User talk:Kuru

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. WARNING: If you've come here because my name was used in a solicitation for a paid Wikipedia article, you are being scammed. In no way, shape, or form would I ever operate or advise as a paid editor. I also do not typically assist declared paid editors; I'm here as a volunteer to improve the project, not to help you turn a buck. Click HERE to start a new talk topic. Archives 2006 • 2007 • 2008 • 2009 2010 • 2011 • 2012 • 2013 2014 • 2015 • 2016 • 2017 2018 • 2019 • 2020 • 2021 2022 • 2023 • 2024 • 2025

Hondo creek

I noticed the maps you've created in your gallery. Could you make one for Hondo Creek? --William S. Saturn (talk) 18:48, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Si. Let me see what I can dig up for that. It may take a bit, since I need about an hour of contiguous free time to play with it. Kuru (talk) 03:31, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Request

Can you protect my user page and my 2009 archive page (edit:autoconfirmed/move:sysop) [both indefinate]? I don't trust some IP editors that would follow the archive page rules, but by instead vandalising the pages . I hope this request doesn't or won't bother you or other administrators. Kind regards, and a happy new year! DivineAlpha (talk) 03:24, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Certainly - done. Kuru (talk) 03:30, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Howard Franklin Morris etc.

Hmm. I don't know what to make of this. On the one hand, General Legume (talk · contribs) is a quacking sockpuppet of General Mung Beans 2 (talk · contribs). On the other hand, it looks General Mung Beans 2 might have been blocked improperly for block evasion based on a misunderstanding. Specifically, it looks like this individual was banned from a different website, and both Toddst1 and MKoltnow misinterpreted the statement on their userpage to mean that they were banned from Wikipedia. For what it's worth, there is a user named General Mung Beans (talk · contribs), but they never edited. Therefore, this might not have been G5-able, as this user may not, in fact, have been banned. And Howard Franklin Morris may be a worthwhile topic, in spite of the military service confusion. Thoughts? A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 21:59, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

They're both socks of User:The Lloigor at a minimum; flip through the common deleted edits. There's quite a bit of nonsense article creation between all the accounts involved, hence my quick trigger on the article in question.

If you can validate some of the references given, that would be great. I could not locate anything in Herringshaw's, on the page given or in the rest of the book; a quick google web/book/scholar search turned up nothing as well, but that kind of search does not work well with that type of article. I'd be happy to assist any other validations, but I'm not fond of good editors spinning their wheels on the words of silly vandals.

By the way, you username is great - a top five episode of the TZ. Kuru (talk) 22:15, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm, apologies, I assumed you were an admin above and I just noticed you were not. I can restore a copy to your userspace if you'd like to work on it? Kuru (talk) 22:18, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

No thanks, my concern was mainly based on the fact that it seemed so damn plausible (as MKoltnow wrote elsewhere). Looks like this guy was prolific indeed, creating these types of hoaxes that seem plausible. If you weren't able to find anything in Herringshaw's, that's good enough for me at this stage; I admit I didn't think this was a hoax at all until I noticed the 26th/28th discrepancy. (The silver lining is that this incident made me decide to create 28th Ohio Infantry.)

And thanks very much; it's my number one favorite episode, although there are a few others that come awfully close.

Anyway, thanks for all your hard work on this. Best, A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 22:28, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

No edits since final warning

There is no requirement that there be edits subsequent to the most recent warning. If there were, I would never warn when bringing an item to the noticeboard. There is sufficient vandal activity, recent vandal activity, and vandal-only activity -- let alone warnings, ignoring the most recent one. One given today has already been ignored.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:30, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Then what exactly was the point of warning him again if you just want him blocked? There has been no activity from that IP in 13 hours, so he's not actively vandalizing. If you feel there is significant enough disruption, please feel free to post to WP:ANI. Otherwise, we can leave your note up on AIV for a while to see if anything else happens. Kuru (talk) 21:41, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

There are two issues. 1 -- vandalism should lead to a warning, so the user and subsquent editors/admins see the level of vandalism. 2 -- the level of vandalism here warranted a block. Where the level of vandalism is great enough, and the most recent ignored warning is recent enough, there should be a block. The fact that there was an additional warning entered which will alert reviewing editors/admins as to the level of vandalism is not reason to avoid blocking the IP in these circumstances. I see this has now been addressed by another admin.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:49, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

That makes little sense. Warnings are used to alert editors to their behavior and warn them of consequences; to deter vandalism. If you'd like to skip straight to the consequence part, hey, I'm all for it, but leaving a "final" warning and then blocking them without any other action on their part seems silly. Kuru (talk) 21:56, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Disagree, for reasons stated (which no doubt were the same reasons the other admin blocked).--Epeefleche (talk) 22:23, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Essay spammers

I found a couple more -- check my block log. Looks like they are spamming at least five websites -- have you put those on the blacklist, or should I do that? NawlinWiki (talk) 21:54, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm still looking at the socks. I'll make list of the sites and get it on the list in about five minutes. Kuru (talk) 21:57, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

I've added the socks to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tanya09. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 22:22, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Page protection

Could you protect User talk:Coolguy101012 as his sockpuppets are disrupting the page? Thanks. Momo san ^Gespräch 22:29, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Si. Have semi-protected his target article as well. Kuru (talk) 22:30, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks again. Momo san ^Gespräch 22:30, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Hippo43

I just wanted to bring to your attention that he's back to his old ways... please check List of common misconceptions. Thanks in advance. Hearfourmewesique (talk) 20:09, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi Kuru, I'm not sure what specifically I'm being accused of. Hearfourmewesique has repeatedly added material which is not supported by the sources he cites. I've repeatedly tried to discuss the matter, and given detailed explanations of my view on it, but he has failed to engage, preferring just to revert. Please see Talk:List_of_common_misconceptions#Music_examples. He seems to think that because I was previously blocked for some aggressive editing on other articles, that he doesn't have to discuss challenges to his contributions. His most recent revert undid some 14 intervening edits, without any edit summary or contribution to the open discussion. A look at the recent history of the article and discussion should show that I've engaged with other editors about other parts of the article over the last few days and we've been able to make some improvements. I wish he would take the same approach. --hippo43 (talk) 00:02, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Unblock

Fantastic!! I love it--Jac16888^Talk 01:32, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Blip

My apologies. My account is shared between two different individuals. Feedington (talk) 23:28, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Talk:List of common misconceptions#music examples

I am urging you to intervene... please, this has gone way too far. At least two other editors have grown tired of hippo43's incessant disruptions. I have done more than enough, I seriously believe that my cointributions are valid and do not contradict the WP guidelines, in spite of hippo's endless efforts to hinder my work. I await your sincere response – thank you very much in advance. Hearfourmewesique (talk) 06:02, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Hey Kuru. I've also looked into the Hippo43's recent contributions and well, they're making the same edits I blocked them for originally. I'd block Hippo43 myself now but that'd be wheel-warring. Please consider. Regards, FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 07:30, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi Kuru, I think Hearfourmewesique is reading the situation wrongly - another editor has recently likewise disagreed with his stance, and no other editors have spoken up to agree with his point of view. I have been trying to get him to discuss it for weeks, but he has refused, saying he won't take my bait, calling me a troll etc. I'm not sure what else I'm supposed to do when an editor simply keeps reverting and refuses to discuss the issue. If I have done something wrong over this issue since my last block expired, can Fastily or yourself explain? Thanks. --hippo43 (talk) 08:57, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Responded on your page. Kuru (talk) 13:10, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Requested Move

May I ask you yet another favor, and move Sea star => to Starfish as per the consensus on that talkpage?--Mr Fink (talk) 13:47, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Sure, as soon as the discussion ends. Kuru (talk) 03:12, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you!--Mr Fink (talk) 02:28, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

list of alternative metal artists

It seems that 65.8.171.174, without using the talk page during the block, or even still not using the edit summary, is still willing to add the extreme metal genre to the list of alternative metal artists. Any further recommendations?--猛禽22 ^•• 20:33, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Fastily already blocked him; if he pops up with another IP, I'll soft protect the page again. Kuru (talk) 01:42, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Internal Audit Article

Why do you internalauditguru.blogspot.com is a low end blog & that comments from it cannot be posted on wikipedia? 203.199.30.92 (talk) 08:31, 28 January 2010 (UTC) Amit

Blogs are generally not considered reliable sources for adding material; it is self-published material. The blog itself is also not suitable as an external link, as noted in the links I left you on your talk page. Thanks. Kuru (talk) 12:55, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

User talk:173.79.188.192

Hi

You recently declined an unblock request from this user. Since the unblock request was declined, the user has removed the unblock request template from their page even though it does say not to do it. I have reverted it as vandalism, but thought I would let you know in case any further action needs to be taken against this user for their actions. If I was wrong to restore this template then please let me know.

Hope you're well :) --5 albert square (talk) 03:39, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Real name

Do you think that Katie Perry is a realname problems considering that Katie Perry and Katy Perry exist? ww2censor (talk) 14:24, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

I usually wouldn't bother unless they're editing in places where that becomes a confusing claim, but I'm not sure what the conventional wisdom is at the moment. You may want to ask at Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention. Kuru (talk) 14:41, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Blocking of User:70.29.59.12

Hi, thanks for your action on this. User:Rightous who appears to be the same editor has started up the same behaviour immediately. Diffs: [1], [2]. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:56, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Already done. Kuru (talk) 20:58, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Report for submission error

Resp.Sir,

During the submission of article named 'Fachsoft' on wikipedia.The machine reported the following error: User Kuru (talk) deleted this article after you started editing it, with a reason of: G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion Please confirm that you really want to recreate this article.

My client just informed me later on. Fachsoft is an emerging IT company in the state capital of India.

Fachsoft Solution is a dynamic development company that provides strategic business solutions. Our repertoire of knowledge gained over a period helps us to create a positive merger of both business and technology.

We provide full lifecycle product engineering, independent testing, security, staff escalation, as well as professional services for disparate industry segments. Our commitment to quality & timelines has helped us to gain advantage over our competitors and goodwill among our clients. At Fachsoft Solutions, we bring together technologies, partnerships, and resources to provide positive blend for IT investments.

Wikipedia can check it on www.google.com.

The given information is correct.

Please let the article to be hosted

Thanking you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anvarjam (talk • contribs) 19:21, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

The article you had written was complete, unambiguous promotional material. Please do not add it again until you have completely read our submission guidelines. I'd usually give more feedback, but the twelve paragraph puff piece I deleted was far over the line. Additionally, you mention your 'client', please also read our conflict of interest guidelines. Kuru (talk) 20:07, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Mark Cuban

I don't get it. What do you have against my stories about Cuban? Do you doubt their veracity? I played rugby with the guy, let him copy my calculus notes, drank a lot of beer and got high with the guy, came to blows with him on more than one occasion but in the end don't believe I've said anything untrue about him. What gives? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gregsedits (talk • contribs) 03:08, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

No, you may not add your personal stories to one of our biographies. I've left you several links to policies related to verification and reliable sources. Please read them, specifically WP:BLP. You will be blocked on your next violation of this policy. Kuru (talk) 12:48, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Jorn Barger

I went to high school and played football with Jorn Barger. Honest injun; cross my heart, hope to die. Can I reference our high school on his site? You can verify the school and location at http://www.robotwisdom.com/jorn/hs.html

Please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gregsedits (talk • contribs) 03:16, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

No, you may not add your personal stories to one of our biographies. I've left you several links to policies related to verification and reliable sources. Please read them, specifically WP:BLP. You will be blocked on your next violation of this policy. Kuru (talk) 12:48, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of both the Takedo_panacea company page and my user-space for Edegonz

Dear Kuru,

I am writing to discuss and contest both the speedy deletion of the Takedo_panacea page for the company Takedo Panacea and most recently the deletion of my Edegonz user page. You (Kuru) wrote that you could walk me through the guidelines "for what we can include here" so I appreciate that olive branch and gesture. Yes, I would like some help and apparently need a little at least but before we proceed allow me to bring to your attention that the reason I'm writing just "a little" is because I've already thought about this considerably and things aren't as bad as you think (i.e. you also wrote the page was "so far off the mark that [you] would not know where to begin"). Please allow the following to better scope your guidance so that we can come to an amenable agreement without in any way bringing discredit to Wikipedia, an organization I admire and deeply respect (to prove my admiration I just donated $500 on 19:37, 21 February 2010)[3]:

To bring you up to speed RHaworth recently wrote that the pages were "Unambiguous advertising or promotion" and "Wikipedia is not a free host. Please publish on your own website.". Similarly, Tbsdy_lives wrote "Patent nonsense." Harsh attacks on my character and both the company's legitimacy & intent, but I am not easily offended.

First of all, I would like to say that I can see, most definitely, how experienced Wikipedians such as yourselves on first glance would flag this page and/or warning lights would shoot up in his or her head. Second, I am not interested in free hosting. It's an insult to a company that it cannot afford $10 per year for a host. I personally have 2 websites of my own and setting up their domains took less than an hour and just $20. To prove it would it help if the company owner contact Jimmy Wales to donate $500 to Wikipedia? But this is beside the point and makes money an issue when it shouldn't be. Moving on...

I can understand the "unambiguous advertising" label. This Wikipedia page is simply a descriptor page for a company and not a marketing gimmick. As you'll see the page has no direct or even indirect links for purchasing anything or even contact information to facilitate such so please reconsider this pejorative label if/when I try to upload this page again for this company. Next, "patent nonsense" is also understandable but only when in the context of this being a first glance of the page. There are lots of non-profits whose aim is to promote love, education in the art of eastern mysticism, spiritual practice, and alternative forms of "conscious" holistic healing. All of the above categorize the company. I do not find this as nonsense. Odd, sure, because the company is new and in the eyes of this editor unestablished but allow me to provide further support for my position.

Before I proceed, I just wanted to say that I can even empathize with someone who would think to qualify this as a Wikipedia "Conflict of Interest", but I hope that this person can also see that I've followed most of the other rules to the best of my ability (e.g. third-party sources) in making this page live for Takedo Panacea. I've tried to write in as neutral tone as possible, but I am willing to tone it farther down and AS FAR AS you expert Wikipedians would like for increased legitimacy. I do defer to the community's opinion and will take the editors' advice very seriously and reassess all future edits.

Ultimately, I think that this page, although it's on a company and not an individual, would qualify as a justifiable Autobiography per-se. Why? Because I believe this company is notable enough, which is substantiated by the depth and rigor in referencing the hundreds of internal and over-a-hundred legitimate "notes"/external references, which at the least can serve as educational for anyone interested in the field this company is participating in. Again, I defer to the consensus of the community, but I find it a little frustrating that there are dozens of pages for small bands and one-hit-non-wonders while this page is finding considerable resistance. I'm sure you try to discourage those small entity writers as well, but I really just hope some or all of you actually spend the time to read this company's page and understand that this is a real page, about a real & legitimate company, and with a consistent message throughout. It's got depth and others who are reading it are finding that it's a work of art in itself even though it is yet unfinished (I suppose it never will be due to the beauty of Wikipedia).

Thank you very much for taking the time to read and address this post on your user space.

Cheers, Eduardo

Updated 6:26PM PST: I think you're right about the Quetzalcoatl.jpg File not being Denis Radenkovic's. I didn't see anywhere saying that the image was protected by copyright though but it's best if we delete. I tried deleting it myself but didn't see how or where. Edegonz (talk) 02:27, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

• Hi again! I finished responding to your other 2 questions. On second thought since this image has been downloaded 15,422 does that not make it fair game or do we need explicit permission for usage on Wikipedia?

Thanks! Edegonz (talk) 08:48, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Absolutely no question; we delete it. Even if that blog had permission to host that image, it does not give you the right to claim it is under a creative commons license and redistribute it. The number of people who have downloaded it is not relevant. Kuru (talk) 13:03, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

• Understood. I'm backing away now from the idea of having a real, live page on Wikipedia at this moment since I don't qualify yet for question #2 that we have on my user space discussion/talk page. Could you let me keep my page in my local user space (after I re-add it a 3rd time) until I can come up with that information?Edegonz (talk) 19:52, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

San Antonio task force

Hi! I started the Wikipedia:WikiProject Texas/San Antonio task force. If you want, please join to help improve San Antonio articles. Thanks for your consideration WhisperToMe (talk) 13:39, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Absolutely. I didn't miss you lighting up my watch list over the last week.  :) Kuru (talk) 02:07, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks.

Thank you for protecting my talk page from IPs until March 4th. :) - Zhang He (talk) 02:03, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Not a problem; it's a short term solution. Kuru (talk) 02:06, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Blocking of user 122.109.252.15

Thank you very much for temporarily blocking IP 122.109.252.15 from editing due to vandalism of Skidmore, Owings and Merrill! Kmsom (talk) 16:52, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Happy Kuru's Day!

User:Kuru has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, and therefore, I've officially declared today as Kuru's day! For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian, enjoy being the Star of the day, dear Kuru! Peace, Rlevse 00:39, 2 March 2010 (UTC) A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:39, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Social accounting.

Why were the links within the sphere of management accounting deleted today? The links made reference to the page/s where one can find more detailed information upon the subject within the free textbooks. Due to copyright issues, I am only able to link to the material via an external web link. As an accounting instructor I and my students have found the textbooks which I linked extremely useful in gaining further (free) accounting materials. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Toastcard (talk • contribs) 13:22, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

These link directly to an e-mail gathering service / subscription service. If there is a direct link available, then that might be more appropriate. It is always preferable for you to add your own material here, and use published sources as references. Thanks. Kuru (talk) 13:29, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I can see that the Newsletter signup box is now a mandatory field upon the publisher's website whereas it used to be optional. It would appear that the site i first discovered the books http://www.walesonline.co.uk/showbiz-and-lifestyle/books/bookboon/ has remained the same however, with the email box being still optional. Could I link to the materials contained within the books if i linked the the partner site that does not gather e-mail addresses? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.58.252.12 (talk) 14:59, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

The Julius Caesar vandal

My pleasure. I remembered him from the last time and realized immediately who he was. He did chose an interesting cast, though - Russell Crowe, James Caviezal, Casey Affleck, Anthony Hopkins, Stellan Skarsgård, Daniel Craig. I'd probably go see it. Thanks. Wildhartlivie (talk) 02:43, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Request for review of my appeal on my Block

Kuru,

A moment ago you denied my appeal of a Block on my account (Joeperez69) even though I hadn't yet WRITTEN my appeal -- I had merely typed a test sentence to test the markup. I'm sorry for taking more of your time, but I believe my excellent editorial record of service justifies a minute more to read my appeal. Thank you. -- Joe Perez —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.35.121.164 (talk) 02:37, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for handling 204.111.65.79. Much appreciated. Imzadi1979 (talk) 18:23, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Machine to Machine

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Machine to Machine. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Machine to Machine. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:10, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Threat left on your page

It's being dealt with here [4]. Ridernyc (talk) 00:11, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Mcjakeqcool

These users would be added to this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_Mcjakeqcool

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:A5051790463174

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:A306200130048123

SJ (talk) 22:22, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Amortization Schedule

You wrote not to post inappropriate links. I fail to see how a amortization calculator is not appropriate for an article on amortization schedules.

As you killed every single external link, perhaps it's your personal preference to remove them, rather than for the benefit of others. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Codhubiv (talk • contribs) 03:55, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, that must be it. Kuru (talk) 03:58, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Well you asked me to post here, I posted here. You've 5 word response sheds no light on why it's inappropriate for me. If you could elaborate that would be great. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Codhubiv (talk • contribs) 04:02, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Except that I did not until your post; which account were you using previously? Kuru (talk) 04:05, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

I had no account. We seem to be getting nowhere, fast. If it was a impossibilty to add (or rather I should say ammend!) a link on the article to a relevant page why did you either bother suggesting I use talk? I'm still confused as to why every single external link has been killed, history on the article suggests they've been there a long time - They suddenly constitute a violation? The calculations aren't exactly easy to do in your head! (amortization) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Codhubiv (talk • contribs) 04:09, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

There are literally thousands of amortization/mortgage calculators on the internet, most tied to a commercial site or coated with google ads. There is an article at mortgage calculator which explains the math and has a link to another directory. You're free to add your links at the other directory, but we're here to expand the articles, not to spam your promotional links. To be perfectly clear, add another spam link, and you will be blocked. Thanks. Kuru (talk) 04:14, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

SPAM would surely consist of pure advertising with no relation to the article. I still fail to see how a amortization calculator constitutes SPAM on a relevant article, it's regardless if there are a million calculators - It's reasonable to expect to link to one from the article rather than doing the math. By this logic, all external links are SPAM and prohibited.

If you have the decision on your own to block me, there’s a serious question of the democracy and neutrality of Wikipedia.

I'm yet to see any evidence that you're flexible on the point, so I still have the question as to why you even asked me to post to talk if your mind is made up on the subject. Seeing as you appear to be in total authority with regard to this article.

What am I exactly supposed to do against “do it again and you are banned, end of discussion” —Preceding unsigned comment added by Codhubiv (talk • contribs) 04:27, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Please don't play silly. I've offered you a solution for your SEO; add the teleWorx links to the open directory. Kuru (talk) 04:36, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Well that certainly dodged all my questions. Ever considered politics? If you could take some address to address my concerns that would be good. At the moment it feels like facing down a well known right wing party of the mid 20th century. Codhubiv (talk) 04:39, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Governance, risk management, and compliance

An article that you have been involved in editing, Governance, risk management, and compliance, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Governance, risk management, and compliance. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. --Darkwind (talk) 01:31, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Article about a GCSG Ltd

Good afternoon. Couple of weeks ago I have joined wikipedia to contribute to creation of this unusual "book". A week ago I created article about GCSG Ltd. It were deleted (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion). It is a pity that article were deleted, becouse article were created for information purposes and it isn't advertisement. I spend couple of weeks time to get all the information from differente sources and would like to ask if it is no possibility to publish article in wikipedia, is it any possibility to get information about a GCSG Ltd back? Does it means that user must save articles separatly from wikipedia in case it will be deleted?

Many thanks in advance for your prompt reply Mindaugas Januska 11:08, 28 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.100.95.195 (talk)

I've created a temporary copy at User:Kuru/GCSG Ltd minus the cut&paste of your company's terms and conditions. The article as it stands is complete adcopy with no external, third party references. If you need more information of why this is promotional, please ask. I'll leave it up in my userspace for a week or so; you can create an account of your own if you'd like me to move it there for longer. Please do not create this again in the main encyclopedia in its current state. Kuru (talk) 13:20, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Is the User:Mindukas account yours? That may be a better spot for it to live if so. Kuru (talk) 13:22, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Why remove without considering content reference?

Hi Kuru, I noted you removed one of the reference left by me on page for FOB (shipping). I wonder why the reference was removed? There are other references which may be less authoritative. The content added is correct and valuable to users. You left the content but removed the reference from where the content was obtained.

Garysimple —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.214.127.140 (talk) 17:57, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Pls stop removing my edits

If you were objective, you would Note that we are the only retained search firm that does what we Do. That is the Reason why we do Not join AESC, because we do not comply with their stringent guidelines, we are a truly unique Hybrid, and deserve the post juxtaposed the strictly Huge and the boutique (which this site gives short shrift to)...BTW Who made You the Decider? seriously? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Infonet100 (talk • contribs) 18:43, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm super excited for you and your firm. Please do not add advertisements on general topic pages. If you'd like, I can get you in touch with a competent PR agency. Kuru (talk) 03:29, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm also interested in a competent PR agency. Please refer me. --203.111.229.246 (talk) 16:31, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

This was more sarcasm than a genuine offer. Kuru (talk) 01:08, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

File talk:Guadalupe Watershed.png

I left a question for you on the talk page linked above. --William S. Saturn (talk) 03:27, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks - will respond there. Kuru (talk) 13:54, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

User:Jamen Somasu's edits

Out of interest, why do you not see User:Jamen Somasu's edits as vandalism? That user is clearly making edits that are contrary to conventions laid down by WP:FOOTY, and refusing to stop after repeated requests to do so. Is that not the very definition of vandalism? – PeeJay 22:10, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

They appear to be good faith edits, unless I'm missing something. Acting against a consensus, set by a wikiproject or by a group of users, is not overtly vandalism - this looked more like a content dispute. It is, in this case, clearly a one-sided aggressive edit war and he was blocked for it. I'm sure there's quite a bit of history I'm not aware of; football - your football :) - is not my thing. If you're reporting it to AIV, I've got to extend him good faith and I can only act on clear, bad-faith stuff. If there's a complex history, it may be better to report at ANI or someplace where a more complex history can be considered. Alternatively, you can find admins more familiar with the area who can make the more nuanced calls there. Hope that hopes - please feel free to ask follow up questions. Kuru (talk) 22:22, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

User:9 to 8

Considering that the user's initial complaint was that the definition of "shampoo" required a citation, it seems fitting that you have now "Washed that user right out of our hair." :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:54, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

• groan* :) Kuru (talk) 02:10, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Hey Kuru,

This is user ewebb49. I am messaging you on reference to the false information i put on the san jacinto page. I just wanted to tell you i was writing a report for school on Wikipedia and i was just testing how fast vandalism would be fixed. I am sorry if i offended you and i want to apologize as i had not gone back on my userpage since i finished writing the report. Now that i am done, i have bought a book on how to become a good member of Wikipedia and plan to do such that. April 8th, 2010

Ewebb49 (talk) 22:21, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Super. Do not experiment with Wikipedia again, please. Further deliberate attempts to play around will results in a removal of your editing privileges. Kuru (talk) 12:19, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Executive Search

Hi Kuru,

I see you removed a section named 'Executive Agency' from the Executive Search page.

Despite both filling Executive positions for companies, there is a clear distinction in the respective business models of an Exectuve Search and an Executive Agency.

The text said:

Unlike an executive search recruitment agency, an executive agent works on behalf of top level executives to find them a suitable position of employment.

An Executive agent operates much like a literary agent, a talent agent and a sports agent to source full-time opportunities for its clients by liaising with head-hunters on the executive’s behalf whilst also providing services which could include interim management or non executive roles.

In the UK market, InterExec is the only company offering an executive agency service.

-

The link provided was from Richard Donkin's website, and was an article posted in the Financial Times, arguably the UK's most respected Financial Newspaper.

There is a link to the the article here: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2359f3ea-7b0d-11d9-a8c9-00000e2511c8,Authorised=false.html?_i_location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcms%2Fs%2F0%2F2359f3ea-7b0d-11d9-a8c9-00000e2511c8.html%3Fnclick_check%3D1&_i_referer=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FInterExec&nclick_check=1

as well as others to the company: http://www.businesslinedirectory.com/directory/employment/recruitment-and-staffing/interexec.html

May you please reinstate the text, either removing what you see is unfit or adding what you see it fit.

Kind regards

FS61 (talk) 10:37, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, six months ago. Sorry, there still seems to be no to trivial differences to the manner in which many firms operate. The fact that you've single out a specific firm, and one which you have an apparent conflict of interest with, seems promotional. I don't see any reason to add the text. Feel free to start a discussion on the article's talk page. Kuru (talk) 12:17, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Forgive me as I have obviously failed to make the distinction – apologies.

A headhunter / recruitment consultant is employed and paid by the company (not the employee) that it is providing the search for.

An agent is employed by the employee (not the company). This agent will then work with the headhunters / recruitment consultants but not be paid by them or the employers that they work for.

In the UK there are approximately 4000 headhunters working for companies. An agent provides access to this market – which would be impossible for the individual employee to do. This model is the same as for actors, writers, musicians etc.

By virtue of legal dispensation by the UK’s Government Department of Employment there is only one company that can be paid by the employee . This does not provide them with exclusive rights it’s just that no other company has decided to adopt this business model. We are not trying to promote this company per se but are looking to highlight the fact that there is a fundamental difference between the business model of a headhunter and agent.

I shall also post this on the talkpage of the article as you kindly suggested.

Kind regards

FS61 (talk) 13:46, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

What makes you so good

I see you're a businessman. How do you promote your stuff? What's wrong with putting some links in WikiPedia pointing to some useful information? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jansengeorge (talk • contribs) 17:39, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

By providing excellent services to our customers, listening to their feedback, and developing an affinity for our core markets. Spamming community driven online encyclopedias is not in our marketing strategy, if that's what you're asking. If you'd like feedback on whatever transgression prompted this question, please feel free to ask with your original account. Thanks. Kuru (talk) 17:49, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I was wondering whay all Filipino shipping companies can have their own page including link to their ccmmercial(!) site. Why not my company? --203.111.229.246 (talk) 16:27, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't know your company, so I can't give you specific advice. The threshold for notability here for corporations is remarkably low. If you have a link to something that was deleted, I'd be happy to review it. Kuru (talk) 01:07, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

impersonating

Blah, that was my fault for misreading the talk page. When I block user "Robert McFictional" for impersonating Robert McFictional, that means that he has a userpage on which he states "I am Robert McFictional and I am a fat ugly dog-molesting loser with a small penis! Hate me! I deserve to be spat on by everyone I meet!", or the like.

I misread "sucks rocks" as "sucks rocks", which is considerably less offensive than some stuff, but was still enough to trip my "insulting someone by stealing their identity" detector.

I've already unblocked; go ahead and explain to him if you want. DS (talk) 23:57, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Ah, that makes more sense. I'll drop him a note. Kuru (talk) 23:58, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and the block rationale is so that Robert McFictional doesn't find himself with the stigma of his real name being associated with wikivandalism. DS (talk) 00:03, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

HI.

I was blocked on April 9th for writing on a talk page, which you said were "disruptive edits." I was blocked until this day, the 12th, and I don't understand why. I thought a talk page was where you could write whatever to someone. I did, and you removed it seven times. I put it back and came and saw I was blocked. I don't get this. It was on Anatandrus dude's talk page and I find this unfair... thanks. :\—Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.1.184.13 (talk • contribs)

Yes, silly edits and racial epithets will indeed get you blocked; regardless of where you add them. Future behavior along this line will have your IP blocked for longer periods. Kuru (talk) 22:24, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

I wasn't trying to be racist. I was playing around with someone I knew. But ok.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.1.184.13 (talk • contribs)

Don't do that here. Kuru (talk) 22:32, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Ok i wont do that here

Sorry!

Sorry for doing the wrong cleanup on the Consultant article. Thanks for catching my error! Libcub (talk) 01:41, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Just wanted to know if you got my email in reply to yours

Would like to discuss further, but did not get a reply from you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.111.229.246 (talk) 16:25, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I did; I'm not sure how I can help you with marketing shipping corporations in the Philippines ; it's not exactly my thing. Kuru (talk) 01:05, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi kuru, about your message: " Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Stock market simulator ‎. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. Kuru (talk) 22:43, 23 April 2010 (UTC)"

Yes, I think a list of stock market simulators available should be there and in many users asked for it. Many articles have a list of available examples, and I think is very useful. I don't understand the problem with this, as you said it doesn't affect search engine rankings, and I would like the list to be completed by users.