User talk:Kuru

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Kuru's Talk Page

Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end. Please note that I will usually respond on this page to keep the conversation together. If you have a question about a particular edit/reversion, please try to include a link to it if you can.

Click HERE to start a new talk topic.



It seems like Andrewbf, can you sockpuppet him/her? (talk) 07:08, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Seems painfully clear; exact same edits to the same articles, same editing pattern in general, and supporting reverts while logged out from a Mexican IP. I've blocked and tagged. Also blocked the IP. Thanks. Kuru (talk) 13:42, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

user:12З МАТЕ[edit]

Thank you for your prompt action. May I suggest his contributions be nuked too. He has created numerous user pages as evidenced here. LRD NO (talk) 12:36, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Ignore my previous post as those edits do not seem to do any harm. Thanks again for your action. LRD NO (talk) 12:47, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
I cleaned up most of them before I saw this. Looks like everything is cleared up; please let me know if I missed anything. Kuru (talk) 12:48, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
Thumbs up for the good work. Cheers. LRD NO (talk) 21:24, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Edit to List of concept- and mind-mapping software page[edit]

Hi, I noticed that you removed my edit from the page called "List of concept- and mind mapping software". Your comment says "rmv addition with no article", is this because I didn't link to an internal Wikipedia page? I would like to learn more about editing Wikipedia so that I can contribute more and in the correct way. I would be really grateful if you could help me.

Sarahmcgarr (talk) 16:03, 18 July 2014 (UTC) Sarah, 18 July 2014

Talk:House music[edit]

Special:Contributions/Inidian maninian wrote "electronic influence genres in this music genre", which was the same as User:Thewatertribe wrote "Electronic genres influences in this genre" on talk page. (talk) 07:45, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

McKinsey & Company[edit]

Thanks for the prompt update to the list of CEOs page.

I was wondering if you had any interest in getting involved in the McKinsey & Company page as well. It started as an attack piece about a year ago and has slowly started to shape up into an encyclopedic article. Following COI best practices, I mostly just make suggestions and offer content on the Talk page, but that means I have to find willing volunteers to collaborate with me. We've mostly just had various editors swinging by to review a section or two of draft content I put together. For example, next up I need to find someone to review a first draft of a "Notable works" section here CorporateM (Talk) 20:30, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Edit warring[edit]

Hello Kuru, User: Jusgtr has returned to reverting on Run the Jewels (album) (not even an edit summary this time), along with reverting on other articles. Maybe this user is just lacking the competence. STATic message me! 15:40, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I blocked him a few days ago and neglected to respond to you here. Please let me know if he pops back in and resumes the same disruptive behavior. Kuru (talk) 21:34, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Question on Revision[edit]

Sorry, I am new here and it looks like you took down a post of mine. You stated "rmv addition with no article." I google searched (and searched on wikipedia) for RMV addition and I could not find a definition. Could you describe what you mean?

Also you stated no article - which I see on many other posts as well. As far as I can tell an article is not required. I apologize if I am mistaken, but I would be happy to fix whatever I am doing wrong. I am just looking for some direction on what you feel is missing or needs to be revised. Based on your comments I could am not sure what to correct.

I appreciate your time and look forward to your reply.

- Eric — Preceding unsigned comment added by Etczerwonka (talkcontribs) 21:24, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Eric. Apologies for using abbreviations in my edit comments. I watch a large number of articles and my mobile browser refuses to remember edit summaries I've used in the past. In this case, 'rmv' is simply shorthand for 'removed'. As you surmised, I've removed the entry for your software as the criteria for inclusion on that page is that there is an existing article in place. This inclusion criteria is shown clearly in edit comments when you edit the page, and are summarized on the article's talk page. If you feel there is something special about your addition, or you feel the inclusion criteria is invalid and would like to change the consensus on that, please start a discussion there. Kuru (talk) 21:33, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Appealing Topic Ban[edit]

I requested your help several days ago with filing an appeal for a topic ban. Please advise me of the appropriate forum for doing so as it is still unclear to me after reading the ban notice. Wikieditorpro (talk) 15:16, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

In your topic ban notice, there is a link to the appeal process. As noted, your options are 1) to appeal directly to the administrator who placed the restriction, 2) post an appeal at the AE Noticeboard, or 3) appeal directly to the arbitration committee. I'm not sure on what is unclear. Can you be more specific on where you are confused? Kuru (talk) 16:40, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
Based on my reading of the appeals notice it was my understanding that I needed to use the administrator's noticeboard as the next step in the appeals process. Thank you for the clarification. Wikieditorpro (talk) 04:27, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
A final question: Does the 500 word limit at AE Noticeboard apply to appeals too? And if so, where would I request permission to exceed the limit? Wikieditorpro (talk) 06:57, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Simon Gutierrez[edit]

Simon Gutierrez still works for KSAT. -- (talk) 01:44, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Awesome. Please find a reliable source, and be careful not to use false sources. Kuru (talk) 01:45, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

But I'm not sure. -- (talk) 02:13, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Run the Jewels[edit]

There is probably no reason to protect the page for that long, cause I think we just about solved it. Koala15 (talk) 03:08, 25 August 2014 (UTC)


Can you keep an eye for the page? (which who add genre on Stylistic field similar as Andrewbf) (talk) 15:55, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Removing on-sir staff[edit]

Corky removed the on-air staff for KSAT, WOAI and KENS. We need to reverted it back. -- (talk) 02:29, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

I removed it because it violates WP:LISTPEOPLE. Here is a quote from another user:

If you would like more proof that it has been discussed, I'll be glad to provide them to you. Corkythehornetfan (Talk) 03:13, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Are you the security? -- (talk) 03:38, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
Given the history of those embedded lists, I don't disagree with Corky's position. They've been abused significantly in the past and are a bit of a WP:BLP nightmare when some of the unsourced crap in them goes un-noticed on low traffic pages. Instead of reverting, it may be helpful for you to state your position on why you disagree on the article's talk page so that you can lay out a counter position. Kuru (talk) 11:19, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

On-air staff is not unsourced. -- (talk) 15:22, 11 September 2014 (UTC)


You might have hit the wrong button; instead of disabling talk page access, you disabled email. He re-blanked, but I fixed it. Origamite 15:56, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Totally hit the wrong button; my bad. I'm adjusting to mobile technology slowly... :) Thanks! Kuru (talk) 16:00, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Andrewbf's new sock[edit]

Indiaman2223 and Special:Contributions/ seems likely Andrewbf's pattern, recently disrupting defended Binksternet on house music, Stay the Night (Zedd song) and Clarity (song). Another account is Inidian maninian, named instead of Indian man, he/she posted on talk page for house music, similar with first diff. (talk) 11:37, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

The IP is clearly the same problematic editor, and I've blocked the account as well. Since he's mixing accounts and IPs, you may want to file an WP:SPI to see if there are other accounts. Kuru (talk) 11:51, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Public relations editing of Wikipedia articles[edit]

I noticed you weighed in at Wiki-PR editing of Wikipedia and maybe you are the person to talk to about this. I suspect there is much editing of Wikipedia by public relations people wanting to tout their companies. My local Craigslist often has ads from companies soliciting people to write articles on Wikipedia. Anyhow, I think I found a clear violation of this at Nextdoor. Editor User ACD27 has contributed only to articles about Nextdoor and has also proposed an article called Draft:National Good Neighbor Day. Not coincidentally, the Nextdoor company has started a campaign to make "National Good Neighbor Day" part of its company promotion. See, for example, "Nextdoor Launches Campaign to Celebrate National Good Neighbor Day." Or see Nextdoor's in-company blog, which has several posts about "National Good Neighbor Day.", most written by the company's head of PR, Anne Dreshfield (ACD27?) This could very well be an example of someone using Wikipedia to promote a company. Does Wikipedia have a means to call attention to people using the encyclopedia for PR? I bet it happens a lot. Chisme (talk) 18:44, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

FYI, my reporting Juno for edit-warring was NOT retaliatory[edit]

HI Kuru,

Just FYI, my reporting User:Juno for edit-warring was not retaliatory, as you suggested. If you go to the TALK page of the UNITED STATES PRO-LIFE MOVEMENT page, and search for the word "occasionally", you will see that Juno repeatedly reverted my edits, that I tried to engage in compromise/dialog with him/her, and that I warned him/her that I would report him/her for edit warring if he/she reverted my edit again. The fact that she/he reported me had nothing to do with my reporting him/her.

Also, I am finding it very difficult to learn how to report users properly, and generally to use Wikipedia's templates. The DIFF page is very confusing (I see no "radio buttons", whatever those may be) and the template page for notifying editors that they have been reported for edit-warring ("an3-notice") is less than useless--what data is one supposed to put onto that page, and where??? How does one actually send the notification to the reported user? In the end I had to warn USER: Juno that I had reported him/her by leaving a hand-typed note on his/her TALK page.

Best wishes, Goblinshark17 (talk) 03:30, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

hello kuru[edit]

Hello kuru i am new to wikepedia and i was wondering how i edit pages without vadalizing them i want to upload my own page but i'm not sure how to get the 10 edits — Preceding unsigned comment added by Berndern (talkcontribs) 03:07, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

"Virtual" range block[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Virtual" range block. Thank you. Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 10:08, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Re to Edit Warring nb decision[edit]

Kuru- Hi, I was advised to first voice my disagreement on your page. My response to your decision on my report of a user blatantly edit warring due to bias (against the content especially, evidence by what I'd included under comments), and ignoring requests to discuss is here, under your comment. To quote it:

@Kuru, the genres aren't the primary concern here. The recent album diffs that were first linked above (and expounded on in the second paragraph under Comments here) are. Why are those not mentioned? Why is the blatant edit warring (2 reverts of same information currently), rooted in cherry-picking and tendentious editing (as mentioned above), NOT a violation? Please explain directly. "Your best bet would be to continue your content dispute in the existing discussions on the article's talk pages" - there is none of that, as the reported user does not need that since he feels he can just revert what he disagrees with even if it's accurate and cited (as in the album page), clearly enabled by a post like yours. He has not bothered to consider the discussion created, and especially won't now, and in removing the noticeboard temp on his talk page, said: "That was quick.". I'd suggested he use a Request for Comment (as I'd used before on another page), and he has not bothered. So, please elaborate, as what your response currently does is enable this WP:OWN-inspired edit warring, and suggests to other editors with his inclinations, and editors on the other end like myself, that it can just keep happening without any consequence. If you don't consider this blatant edit warring behavior, then I'd like another admin opinion here on the diffs presented.

Adding to that: As I mentioned in the report, this user has a history of such, and has no intention of pursuing any discussion. The only thing he's done is twice revert the Wiki-adhereing, accurate copy edit (which would make two negative quotes he agrees with contextually less severe), and will continue to revert if the edit is made again. I'd already started a discussion on the talk page prior to making the report. Again, he has no intention of listening, evidenced by his inaction and his edit summaries on the NYKOP album page (first two diffs provided). I repeat, he will revert again if the useful copy edit is added again. Why is this being ignored and such behavior, by a lack of consequence and direct commentary, vindicated and enabled? Please see WP:COMPETENCE (under "bias-based"), plus, I quote the definition of edit warring directly from the noticeboard project page: "Edit warring is a behavior, typically exemplified by the use of repeated edits to "win" a content dispute." - which is exactly what this is -, and I quote from the Admin instructions page: "Users may be blocked for continued edit warring to prevent further disruption to Wikipedia. A violation of the 3RR rule (see below) is not a requisite for an editor to be blocked for edit warring." --Lpdte77 (talk) 03:08, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

You appear to be having a very minor content dispute, where another editor has reverted you twice. In no way would I personally block someone for such unless this was a continuation of a previous edit war, there was egregious policy violation (BLP, copyvio, etc), or if there were mitigating sanctions on the topic. None of these seem to be the case. I would suggest reviewing WP:DR and bringing other opinions to the article if you feel he will revert you in the future; you may want to also leave him a message directly on his talk page - something that discusses the content. As always, you are free to take this to ANI if you feel there is something more to this that I am missing, but the edit warring issue does not appear to be significant enough for a block. Kuru (talk) 10:06, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
The magnitude of the content dispute is irrelevant here. The fact that edit warring ("Edit warring is unconstructive and creates animosity between editors, making it harder to reach a consensus. Users who engage in edit wars risk being blocked or even banned. Note that an editor who repeatedly restores his or her preferred version is edit warring, whether or not the edits were justifiable: it is no defense to say "but my edits were right, so it wasn't edit warring".) is taking place without discussion, and will continue to take place when the copy edit is made again, is notable, and, with no disrespect, what you are willfully ignoring and validating. Essentially telling this user and anyone else reading (such as the user he pinged) that this behavior is laissez faire and not given warning or consequence is a complete detriment to Wiki-abiding users like myself and Wikipedia editing community as a whole. Need I link to the history page again (most recent edits);, it is evident the user's only intention is to edit war, and need I repeat he's done this many times before. Take a look at his contribution history and see that it's full of reverts of other editor's contributions, with little to no evidence of participation in discussions related to the disputed content. (And here, his last revert of an edit of mine (before this); see that what I did was remove a genre that is not at all sourced, yet look at what he laughably claimed in his edit summary (what he actually did); I didn't bother with it again). Again, as I linked, there is such thing as a topic ban ("The purpose of a topic ban is to forbid an editor from making edits related to a certain topic area where their contributions have been disruptive"). Again, this user is clearly biased against this page (the linked album page), and will not allow anything that accurately makes text appear less than strictly negative, WP:OWN, WP:TE, WP:DE, WP:NPOV, WP:CHERRYPICK, WP:AGF, WP:ONLYREVERT. The fact so much Wiki-policy violation clearly inspires his edit warring is notable, and that he has no care to partake in discussion, and especially won't now, and stunning that you personally do not deem it such. How in the world is this minor and not of consequence? Are you letting me know I can just do what the user freely engages in without any problem? I can just keep readding the copy edit and he automatically reverting without bothering to engage in the discussion, without consequence? As I've said, this isn't about a personal dispute with the user, this is about the user's edit warring being strictly against Wiki-policy and it being a detriment to the progress of this article, hence my report in the appropriate noticeboard. Do you really consider this insignificant and not worth your trouble (e.g., a simple, strongly needed topic ban?) --Lpdte77 (talk) 19:57, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
You have my response above; you seem to be confusing policies, guidelines, and user-created essays. We don't seem to agree with your interpretation of the edit warring policy, and I am unpersuaded by your tirade above. I will not be blocking the editor in question, nor will I be unilaterally applying sanctions to the account based on your request. Good luck. Kuru (talk) 00:29, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
All linked pages are directly from Wikipedia, the Wikipedia guidelines and policies, all created through consensus; what everyone at Wiki goes by including admins. If you wish to interpret them your own way and/or apply them arbitrarily, and too refuse to acknowledge the specific quotes from those being blatantly violated in the diffs, than that is up to you, and reflects on you, not on me (as you seemed to imply). Thanks. --Lpdte77 (talk) 00:45, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Don't think you're interesting anymore in the matter, but just to follow up: the reported user decided to let the copy edit pass, so such dispute is settled.--Lpdte77 (talk) 03:42, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Carlos Slim[edit]

Sir,I have seen some of interview of Carlos slim standing near ex us president bill Clinton whose height is 6 ft 2 inch and both are of same height i.e. 6 ft 2 inch which is not mentioned in Wikipedia,so its my request that the height could also be included in Carlos slim Wikipedia.Also,Carlos slim recently acquired 59.7 percent stake in telecom Austria in Europe which could also be included and its by joint effort of all of us,the page could be improved more and more better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asuluck27 (talkcontribs) 01:56, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

As I noted, at a minimum you must provide reliable sources for material added to biographies of living persons. Your observations on his height do not match this requirement. Even if you provide sources, you'll need to find an appropriate place to add the material in the article. I would note that his height is very unlikely to be notable enough to add into the article's lead paragraph, if at all. The material related to his acquisition of TA is already in the article and described in detail; if you feel there is something wrong with that material, please feel free to correct it. Again, please use sources. If you need help adding these citations, I'm happy to help; I know if can be a little confusing. Kuru (talk) 12:46, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

I need small clarification about the 1RR rule![edit]

It is violation of the 1RR rule if i revert the editing which was made without identifying the source which can confirm it in this Module Syrian Civil War detailed map. Or I can undo all edits which was made ​​without specifying the source without violating the 1RR rule. Here is example of such editing: here Hanibal911 (talk) 21:49, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Generally, no. "Unsourced" is not an exempt category of reverts. Kuru (talk) 12:21, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

If you click "undo" on a page protection...?[edit]

Hey, Kuru,

You know what I just noticed? I don't know why I didn't notice this before or try anything with it, but I just now saw that your protection of a page has an "undo" button with it just like editions do. Will you please go protect One Magnificent Morning again for a little while so that I can see what happens if a non-admin. presses "undo"? Why didn't I try that before? What is it that the system says or does if a non-admin. presses "undo" on the page-protection action?

And if an admin. clicks it, it just unprotects the page without question, or is there still something special that the system says first? And if so, what? Will you show me, please (by actually reprotecting that page or your page or something for a short time)? (talk) 12:04, 7 November 2014 (UTC)


Hello! I'm sorry to bother you, but I have a suspicion that a banned user originally known as Andrewbf and then under various "sock puppet" names, has returned to Wikipedia with a new IP address -

This address's location is, apparently, Mexico, the same as Andrewbf's, and he/she has been making identical "stylistic origins" changes to the House Music page (and now to the Electropop page) as former identities. I have tried to accommodate him/her and to treat the changes with good faith and give the benefit of the doubt, but in reality I do doubt their logic and fear further problems. This user has also been causing problems on another page, which has now been protected.

I would be grateful if you would visit the user's talk page/history if time allows and perhaps consider protecting the House Music and Electro Pop pages if the problem persists.

Many thanks.

(Etheldavis (talk) 22:26, 9 November 2014 (UTC))

Clearly him, thanks; blocked the IP. Not sure about protection as he seems to haunt a large number of articles. He's not hard to spot. Kuru (talk) 01:30, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

One Magnificent Morning[edit]

Tell me how to handle the IP editor at One Magnificent Morning were you protected the page. He doesn't care about reliable sources in an attempt to enforce his own opinion. He also make personal attacks about my grammar and spelling and tries to make me the issue. When reporting to page protection, admins will only page protect for "enough recent disruption". Spshu (talk) 16:24, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Block evasion, Overdtop[edit]

Hello. Per WP:DUCK Overdtop, whose unblock request you just declined, is back as (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · edit filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), repeating both Overdtop's edits and their behaviour, with personal attacks in this edit summary. Thomas.W talk 14:49, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Clearly closely related to (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · edit filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), too. I've done a small rangeblock. Bishonen | talk 16:22, 15 November 2014 (UTC).

Hello Kuru. I have been blocked before and I realize my mistakes. I will create a new account but I want to know, what counts as vandalism? I want to know so I can avoid doing so again. Please tell me or link me to the article. Thanks. (talk) 04:35, 16 November 2014 (UTC)random user


Trophy.png Hello
Hello, i have been blocked before. I realize my mistakes and I want to know how to avoid vandalism. If you could post on my talk page saying the rules, or a link to the article on vandalism, I would much appreciate that. Thanks. Tharmoghoyf (talk) 04:42, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Andrewbf again?[edit]

Hello again! I'm pretty convinced that blocked user Andrewbf is back as IP address - the changes made to various Wiki articles correspond closely to some of Andrewbf's past actions. Going by past behaviour patterns, I anticipate further problems with this editor.

(Etheldavis (talk) 21:47, 24 November 2014 (UTC))

Spectorwish situation[edit]

I have copied it! Thank you so much for retrieving it for copy, I'm sorry for the wiki mix-up situation, I have saved what I need it so it is for deletion, thanks again!! Plex-senpai (talk) 00:43, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome; will clean it up. :) Kuru (talk) 03:58, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Hope you are Having a Good Day: State Bar of California Article.[edit]

Hi, I was blocked for violating the 3RR. No hard feelings and I don't take it personally. I only care about the quality of the article. If you need to check my Talk page, it's here:

12 Reverts in One Day / Article Now Devoid of Citations and Quotes from Legal Journals and Mainstream News Sources:

What I was trying to prevent is this: 12 reverts by Srich32977 that took out huge chunks of the article without discussion, and while flouting the absence of a discussion. You can see it on the talk page of the article, here:

It's an article about a public entity, the State Bar of California, and 3 users have comitted themselves to deleting anything critical the press and legal journals report about that organization. Basically the article has now become an advertising brochure for the State Bar. For 4 months I was working with another Admin to prevent exactly this.

Possible Sockpuppet:

Srich32977 appears to have a sockpuppet account. You will notice on my Talk Page he also writes under another name. You will see that appears to admit this on his own page: "originally posted on User:Srich32977 17:36, 19 November 2010 (UTC) & 14:01, 21 May 2011 (UTC).] Restated on & by – S. Rich (talk) 23:57, 29 June 2013 (UTC)."

I looked at your page; you appear to be a grown up. I really don't have a dog in this fight. I'll leave this up to you. You will see the speed with which the people vandalizing the article will show up and cloud these simple issues.

Peace and good luck. (talk) 18:59, 1 December 2014 (UTC)


The user even with a username change has admitted to working for the company. Block appropriately.

Evidence here

Luxure Σ 23:39, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Si, done. Good faith was exhausted; my apologies for the disruption caused by the unblock. Kuru (talk) 01:44, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

History Channel project on the Texas Revolution[edit]

Don't know if your Notifications are on, but you were mentioned at WPMH Potential project for you guys as a possible contributor for some teamwork. — Maile (talk) 13:53, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your message to me[edit]

Kuru - thank you for your message today regarding my post on the

I inserted, what I considered, was pertinent advice regarding eligibility for getting a reverse mortgage. I don't really understand how this was considered a SPAM post/link when, what is going to happen next March will be a huge event regarding eligibility in this industry. I reviewed the "references" section of this page and other companies have blatantly used this page for a link to their site and their comments are, in my opinion, sub-par.

If you can please let me know how I can improve my edits, I'd greatly appreciate your advice.

Regards, Hutad Hutad (talk) 01:41, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

If other companies are inserting promotional material and links into wikipedia, then you can improve your edits by help us identify those links. At the moment, you are continuously inserting terrible blog links which are covered with promotional spam. There are a tremendous number of sources you could have used; please do not use those. You've been warned several times to cease that behavior. Kuru (talk) 01:53, 10 December 2014 (UTC)


Need a revdel for an allegation that surfaces periodically on an article talk and at ANI. Can you do it if I email you the diff now? - Sitush (talk) 02:20, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Yes. Kuru (talk) 02:21, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
Email sent. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 02:24, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
Done. Pure nonsense. Kuru (talk) 02:37, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
Indeed, as in the past. The poster doesn't seem so sure but they're obviously out of their depth. - Sitush (talk) 02:41, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

proposed deletion Most popular Internet search engines[edit]

dear Kuru i have removed content which i reffered from eBizMBA rankings now i completly added materials from which i reffered from Alexa rankings i wish it should not deleted and i have removed the proposal tag .even now if it has any problem with article Most popular Internet search engines please report me User:Krishnachaitan (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 10:59, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Page Deletion[edit]

I have a question regarding your recent deletion of a newly created article that was a draft. Please let me know the reason for this, as I found much relevance in the research. Thanks. --Username8550 (talk) 01:08, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

The article appears to be a fake, and you appear to be coordinating with two other accounts to insert false information in a biography. Please stop. Kuru (talk) 01:59, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

A kitten for you![edit]

Cute grey kitten.jpg

Thanks for your help!

Clara2812 (talk) 02:24, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Can you help me make the page better? Here is the information. I just want to help because I found it helpful.[edit]

(removed cut&paste)

I'm sorry, but your first step is to determine if the person meets our notability guidelines. The next step is to find reliable, third party sources that specifically support your claims. You appear to be attempting to add an article that is not notable, and has sources that do not seem to have anything to do with the person. You, using other accounts, have also attempted to alter other biographies on the site with fake claims. This will lead accounts being locked in short order. Kuru (talk) 02:43, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Edit to Comparison of network monitoring systems article[edit]

Hi there, How can I get my edit to the Comparison of network monitoring systems article approved? Kagrainger (talk) 03:00, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

As noted in the criteria for inclusion on that list, see WP:WTAF. Kuru (talk) 03:02, 17 December 2014 (UTC)


Thanks for letting me know. I tagged it as name-only, so you are correct to unblock. Having said that, I can't really understand why I was so generous (Spirit of Christmas?), since the text was clearly promotional. I've actually deleted it now, since it is a verbatim copyright infringement of their website. I'll see what happens next... Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:04, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

I figured you were just a softie. :) My bad on missing the copyvio; should have caught that when I glanced at the draft. Kuru (talk) 16:09, 21 December 2014 (UTC)


Thanks for updating the dates and referencing as I was way too lazy to do so. Zdawg1029 (talk) 15:40, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Greetings from Teahouse membership[edit]

Hi ! Welcome to the Teahouse. I hope we could work together sometimes. Pls. drop by at my homepage. I would love to learn new things here at WikiPedia. Thank You! (InAdvc.) Ceejhei13 (talk) 14:21, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

List of password managers[edit]

Hello Kuru,

We see that you are an editor of the wiki List_of_password_managers page. We believe our Qwertycard product ( please see ) falls in this list category, however we fully respect the wikipedia policies on these things and so we will leave it with you to consider if it should be included.

Kind regards, Alex — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:41, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

User: UxUmbrella behavior on Rihanna videography[edit]

Hi Kuru. I have a big concern about the behaviors of this user on Rihanna's articles in all, more specifically on Rihanna videography. He adds a picture which is about to be deleted, with so non-sense caption and he is also sourcing it which he doesn't need to do. Additionally, he is removing a sourced material and adding unreliable sources linking them directly to the names of the directors. As an admin I would like to take care of him. Cheers! — Tomíca(T2ME) 19:48, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Done. Please be careful in the future; content disputes, even with disruptive editors, do not allow you to break the 3RR yourself. I concur that the image is a copyright violation, and its repeated removal was exempt - just be sure to clearly state that in your revert summaries. Kuru (talk) 20:03, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
I will. Thank you on the well-meaning advice. All the best. — Tomíca(T2ME) 20:04, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
You won't believe, but he is back. He is now UxUmbrellaEditor (talk · contribs) and continues with his stubbornness. -_- — Tomíca(T2ME) 15:58, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
That is pretty astounding. I blocked him earlier today; feel free to simply revert his questions in the future when he's evading his blocks, you don't need to respond to him. Kuru (talk) 01:04, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Questionable editors[edit]

Hey Kuru,

Sorry to bother you, but I need an administrator's help. I was wondering if you could look into a few editors. On Weekend Today (Australian TV program), a few editors, who only edit this article, keep adding names to the article who are not notable per WP:LISTPEOPLE. Those users are User:Tomatoseds, User:Happyies, User:Howards storage world, User:Jillop, and User:Usernamesed. Like I said, they are all making the same edits and only to this article. I've created a discussion on the talk page, but they don't pay attention to that. If there is something else I need to do, please let me know. If I need to explain more, I'll be glad to do that. Thanks, Corkythehornetfan (Talk) 03:57, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Apologies; I'm only on briefly in the mornings; will check this afternoon. Kuru (talk) 13:07, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
No problem, thanks! Corkythehornetfan (Talk) 14:57, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
And these users as well (I'm 95% sure they're the same person)... User:Giraffesde, User:Factoriesed & User:Pigglots Thanks, Corkythehornetfan | Talk 00:31, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Were you able to find out if they are the same person or anything about the users? Corkythehornetfan | Talk 13:39, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Nevermind, I've asked another administator. Corkythehornetfan | Chat? 19:05, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Help on Big data--is User:Jugdev being disruptive?[edit]

Hi! Apologies for bothering you. Since you intervened once before on Big data, I was hoping for your advice.

Right now, I feel I feel that while User:Jugdev is most likely acting in good faith, he is engaged in disruptive editing. I think we're locked in a pattern: If I revert the page during the US day (and explain why), he'll revert it again in the middle of the US night (and post a message saying "I already explained that my change is in keeping with WP style and it comes from a highly respected source"). (example, example, example)

I'm not sure if this formally crosses over to disruptive editing, though. He tends to avoid WP:3RR, I think because he's on a different time zone from the other editors involved. And he's finally stopped removing the "tone" tag from the Big data page. But Talk:Big_data#RfC:_Is_the_opening_paragraph_a_good_summary_of_the_topic.3F on the talk page, all he does is keep insisting over and over that his edits "are in keeping with WP tone" (nobody else seems to think so) and "are factual" and "come from a respected publication on the topic of Big Data" (which is never named or linked to). I do feel like talking to him is not going to help, but I'm not sure what the play is. Should I just try to round up other editors to keep taking turns reverting him? Or have we crossed to the point where I can request administrator intervention?

Huge thanks for your help! And apologies once again for bothering you about this. Narsil (talk) 19:29, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

I think he's clearly edit warring again, but I've left one last warning on his talk page. The discussion seems to be solidly against his version. Apologies for the slow response; my availability is limited during the day. Kuru (talk) 01:32, 6 February 2015 (UTC)


Vedanga - you seem to be dedicated to adding small paragraphs sourced to trivial "whitepapers" which are basically brief corporate puffery for the same firm. Do you have a conflict of interest here, or do you really feel these are reliable sources? Kuru (talk) 12:12, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Kuru - As part of my research I referred the pdf files from only one source in order to ensure continuity. I completely understand your concerns and rest assured that I am not associated with the said firm. As and when I come across content that I deem fit to be uploaded on wiki as part of the reference section I will do so without any other intention in mind. I personally feel that resources that I have uploaded as part of reference section are reliable, however if you feel otherwise please let me know.

Vedanga Kumar (talk) 13:35, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Uttara Kuru[edit]

Art thou from — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:10, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

External link[edit]

Hi Kuru,

I am really disappointed with my try to contribute some related articles to the topic "corporate fixed deposit". In my view the article that I added "" is related to the said topic, so I wanna know how can u define it as spam?

Waiting for your reply..

Ileana — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ileanalyardson (talkcontribs) 05:21, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Ileana; If you add any more links promoting bank bazaar, you will be blocked and the site blacklisted. This is obviously a promotional puff-piece and is in no way an acceptable WP:RS for that article. Note that this also goes for using alternate accounts and/or paid editors linking to your blog material or slide shows. Kuru (talk) 12:34, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Am sorry[edit]

Hi Kuku,

I apologize for spamming Wikipedia with the Bizagi keyword and I know its not the right way to do things. Having said that, there are a few companies like IBM that have keyword spamming too.

Could I request you consent to add the less spamming links back to Bizagi page please?


FICO — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fico2015 (talkcontribs) 14:32, 20 February 2015 (UTC)


From a different IP address. Don't think global IP block has been lifted for my previous location. BatalaMaestro (talk) 02:52, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Business topics[edit]

Your name just popped up on my watchlist on the Sageworks page and I saw that you had an interest in business topics and have a business background - that's a rare find in these parts.

I was wondering if you had any interest in chipping in every once in a while on business topics where I actually do have a COI. See here for example. I've been trying to get that page up to GA for months now, but it's been very slow going without bold editing, since WP:COI requires I use the Talk page and even after my suggested changes are made, they are often reverted by an SPA. CorporateM (Talk) 22:38, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

I understand the difficulty and from what I've seen you've done a good job of managing your COI; as well as can be expected with the rather nebulous set of community expectations related to paid editing/advocacy. That being said, I'm not comfortable assisting on demand - too much gray. If I see issues pop up at ANEW or AN, I'll look into it. Kuru (talk)
No problem. I actually just now remembered that you were the one from the edit-warring board. I've been brought to ANI a few times in similar circumstances, so you may see me there again from time to time ;-) CorporateM (Talk) 00:09, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

User talk:Kenneth "Kenny" McCormick[edit]

A hard block is needed on this user as well. They're part of the sockpuppet gang that Materialscientest started pages about earlier. Regards. :) - Amaury (talk) 17:19, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Si. Done. Kuru (talk) 21:06, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Edit Waring[edit]

Neither Harari234 or Zekenyan have learned anything from their pervious blocks. They both continue to edit war, break consensus, etc. AcidSnow (talk) 01:50, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

I have provided reliable sources and you have not. You and another user have removed my sources. Zekenyan (talk) 01:53, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

You didn't proved any "reliable source" for your claim. In fact, this was pointed out to you by two other users. Though, you don't seem to care. I haven't provided sources? You honestly must be joking since the article is filled with them. But once again you don't seem to care even the slightest. This isn't surprising though, since as I pointed out earlier: "I have plenty, though what's good will it do? You don't even bother to read the article so why read something that complete crushes your claims"? AcidSnow (talk) 02:01, 15 March 2015‎ (UTC)

In other words you are trying to say you will not have a discussion with me. If you will not participate in the talk page during a content dispute then dont bother editing articles. Zekenyan (talk) 02:09, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

What?!? I was the one who first told you to go to the talk page, I was the one who started the conversation, I was the last person to reply, etc. What more false claims would you like to make? More importantly, you shouldn't be editing any of these articles as you have deliberately chosen to break consensus. AcidSnow (talk) 02:17, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Which article did you last revert me on? I am talking about this article Talk:Harar. Either you participate and provide a source or I will take this matter to an admin. Nowhere on your edit summary did you talk about consensus. I repeat this is your own words "what good will it do". You are not going to discuss you have made that clear. Zekenyan (talk) 02:23, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

That wasn't the last article I reverted you on. In fact, the last article was on the Harari people; which I too was the creator of the discussion and the last to reply. Even then, I too was once again the creator of the discussion and the last to reply on the Harar page. I didn't talk about consensus? Dude the whole point of going to the talk page is to get consensus; which you have consistently failed to receive. Isn't it ironic that you accuse me of not discussing even though I have been involved since day one? You, on the other hand, haven't in more than four days! But nonetheless, you still had time to continue to break consensus. Anyways, if I read it correctly you want more admins involved? By all means be my guest as it won't do you any good. AcidSnow (talk) 02:48, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

It is a reversion of my addition on article Harar Look through the edit summary I had cited my work before a user by the name of Maddayexpresso removed it. I believe sanctions will be needed if you do not come to the table. If you have trouble with the english language. A translator should be arranged if possible. Zekenyan (talk) 02:59, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Haha, did you just imply that I poses poor English skills? Dude you're the one who made a sentence fragment when you wrote that: "If you have trouble with the english language". Anyways, that claim made by that author you provided has already been proven fringe. More importantly, you have no power to impose sanction against me, but my all means try to. AcidSnow (talk) 03:32, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
Apologies; I had logged out for the night. Will look at this in a minute. Kuru (talk) 13:32, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
Don't worry about it. AcidSnow (talk) 13:40, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
Also the discussion has been moved to here: [1]. AcidSnow (talk) 21:06, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Continued Edit Warring on Sageworks page[edit]

User CorporateM has begun to edit Sageworks page without developing consensus first. I kindly request your intervention to help as I do not want to resort to reverts. I would request that the article be protected until consensus is developed.--Harald Forkbeard (talk) 17:50, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

I don't see anything requiring an immediate revert (BLP, copyright, etc), nor do I see anything needing immediate page protection. Thank you for taking the right approach and adding a tag to the article instead of reverting. I've commented on the talk page. Kuru (talk) 01:02, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

New Time Tracking Software.[edit]

I see you have edited Comparison of time-tracking software. Please consider adding TimefyMe to it. Ogai (talk) 11:49, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

I don't see any available third-party sources; that makes it very difficult to create an article on the topic. Kuru (talk) 21:43, 18 March 2015 (UTC)


Andrewbf is return as IP and is back to same editing. (talk) 06:19, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Spurs winning percentage.[edit]

I will concede the point. The page you show; however, directly contradicts this page which was posted at the end of the 07/08 season (, which clearly displays the Spurs record containing ABA games as the team has not yet reached either the win or loss mark shown in NBA games alone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevster999 (talkcontribs) 17:08, 27 March 2015 (UTC)