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.

Policy question: Proxy blocking VPN providers[edit]

Hi Kuru,

Hope you don't mind me asking a question related to our proxy policy since you seem to be the most involved editor with those. What is our current policy towards VPN providers? My own assumption would be that paid VPN providers would likely get a pass whereas VPN providers with free trials or other open access would qualify as being open proxies?

The specific case i am looking at is the (range contributions ·block range · block log · WHOIS (partial)) range. It is part of one sockpuppeteers set of abusive IP addresses and is registered to SumRando, a VPN provider that seems to offer a free trial of its software. Do we consider this an open proxy range that should be blocked pre-emptively akin to ProcseeBot's rangeblocks, or do we only block these when there is a specific cause? Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 23:33, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

@Excirial: I consider any proxy/vpn/webhost service that has a trial or free use policy to be no different than an open proxy and will block on sight. Be aware that the policy actually states open or anonymizing, which covers any of the above services, open or not. Most of the time we're only aware of them when they're used abusively, so it's a distinction without a difference. In the example above, that's obviously a VPN/webhost and it's been used recently for vandalism. I would block the range for a year with a proxy or "Colocationwebhost" tag. We probably need a block template with language specific to VPNs. Kuru (talk) 00:14, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
Crystal clear. Good to know that the "or anonymizing" part is a blanket cover that applies to all services that hide a users IP and not merely to dedicated proxy services. Thanks for the info! Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 01:15, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Bric Update on Timesheet[edit]

Kuru, Was the issue with the links in the body of the content? Or was the issue that Bric should not be included?

Thank you, Grant — Preceding unsigned comment added by GrantJStanley (talkcontribs) 22:57, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

The link in the body of the content was not a reliable source by our standards; it's essentially a blog. It's also simple adcopy for your product. You may want to read WP:COI as well. Kuru (talk) 00:18, 8 March 2017 (UTC)


Hello, Kuru!

Please accept my apologies for spam in the article of technical analysis. I just checked the work of service.

I noticed a slight discrepancy in the article - Instaforex is not one of the first companies to start promoting cent accounts. In the past this company was a subsidiary of lite forex, thats why function "cent accounts" was possible in Instaforex. At the moment even article refers to archive ( and named: "Lite Forex Cent Accounts". Archived from the original on March 1, 2010. Retrieved 3 July 2015. Thats not true, because Instaforex is not Lite Forex.

Please, if its possible, deleate this link from article. (talk) 14:35, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
Fine work on Zara Investment Holding. Edwardx (talk) 21:56, 12 March 2017 (UTC)


Hi Kuru

Can you please explain your reasoning. Thanks --Tarawneh (talk) 16:31, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Seems self-explanatory. "Guests enjoy private access", "a wide variety of restaurants for your culinary cravings", "These boast modern furnishings", "nestled amongst lush gardens." This kind of gushing prose is completely inappropriate for a neutral encyclopedia and looks like it was simply copied from a brochure. In fact, as I look at your "references", it seems you've done just that. Many of those sentences are directly cut&pasted from the hotel's promotional material. I've hidden the revisions as copyright violations; please do not do that again. Kuru (talk) 16:53, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
I simply collected the content from different Wikipedia articles. WP:AGF. --Tarawneh (talk) 22:55, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
You are responsible for the content of your edits, especially those which are clearly inappropriate. Be accountable, and adjust your future actions accordingly. Kuru (talk) 02:25, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 14[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Taekwang Group, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page South Korean (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:04, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[edit]

I see that you reverted some links in the past couple of weeks from user: Anyway, they have been back today adding spamlinks, domains now added to revertlist, and set COIBot to monitor. I have whacked in a short block, and also left a blunt Strine message for the user. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:40, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Customer Data Platform[edit]

Kuru, removal was completely justified.. this content was copied over from an older sandbox and there was a completely revised version that should have been posted. I have the rewritten version, how should I proceed? Thanks so much for your work Adtwiki

Adtwiki; aside from the blatant copyright violation, that looked pretty promotional as well, as have many of your past edits. Are you currently working a paid task? I cannot find your required disclosures. Kuru (talk) 22:29, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
Kuru; no, I'm not paid to do this, I don't believe in that sort of thing. Much of my contributions have followed many of the other existing pages format, tone and layout which are on good standing. I'm certainly an occasional contributor and not aware of the disclosures. Customer data platform is a growing and relevant field and deserving of a wikipedia page dedicated to it. How should I proceed to restore this page and place my revised version?
The link between your firm and worksoft is pretty clear. I can't find an immediate link to anything CDP related. I would suggest using the "DRAFT:" namespace to start with, so that the promotional material can be handled first. Please don't include the link directory. Kuru (talk) 23:07, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
It was my first page to create to speak to a company that operates in the testing automation space. I used WinRunner as a template and worksoft was clearly up for a while even before deletion... I kept following up and learning to ensure it was not promotional avoiding terms like best in class and other bs terms. And regardless of your thoughts, I was not paid nor associated with the company. If it was deleted, something else must have happened or edited. You've been doing this for a long time and seen your share of false pretenses and perhaps this falls under a pattern you see, so I'm not going to argue with you about my apparent being pwned as a newbie. The CDP copyright issue was clearly a poor error on my part. However, I am willing to take necessary steps to introduce Customer Data Platform as a legit resource on Wikipedia. I'll start with a draft, keep the link directory out, and keep it simple. Thank you for working with me on this.
You mentioned the disclosure, Let's make sure I get that covered as well. Again, I'm not paid to do this, but do know people, companies and institutions associated with Customer Data Platform. Is this what I should use in that case? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adtwiki (talkcontribs) 23:29, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
No, if this is not a paid task as an employee or as a freelancer, then you're not required to disclose anything. Your assessment is correct; this is pattern recognition from years of jaded experience. I'm happy to take your word for it that this is not PR and work with you. Throw the draft out there and we'll clean it up and move it back into production. Kuru (talk) 02:54, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
Appreciate your consideration, apologize again for my poor attention to detail on this and thank you so very much in advance for your help. I recognize this isn't easy work. Nor would I say you're jaded...just chugging through a slew of contributors to ensure wikipedia maintains its credibility. I'll get working on the revised Draft and have something in the next couple of days.
Okay, started a draft page with a first but minimal cut. We can move the talk there. Draft:Customer Data Platform LMK what you think. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adtwiki (talkcontribs) 21:23, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Looks like I've got a great start. LMK, if you're good with moving it live or any feedback you might have. Adtwiki (talkcontribs) —Preceding undated comment added 13:40, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

we seem to be good with the page, but it's no longer showing up on Google. if it's a matter of time as the page was taken down, lmk.

your are pathetic[edit]

truly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:35, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

"You are" or "You're". Kuru (talk) 01:40, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Regarding the recent block of an unregistered user[edit]

Good Evening! This is with regards to the recent block of the this user. I'm a relatively new Wikipedian, having made just over 600 edits, and I was curious to know about the reason for the block. I'm quite active as an anti-vandal and most blocks that I see are after 4 "vandalism" warnings are given. But I'm not quite familiar with all the policies of Wikipedia, so I assumed the same 4 step warning would be applied in this case as well. But since that was not the case, I couldn't understand it properly. Of course, I ask this purely out of curiosity, so its not an urgent matter at all. Thanks for your contributions as an administrator and hope our edits lead us to cross paths again! Jiten Dhandha • talk • contributions • 19:56, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

In that particular instance, it is a banned editor and blocked on site. I usually link to the case in the block notice, but I was on mobile earlier. Here's the link: Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Best known for IP. If you need more specifics, please e-mail me. Kuru (talk) 00:01, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the information! Wasnt aware of this before now. Jiten Dhandha • talk • contributions • 12:29, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Lucy Verasamy DOB[edit]


I noticed you removed the DOB I added to the Lucy Verasamy article because of a circular ref. I don't really understand this as I'm fairly new to Wikipedia - the reference I gave was from Companies House (which takes info directly from the individuals involved and not from anywhere on the web). Here's the link I had:

I appreciate that the other link ( was potentially just copying info from Wikipedia and could be inaccurate.

Thanks, Loweredtone (talk) 16:08, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

As you note, the link I tracked to that page was the "omicsgroup" mirror, which is a simple copy of the Wikipedia page and cannot be used as a reference. The other link did not include the day, and it was unclear that it referred to the subject of the article (despite the uncommon name). I'd be fine if you restored that one with just month and year, but it might be best to find one of those registry pulls that links her explicitly to that defunct firm. Apologies if the removal was clumsy; I tend to error on the side of caution for WP:BLPs. Kuru (talk) 18:06, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
No problem, I was just wondering - I wasn't sure how to format the date in the infobox without a 'day' so I'll try to find that first. Understood on the companies house things too - it also mentions that she's a meterologist so I didn't think it would be another person but you never know so I'll try to find something else referring to that. Thanks, Loweredtone (talk) 10:23, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Queries Regarding A Wikipedia Article[edit]


Whenever we are editing the wiki article of Hemant_Kanoria -, We are getting a message from you that the sources are unreferenced or poorly referenced information. Can you please mention us which source are unreferenced or poorly referenced information so that we can improve them and update the article.

Thanks NilankaG (talk) 12:26, 12 April 2017 (UTC)NilankaG

There are many issues with the proposed changes. First, though, will you please read WP:PAID and verify that all of you have complied with our terms of use? Thank you. Kuru (talk) 14:17, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I have verified myself on the talk page of the article - and also done some updates on the article, please review the changes and please specify that anything thing needs to be updated or not.

NilankaG (talk) 10:03, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Strange accounts[edit]

We have a number of strange accounts here. Started an SPI at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/EAC_tester.

Also a strange IP in the mix here[1] and making racial slurs. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:29, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

I am wondering if this is an effort to hide vandalism under an number of edits in the hope of the vandalism sticking? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:32, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
Not sure - really odd. I responded at the SPI. Maybe a shit-bot test run? Will dig back through all the reverts as soon as I finish another task. Kuru (talk) 02:36, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
Yup your assumptions have been confirmed[2]. Maybe a good faith newbie programmer. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:45, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Edit on Mark Cuban[edit]

Thank you for removing the non-notable content from the lead - you beat me to it. I had previously removed it but the editor who added it reverted my edit and then you got it. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 16:53, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

I'm just trying to say PR refers to many aspects, and thank you for editing that and I improve my statement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yantingzou (talkcontribs) 00:30, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Search engine marketing revision[edit]

Hi Kuru, Can you please tell me what was wrong with my contribution or what copywriting violation have you found? I have tried to go through all rules but probably I missed something and I can't really deduce it from your note "rmv copyvio from given source". Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Psdab2016 (talkcontribs) 22:30, 25 April 2017 (UTC) Update: I already found the explanation on my talk page, so please ignore the question, I know what the problem was now and will create a modified version. Thanks!

Copy-paste unblock request decline[edit]

Perhaps you would like to revise this edit, since "We already have a User:Pooja Gupta and your requested name without the space is too similar" refers to the new user name offered in the previous unblock request, not the one that you declined. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 12:50, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Yup. That's what I get for trying to be cute; I've revised to indicate that the second part was the issue. Kuru (talk) 13:06, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Bharat Ke Veer[edit]

As an administrator who can view deleted content. Can you please copy paste the content on my talk page? --Marvellous Spider-Man 12:01, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

I'm usually happy to, but on quick review it looks like large parts of the material were also copied from other sites, in addition to the original deletion reason. Primarily "". I'm not familiar with Indian copyright law (i.e. is it similar to public domian use with products of the US Federal government). I really can't restore potential copyright violations. The material is pretty bad, I'm not sure how useful it would be. Kuru (talk) 12:23, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Reid Stowe odd addition[edit]

You might not think this addition so odd if you knew the story behind it. I started using Wikiwand a while ago. Shortly after Reid Stowe's birthday (Jan 6 2017), I went to the Reid Stowe website and found that the Wikiwand version did not update his age correctly. I tried to refresh the page, and that did not work. My only solution was to create a link to a Purge page through the old Wikipedia view of the page, and hit that purge function in the Wikiwand version. It worked, and refreshed the cached page on the server for Wikiwand. My mistake was to leave the Purge link on the page for you to discover as an "odd addition". Thanks for noting the oddity :). Skol fir (talk) 15:47, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Haha - yes, still odd but explainable.  :) Kuru (talk) 17:43, 11 May 2017 (UTC)I
I am a good explainer. :) I realize now that once I performed the purge successfully, meaning that the cached version of the page was reloaded on the server at Wikiwand, the 'purge' function was no longer required. At the time, I was just happy that it worked. Skol fir (talk) 17:58, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Rabbit Fenceboi[edit]

The odd thing is, I partly agree with him: I think the part about the Great Wall is acceptable, but just barely, and I think that, while the fence itself is clearly not visible from space, the effects from differences in land usage, flora, fauna, and so forth clearly are. The same is true of some small dirt roads in dry ranch country, where the drainage ditching creates more verdant grass, and the fencing keeps the cattle from eating it. Anmccaff (talk) 18:57, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

I have no position on the content change; if you agree with it, make the change. My experience is that he's right about 95% of the time. I only block/revert when he repeats the behavior that lead to his community ban - dogmatic edit warring and vitriolic confrontation with those that disagree with him. Kuru (talk) 19:17, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
I suspect the fellow is now at, but there is no rabbitizing going on, so no herm, no fowl. I dunno if I want to be changing anything, especially something that's on the edge rather than a blatant problem, based on borderline vandalism. Anmccaff (talk) 20:27, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Tay Bridge disaster[edit]

Thanks (I clicked on the thanks button for your edit, but there were no obvious signs anything happened as a consequence). The chap in question looked suspiciously like other numerical addresses that had done previous deletes, including one reverted as by a sock of a banned user, but I wasn't entirely sure. Rjccumbria (talk) 21:32, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Go set a watchman[edit]

Thank you for intervening on the article Go Set a Watchman. I thought you should know that the same individual is somehow also editing with this IP address.[3]
I write "somehow" because although their locations in the UK are not adjacent, the similarity of posts/edit summaries is so obvious. Cheers!
Gareth Griffith-Jones, The Welsh Buzzard (Talk) 13:08, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Si. He's settled in to a few UK ranges at this point and seems to be slowly running down his list of old grudges. Presumably he'll rotate to a new IP; the next step will be to semi-protect the page. Sorry you've had to deal with him. Kuru (talk) 13:25, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Your assistance is much appreciated. Cheers!
Gareth Griffith-Jones, The Welsh Buzzard (Talk) 13:37, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Removing original attribution of User intent article.[edit]

@Kuru: I understand your objective of removing spam. However, please note that this article was contributed by the author of the link you have been removing: Compare the similarity of the article structure, wording, and phrasing of this wiki page with the article at the link. Furthermore, looking at the bottom of the original article, you can see the license the author gave: "The text of this page is available for modification and reuse under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License and the GNU Free Documentation License (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts)." The author contributed the content under the license of attribution. By removing the author's link, you have violated his copyright. Altering or "paraphrasing" does not change the fact of the original source as you can see via the View Edit History. Please reconsider putting the attribution back. Thank you for your reconsideration. (talk) 02:56, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

I'll try to be more clear. You've added the link as a reference, not as an attribution. The link may not be used as a reference since it is in no way a reliable source. My suggestion would be to remove any material that you've copied - I've already removed the material you've claimed previously. If you're unable to write without copying someone else's material, then please consider leaving it to other editors. Kuru (talk) 03:19, 23 May 2017 (UTC)