. InfiniteCredit.com is a legitimate self-help website for help with problems with debt collection or incorrect reporting of debt and our community doesn't take this lightly and we do not ask for nor accept money for our help. Please respond either to my email or to my talkpage. This is the first time I have ever edited a wikipedia content and am stunned that you would consider my contributions as spam. I am requesting that you reconsider. If you want to check, our website is 4th on Google Search for credit repair discussion, and 5th on credit repair forum. We are legitimate and have been helping consumers since 2004 and operate the site just like Creditboards.com. If we are spam then so is Creditboards. Please advise.

blitzkim 141.153.124.188 05:46, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

5/11/07

. . . Or feel free to respond on the editor assistance section where the discussion started. ~a (user • talk • contribs) 05:51, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Responded there. Thanks for the heads up, A. Kuru talk 00:40, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

That's nice that you did but it seems I have been accused of editing the page and I did not. I had asked if it was permissible for me to do so and this is my first time back since asking the question. Seems someone else did it and I got tagged with a warning again. Seems the ip was 76.108.0.110 which is not mine. Just an FYI. 141.153.124.188 06:49, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RE: revert

You wrote on my talk page:

Thanks - I'm making so many people happy today... :)


Judging from that last reverted edit, at least you're in good company... :-)

--JFreeman (talk) 23:42, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] this user

It looks like the user above that you blocked is trolling the talk page now.--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 16:21, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I just protected it for a little while; let's see if he'll just get bored and shuffle off. Kuru talk 16:23, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sorry

Was just playing around to see how Wikipedia works. Is there any chance you could make me an Admin? I'm on the computer 12 hours a day and have been an admin on a few message boards.

[edit] Vandalism

Your message to : User talk:77.105.193.84 "Please do not add unhelpful and unconstructive content to Wikipedia, as you did to Baby Gender Mentor . Your edits appear to be vandalism."

Please Note: This user runs a tor exit node! More information can be found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tor_(anonymity_network) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 77.105.193.84 (talk) 14:52, 14 May 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Washington College article (again)

Kuru,

I can see this going to be a 3-revert issue again. Could you please protect the article so we can move these differences back into discussion. D-Hell-pers 02:51, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

I have continued the discussion on the WaC article FYI. D-Hell-pers 05:31, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Robert Horry

Hey asshole, I did not vandalize Horry's page. That nickname is what sportscenter called him after his hard flagrant foul.

I would encourage you to read the warnings on your page carefully - my warning was for the nonsense you added to the flop article. I would also encourage you to read WP:CIVIL. Kuru talk 05:37, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hey

85.199.0.2 apparently hasn't paid attention to your last warning and vandalised my userpage (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3AAlaexis&diff=131054206&oldid=130120871). Alæxis¿question? 16:19, 15 May 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Thanks for the help

Thanks for your help in trying to stop the wild talk at Talk:MDS America page. However a sockpuppet of 83.206.63.250 has come right back to the same page and posted again with violations of WP:LEGAL again. 65.2.209.219 19:54, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

user:83.206.63.250 (presumably aka JC Ducasse user:Jeanclauduc) also made a horrible personal attack [[14]] against Fabrice Ducasse. My French isn't good, so I've relayed this to FayssalF. nadav 21:54, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your sensible comments at Talk:MDS America! EdJohnston 00:32, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Yes, thanks! I'm taking a short break from those two articles - the ceaseless, incoherent disruptions are more than a little tiresome. Thanks for helping out. --Ronz 00:42, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Problem with a user talk page

I went over to Rivatphil's talk page [[15]] to check something, and what I found was an unholy mess. Apparently, something in that welcome template has screwed up the formatting for the rest of the page, rendering all the warning templates indecipherable. Have you any idea how this can be fixed? Advice would be appreciated. Thanks. ---Cathal 04:53, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Looks like there was a modification in the original welcome message that left an orphan (unclosed) font tag. Apparently, it's been like that for the last year. I think it is fixed now! Kuru talk 05:01, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Yes, the page can actually be read, which is, I think, the point! Thanks. Of course, I now no longer recall what I was going to say to him... Perhaps it will come back to me. ---Cathal 05:13, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Finish Texas A&M University article

This is a request to assist in finishing the Texas A&M University article for FA status. We need just a couple of people to read the article and the discussion and then sign off the remaining items to be checked. Once this is done, we will submit for Featured Article status. Even just checking off one item would help, so please do what you can — BQZip01 — talk 06:23, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Good spelling catches! — BQZip01 — talk 04:24, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
If there is any way you could review an item or two and sign off on it, I'd greatly appreciate it. — BQZip01 — talk 04:24, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tim Duncan

Thanks for the link on Tim Duncan's full name and for fixing the inches thing I messed up on. Cnota 22:15, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Not a problem - it's a tricky little template. Happy editing! Kuru talk 03:50, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your comments on Wikipedia

Hello Kuru,

Your user page is very nice especially the quote at the top, which is something I plan to share.

Recently our web designer brought a concern to our attention that was directed to us regarding comments published by you via Wiki that are both defammatory and innacurate.

When a search of google index pages for our company, the following appears:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=eastlandmortgage.com&btnG=Search

A few links down a wiki string of cached information leads to a pubished statement regarding us that is not accurate.

One of our associates is a college student who has published a directory (free of charge to all users we have been told) for jumbo lenders. We along with many other lenders are included in it. He has told us that if he intended to create spam it would 1- refer primarily to one company, and 2- not have a valid address. He is concerned that his directory was not only misinterpreted, but that it was published publicly as such. Further we are concerned that our webmasters shared use of an adjoining suite is your sole basis for publishing defammatory comments against our company, and our (very nice) webmasters attempt at what appears to be a reasonable directory for a niche in our industry.

Please take corrective action to be sure we are not published in a google search in a way that makes a deffamatory claim about our firm, and our webmasters directory. We do not wish to initiate an action between us and Wiki, a non-profit two of our members have supported.

Thank you.

James —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.113.40.162 (talk • contribs)

If you'd actually read User:Kuru/archive-4#jumbo mortgages, you'd realize that Kuru didn't actually write it. It was posted on his talk page by someone else. EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:29, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
Evula is correct, the comment was left by another editor that was apparently upset that I did not remove your link from the jumbo mortgage article along with his link. You can reference the specific edit here. I take no responsibility for the content of his/her post, and have no objections to your removal of it from the archived page (I assume this would make it drop from the google index at some point). Please let me know if I can assist you further. Kuru talk 00:15, 25 May 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Yamamoto's RfA

Looking back at Yamamoto Ichiro's talk page, I wanted to assure you that I was meaning, in no way, to insist that he take's Deskana's points into consideration. I was merely stating my opinion that I agreed with Deskana's point he made in the RfA where he pointed out that replacing the George W. Bush page with "he is a democrat", is not blatant vandalism, and I'm sorry if it came out the wrong way. Yamamoto has done tons of anti-vandal work, and my only concern was that he may, unintentionaly, bite the newcomers. All of that aside, he has the right to take the advice he wants, and it's no big deal. You're right that he should enjoy the tools, and I have no doubt that Wikipedia will benifit aswell from him. I knew that Wikipedia:Administrators were never paid, with extreme exception of a few Wikimedia Foundation Staff, and maybe I have been expecting more than I should of admin. canadates.(Maybe Adminship is not a job could be added somewhere in Wikipedia:What adminship is not.)--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 01:40, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

You have my apologies for any confusion - my note on his page was unrelated to your note right above it; simply one more congratulations in a linear stream of posts. I was more concerned with the "nothing but vandalwacking" type comments from other editors, which I do not consider to be a problem, than the "fails to assume good faith" comments such as yours, which I do consider to be a valid concern. I simply did not see it with Ichiro, but it's a judgment call which I fully realize others could interpret differently. :) Kuru talk 01:54, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] conservatism

Sorry about that, I was under the impression that I was editing the box just for the neo-conservative article, in which case the edits would have been legitimate. Thanks for correcting. I'm new to editing on wikipedia so hopefully I can limit this in the future.

[edit] thanks from a raccoon

thank you for helping me revert vandalism on my talk page. I may need it semi-protected for the next little while since vandalism's been on the increase in the past 2 weeks... :) RingtailedFox • Talk • Stalk 19:29, 26 May 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Aaron Bballer

Hi, I see you picked this account up for vandalism. He added personal imformation about me, my school and partner to my talk page. Is there some rule about privacy on wikipedia regarding that? The link to his talk page is Here and mine is here. I removed his comments, but they are still in history I presume. Gollod 01:34, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Sarah noticed this already and has performed this deletion to remove the information from you user page's history. Kuru talk 11:58, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hi Kuru - Thanks for welcoming me

Hi Kuru,

Thanks for welcoming me. So I'm new to wikipedia as a user (not as a visitor) and I'm mainly focusing on anything related to Project Management. I'm currently trying my best to clean project management articles so that wikipedia's visitor will be able to have a smooth and rewarding experience.

One question, I'm trying to create a decent page for myself (you know, with the boxes on the right), could you please tell me how to do this?

Thanks again!Pm master



[edit] Someone has framed me

Hi Kuru a while back a user named Five Cougars apparantly posted a personal attack on someone or something, he also apparantly spammed the fair trade wiki, or something like that, i was foced to create a new account as a friend came over and did all those things as a result my old user five cougars is banned, he was on this IP at the time 124.177.109.1 If posible please unban five cougars for me, as i did none of those things and ive had a hard time for it.--Ranger1524 01:58, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Kuru the changes you are making to Kell high school is not true they didnt win the 2003 and 2004 baseball champs i go there so i would know —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Coachenglish (talk • contribs).

I've made no such changes. Care to clue me in on what you're referencing? Kuru talk 20:30, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Knights of kingdoms

Could you take a look at Knights of kingdoms? This seems to be a nonsensical page. While you're there, take a look at the recent edit history of Garzane. This user seems to be adding gibberish, again. Thanks. Nykbasketball 23:44, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Agreed - absolutely no context or content to the page. All of that user's edits appear to be a month old at the latest, unless I'm missing something. If he starts up again, let me know or post it to WP:AIV. Thanks for the heads up! Kuru talk 00:37, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] San Diego Natural History Museum NPOV

There's a NPOV problem at San Diego Natural History Museum. I'm not sure how to deal with this. --SueHay 04:06, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Aye, that looks like a mess. I'll read up on it this afternoon. 11:57, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Business Continuity Edit Reverted?

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Business_continuity_planning&action=history

Kuru- Why do you feel my addition regarding disaster proof hardware should get reverted? It's extremely relevant and valuable for the public to know about this recent development in the DR/BC space. This new class of hardware is essentially the next generation of safes.

-Robb

Please stop adding transparent promotional material for your company, Robb. You can read about our conflict of interest guidelines if you'd like more feedback. Kuru talk 05:00, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
  • For what it is worth, I'd like to express my support for Kuru's reverts. Seriously, Robb, ALL your contributions show a clear agenda of promoting "ioSafe Inc., disaster proof hardware". It just happens that we are not idiots here, and we caught you. — isilanes (talk|contribs) 16:41, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I didnt realise

Hello there.

Thanks for the welcome and thankyou again for explaining why my external link was removed. I have read the guide lines and will cease to enter in Dragons Touch no matter how relevant the link due to the fact that i own the site.

Just so you are aware, i think i added the link to European and chinese dragons as well. I will remove the link from the sections i can recall tonight and perhaps in a while suggest it in the sections talk pages :)

Lex

Thank you very, very much! Kuru talk 23:32, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] HEB predatory pricing

There are two very clear citations in the first portion of this new section.

I've reinstated the original predatory section, but I will remove and review the independents section. I am a witness to this next section and would prefer some method of remain anonymous since HEB is huge and I don't want my name floating around as a troublemaker. Is there an alternative for situations such as these?

I'm not sure what you mean by 'reinstated'; I simply added a 'cite needed' tag to the second paragraph. As you noted, the first section was strongly supported by your citations, but I could not locate some of the specifics in the second section. Some form of verifiable, reliable sources will be needed. I'm afraid that even your first person experiences cannot be cited (unless they are published accounts), so please don't expose yourself for nothing! We also want to be careful of our undue weight policy when adding criticism, but your current addition is very succinct and in an encyclopedic style. If I can help you in any way, or if you have questions about our policies, please let me know! Kuru talk 14:30, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] B4L24

A user with the handle B4L24 vandalized, among other pages Syracuse Orange. But if you look at his other "contributions," they are all vandalism. I was hoping you could block his editing abilities for a short period of time. Thank you for looking into this. Chengwes 17:33, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

That's quite a streak of vandalism - I can't seem to find any real edits in there anywhere, so I've blocked the account. You may want to post these obvious ones at WP:AIV so someone on the day crew can block them immediately. Thanks for the heads up! Kuru talk 21:58, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Awesome. Thanks for your help! Chengwes 22:15, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hello,

I had deleated the page by accident. Over the last few days I have been adding a small section on the "controversies" regarding ICICI's poor customer service, which is a well known fact all over idia. I feel that the article should have this perspective. However the paragraph I add keeps getting deleated —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 124.7.17.24 (talk • contribs).

No problem; it happens! I can see the critical information you were trying to add previously, and I understand why it has been removed. We have a fairly strict policy about sourcing critical commentary with reliable sources, which you did not appear to have supplied. Simply stating that it is a 'known fact' is not sufficient; we need to be able to verify the information through a published, reliable third party. I am sure if you can provide the information, it can be added. If you an supply the sources, please let me know if I can help you. Kuru talk 12:41, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism of Texas Tech University article

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
In appreciation of your guarding Texas Tech University and other articles against vandalism. --Wordbuilder 15:26, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Warning

Hello,

I received you warning message today and apologize for any misunderstanding. I will not add anymore links. I have a question though, what about the references to "Iron Mountain Inc." It contains a direct link to their page which would serve as an advertisement and under your guidelines, "Spam."

I did not take adding a few links to areas where we can help consumers to be spam. I figured we were simply adding helpful information to an area where a lot of people have questions. I care about search engine rankings, but am not interested in using wikipedia as a platform to make our ranking better, I simply felt we were adding helpful information. Apparently I was mistaken.

I do feel though that you use the word "SPAM" quite liberally. On many of the pages I added information to there were plenty more links to other companies as well. If you plan on editing my links, please do the same for them. Thank you.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 199.103.144.2 (talk • contribs).

I have no idea what you mean by 'links to areas where we can help consumers'. The links I removed were solely a link to the front page of your commercial service. There was absolutely no other content other than very specific product pitches. Since you were gently warned about this activity previously by another editor, and since you added blatant commercial links to many articles with the sole purpose of promoting your business, I used my rather conservative label of 'spam'. As requested previously, please read our external link guidelines. Kuru talk 23:30, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
As I said in my first message I apologize for the misunderstanding and will not add anymore links as I have read the policy as requested. I did not realize it was an issue at first because I saw many other links just like it. As you may be able to tell, I added the links to some pages in the same time frame which was before I received any message from an admin. I did not add links since then and do not plan on doing it unless it is according to the guidelines. I will not debate with you about it because I understand your point of view and I appreciate the wealth of information Wikipedia provides to its users. Thanks for your time and again, I apologize for the misunderstanding.

[edit] Postage meter

You removed some of my edits that I made. Both Postage meter and Pitney Bowes have advertising links on them from other users. I removed the one from Postage meter, but left the one on Pitney Bowes. Are these unacceptable too, or are they different somehow from the edits I made? Thanks. Walterbowes 17:35, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, your link appears to be a low content affiliate page which simply promotes a commercial product and has quite a few tokened links back to your supplier. I assume you're also operating as 66.125.80.58 (talk · contribs) which I had warned twice previously; hence the overly harsh warning. I'll look at the both of those articles - I admit I simply reverted your link addition and did not scan the rest of the article. Thanks for replying. Kuru talk 23:42, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
The link on the Postage meter page was pretty blatant, thank you for removing it. I also removed the link I think you are referring to on the Pitney Bowes page - I assumed it was the one trying hard to look like an official PB page (but PB does not own the domain used). Thank you for again for your reply. Kuru talk 00:01, 26 June 2007 (UTC)