User talk:Kuru

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. Archives: 2006 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 2007 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 2008 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 2009 1Q 2Q

Contents 1 Map request 2 copyright issue 3 National Basketball Association 4 Television Radio 5 Television Radio 6 Kuru I am seriously confused 7 Do you consider this a good source then? 8 Because I think it looks really cool... 9 Quick Question 10 Project management 11 Enterprise Asset Management 12 Your claim of vandalism on the Rackspace 13 Thoughts? 14 Thanks Kuru.... 15 72.230.130.84 block 16 re warning 17 user:Babyboomer57 18 Hello Kuru - Trista valiantly fighting the vandals again. 19 Why this website getting special favours from you ? 20 listing 'online database' 21 Microsoft Dynamics NAV

[edit] Map request

Hi Kuru. I noticed that you created a lof the maps that adorn the various Texas river articles, and I was hoping to talk you into creating a new map for me. I've been working on Fredonian Rebellion, hoping to take it to FAC in the next few weeks. The article would be much improved with a map that shows where the rebellion took place. This would need to cover most of East Texas, with the Sabine, Red, Trinity, and Navasota Rivers present, as well as the Gulf of Mexico as the southern boundary (and probably the city of Nacogdoches, if possible). I can add shading later to show the boundaries of the Edwards grant and the Municipality of Nacogdoches, but I am map-challenged and haven't been able to create the initial map. If you can do this, I'd be happy to return the favor by copyediting or reviewing of your current favorite article(s). (If you have a favorite Texas history article I could also bump it up on my improvement priority list.) Thanks for even considering the request! Karanacs (talk) 20:06, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Kuru. I just wanted to let you know that I'm planning to nominate this article at FAC next week. If you aren't able to get an image created by then, don't worry. I think the article can probably pass FAC without it, and if you are able to make one later I can always add it in. Karanacs (talk) 17:04, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] copyright issue

Hi Kuru,

What do you recommend be done about the copyright issue you raised about the "Loan Comparison" article? I believe the article contains some genuine content of interest to wikipedia readers with relevant sources but I also understand the main source is a copyrighted website. Should I get a license from the site? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Obeaudel (talk • contribs) 12:08, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] National Basketball Association

Hi, as you may already know, various ip accounts are repeatedly inserting the Bryant-James Era nonsense in the article. I've warned him several times and started a discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Basketball Association#User:Rdicicco2, in which editors have agree that this is inappropriate. Could you do something about this? It is evident that he will continue based on this. Thanks—Chris! _ct 22:56, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

If you can see it is the same user reverting; we can post a request at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. I concur that the heading is silly; but this is a content dispute and since I've reverted him a few times I cannot use my own administrative tools to resolve the situation. If it persists, I'll post a note somewhere. Likely he'll simply get bored at some point. Kuru ^talk 11:59, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks—Chris! _ct 03:21, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Television Radio

Dear Kuru, Here is my manual request for unblocking I am sorry for abusing all those accounts and i won't do it again because it is wrong and i shouldn't have done it and also you block me for a long time and i want to be unblock because i am sorry for what i did and i hope you read this message and understand i am sorry and it won't happen again and that is all i have to say Television Radio76.223.91.199 (talk) 05:26, 16 May 2009 (UTC).

The above comments were posted by user:69.209.226.53, who has admitted being a sockpuppet of blocked User:Television Radio on his talk page. As someone who has watched this sad sockpuppet soap-opera saga from the beginning, reverted many of his edits, and participated in all 4 SPI's for this user, I would urge you to look thru the SPI and archives carefully before making any decision on unblocking Television Radio, or any of his aliases. Today alone, even after being warned of a possible 3RR violation, he proceeded to revert the same page 2 more times, and was blocked on 2 separate IP's. Personally, I see no redemption for him at this time, but that is only my opinion. Wuhwuzdat (talk) 00:59, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

A sound opinion. Kuru ^talk 02:15, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Television Radio

Dear Kuru, Can you unblock Television Radio because he is sorry for all that stuff that he did and it won't happen again because Television Radio can't edit pages on Wikipedia because it saids on second thought a manual request for unblocking is needed here and here is the request I am sorry for abusing all those accounts and it won't happen again and also i try to contact you by email but it did not work so i figure to contact you is through your talk page and i hope you read this message and realize i am sorry and it won't happen again and when you read this message i hope you decide to unblock me. Television Radio76.223.91.199 (talk) 05:20, 16 May 2009 (UTC). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.209.205.114 (talk) 22:06, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Comment 14 minutes before this IP posted this request, they blanked the SPI for Television Radio. "Won't do it again"? I have my doubts. Wuhwuzdat (talk) 22:37, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

...and then went on to continue the same edits. I've received no e-mails, and the account works fine. I'm sorry, but your actions do no line up well with your promises. Please limit your editing to placing an unblock request template on your main account so that another administrator can review the block. As it stands, I have no intent of unblocking. Kuru ^talk 23:01, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Kuru I am seriously confused

You are considering PMP Institute a spam. and you removed it Why did you remove the PMI Reference?

I trully feel that you are trying to dominate the topic I might be mistaken can you please explain to me your point of view? Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Muminshawaf (talk • contribs) 00:46, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Certainly. My comments have been included with each edit, which I presumed you were reading since you were also leaving edit summaries. The link you are continually adding is not suitable as either an external link or as a reference. As an external link, it is simply a promotional page for a vendor selling PMP training. It is covered with google ads, and provides very little content. As a reference, it is not a reliable source, such as a published article or peer reviewed paper; there is no backing to the claims made on the page. You have also been adding this same link to other random articles over the last few days; ergo the warnings. Please cease adding that link. Thanks. Kuru ^talk 00:58, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Do you consider this a good source then?

Thank you for your input.

The information I am providing is correct you check some of these resource

PMI.org for the PMP Qualification.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/3610564/Rita-Mulcahys-Tips-on-Passing-the-Pmp For the table you removed about PM questions percentages see page 7 please. I think Rita is a very known publisher. and the information is similar to what PMP Institute is posting and similar to http://becomingpmp.blogspot.com/2007/05/pass-mark.html. http://www.rmcproject.com/about/20051130-pmp-exam-scoring-changes.aspx

I disagree If the source has Ads on it's pages it should not be considered. That makes the pmi.org not a reliable source. Their pages is packed with ads

I also disagree If the source offers products on their website we should not consider it. That will also make pmi.org unreliable source since they sell books membership and other material on their website.

I have an argument for you. If an author add any information to a post. I should not remove it unless I can prove that it is invalid. Then before I remove it I should discuss it with the author to get his point of view. I think that is a more suitable way to approach changes.

I really think the information I have on that post is correct. Few resources agrees with me I picked 2 references you did not like. I believe that does not give you the right to remove them unless you can give a solid prove that the information is insufficient. And the resources are scam artists. An education provider that provide FREE services does not make it unreliable. And the pmi.org since they have Ads and sell services does not make it unreliable source in my opinion.

I have no doubt at all that you have nothing but good faith. But I feel I am getting very intimidated by your approach with me.

I would really appreciate if you please allow me to enter my contributions freely in that post since the information is sufficient. If you can prove that any of the information I am providing is incorrect please let me know what is wrong and I will personally change it.

My best Regards, —Preceding unsigned comment added by Muminshawaf (talk • contribs) 02:16, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

You can read our policy on external links here. You can read our policy on reliable sources here. Blogs are not acceptable. Sourcing directly to material at pmi is fine for non-contentious material; they are the originator of the product. After looking into it further, you may want to also read our conflict of interest guidelines at WP:COI, since you appear to have a relationship with the "education provider that provide FREE services" link you continue to add. Seriously, feel free to add of the reliably sourced information you want, but you will be blocked if you continue to use Wikipedia as a vehicle to promote your site. Thanks. Kuru ^talk 02:32, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Because I think it looks really cool...

		The Special Barnstar
		I hereby award you the Special Barnstar for your development of this template. If it were up to me, I would replace {{uw-block3}} with this one! Matt (talk) 03:23, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks.. :) Kuru ^talk 04:02, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Quick Question

Hi could you please Can take action against the constant vandalism on the Dennis Kucinich Page? It appears people keep changing Dennis Kucinich's name to elf and keebler. Possibly semi-protecting the page would be a solution. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Theownedpilot (talk • contribs) 21:23, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Appears to have already been protected. Kuru ^talk 04:02, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Project management

Hi, I noticed you just made some improvements to the Virtual project management article, which still has a long way to go. I have adviced that new user to start this article and would like to give him some time to work on in.

Now I wonder if you could talk a look at the Project Management Institute article as well, and give your opinion here about the changes I (with some help) have made to the article. Do you think it is enough or could you propose some more imporvements? Tahnk you. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 22:52, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Virtual project management is quite the mess; probably created simply as a promotional vehicle but I'll assume good faith. I've looked at and watchlisted PMI; odd that I didn't already have it on my list, I could have sworn it was at one time. I've noted my comments there - I see little in the way of advertising that would support that tag after the changes you and Centrx made. Kuru ^talk 01:00, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for you comment on the PMI article. Maybe you can keep the article on your wathclist as well to avoid this article is becoming a mess again. I think next time we should confront PMI personal at once, when the try to add the lastest development.

I agree about the Virtual project management all te way. My arguments to keep it in place are, that the subject seems notable enough, the initial editor has some talent and I want to give the editor some time to improve the article himself. If he doesn't respond in a week or so, I will probably improve the article myself. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 10:30, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Enterprise Asset Management

Keep up the good work reverting advertising links on the EAM page. They seem remarkably persistent!

Jschwa1 (talk) 08:08, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Your claim of vandalism on the Rackspace

Please find below the definition of Wikipedia Vandalism:

Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism. Even harmful edits that are not explicitly made in bad faith are not vandalism. For example, adding a controversial personal opinion to an article once is not vandalism; reinserting it despite multiple warnings is (however, edits/reverts over a content dispute are never vandalism, see WP:EW). Not all vandalism is obvious, nor are all massive or controversial changes vandalism. Careful thought may be needed to decide whether changes made are beneficial, detrimental but well-intended, or outright vandalism

First, are you aware that Rackspace's publicly known policy is to send root passwords via email? Second, doesn't the fact that you deleted the statement thinking it has to be vandalism prove the validy and importance of the statement? Thirdly, are you now or were you ever and employee, affiliate or have any vested interest in Rackspace? Fourth, don't you think the statement is of use to people who want to lean about Rackspace and therefore a good contribution to Wikipedia? Lastly, please explain why you think stating Rackspaces public policy is vandalism. Thank you for your time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.84.242.121 (talk) 22:25, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Color commentary such as "convoluted" and "claims security" sounds like your own personal conclusions. Silly slogans such as "Fanatically unsafe!" is simple vandalism. Please cease those types of edits. To answer your questions: 1. No; it should be simple for you to provide a reliable source to that effect. 2. No. 3. No. 4. Not really, we're not here to provide a platform for your own personal consumer advocacy. 5. As above. If I can help you with anything else, please feel free to ask. Kuru ^talk 22:47, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Thoughts?

I find myself in the middle of a low-intensity revert war from which I have been unable to extricate myself. User:Jonfriesen has been inserting links into Real Estate Board of Greater Vancouver for going on a couple of weeks. This links are inappropriate for the article and in most cases should be wikilinked. This actually started when user was inserting links to a particlar real estate agency into Buyer brokerage and has now carried over. The issue dows not appear to be eligible as a WP:3RR given that the user comes by once a week or so. Nor can we necessarily blacklist the links since several would be appropriate in articles about particular firms. Flowanda User:Robocoder and I have all weighed in and gotten no where with this individual. Any ideas? Even though the reverts are infrequent, edits on the article are so infrequent that the reversions are starting to predominate the edit history. TastyPoutine ^{talk (if you dare)} 22:10, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks Kuru....

for removing all my contributions....and not advising me after the first one... it is quite clear you just went through my (minuscule) list of contributions and decided to get rid of the lot..I assume that any contributions I make from now on will be subject to your scrutiny?

It is funny how the pages I contributed to still have citations to other commercial sites or sites who take paid advertising from 3rd parties (hence having value in traffic to that page), yet mine have disappeared. This makes me believe that you have taken a personal dislike to me, that you have decided that you think I'm one of these Wiki-abusers that you're so angered by, your actions and your personal statement on your page lead me to believe that some of your decisions were influenced by your obsession to clean up Wikipedia, and not with the level of information on those pages. I shall be sure to use another Wikipedia account from now on. :) Scratchweasel (talk) 14:11, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

If you'd prefer me to add a warning every time I revert an edit of yours, I'm happy to do so. One usually suffices. Kuru ^talk 23:43, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] 72.230.130.84 block

User: 72.230.130.84 was blocked for 31 hours, yet is back today vanadalising more pages. Just letting you know. Trista (unable to log in at work) 24.176.191.234 (talk) 01:59, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, seems to clearly be the same persistent disruptive editor; I've extended the block. Kuru ^talk 02:11, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

NEW as of 24 June 2009 -72.230.130.84 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse log • WHOIS • RDNS • trace • RBLs • http • block user • block log • Abuse Report) is right back vandalising the CSI: NY page again. I have reported this, but as thre is a backlog, I am hoping you may be able to react to this quicker. I also warned them, but see warning does little if any good with this user. (My own opinion) may be a much longer block will help?!? (permanent is what I would like to see as they have very few if any good edits - but I know that is a last resort. I bow to your judgement on what should be done) Cheers. Trista (user Triste Tierra - unable to log in at work) 24.176.191.234 (talk) 22:46, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] re warning

Hi Kuru

Just got a warning fom you re cash management posting. I was trying tohelp your many visitors, and have nothing to gain from them downloading our latest Cash Management Guide, which is free for all to view.

Sorry id I have missunderstood the Wiki rules, but the number of Student and others who contact me each day are usually very grateful foir this type of information.

Regards Robin86.151.169.64 (talk) 11:46, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, the link goes straight to a "buy copy" or registration page. You seem to be adding your link to multiple pages as well; please refrain from doing this and read through the links I provided your on our guidelines and policies. Thanks! Kuru ^talk 11:50, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] user:Babyboomer57

The user is continuing to add links to his site and not engage in conversation at all. What do you think? Blocking or putting the site on the meta blacklist? - Taxman ^Talk 11:25, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

I've left him a final warning and removed the latest batch of links. I usually only use the blacklist if he starts using multiple accounts and hits multiple articles after the primary account is blocked... Thanks! Kuru ^talk 11:56, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

That was productive. :( I've blocked the account; hopefully he will engage on the talk page. Kuru ^talk 12:11, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Heh. I didn't notice he had used a another account and some IP addresses to vandalize my user page starting yesterday too. Anyway hopefully this sticks since he knows we can blacklist it. - Taxman ^Talk 13:28, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Hello Kuru - Trista valiantly fighting the vandals again.

66.67.66.55 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse log • WHOIS • RDNS • trace • RBLs • http • block user • block log • Abuse Report)is once again engaging in changing CSI: New York's Lindsay Monroe to Lindsay Messer, even though there is no citation, has been warned numerous times, and has even been blocked for violating 3RR. Others have reverted their edits before I could act, but I have no doubt they will be back in a few hours when they think nobody is paying attention. Reporting does little good, as you know unless they have edited in the last 45 seconds - ANI will do nothing. May I request assistance from you? I appreciate anything (stern warnings, blocks if necessary, etc) you are able to do. Cheers, Trista (User Triste Tierra - not able to log in at work) 24.176.191.234 (talk) 17:47, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Kuru - I reported this person, but another admin labelled it "malformed". Does that really mean "you didn't do it right, so I'm ignoring it."? Please understand it is sometimes difficult to get every little thing right on Wikipedia - and even though I realize reporting people is not really easy to prevent abuse of the process, this attitude from an admin makes people like myself who are trying to do the right thing want to give up entirely. Thank you for all your assistance. Trista (User Triste Tierra - cannot log in at work) 24.176.191.234 (talk) 16:17, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Pretty much - if you deviate from the format they're looking for, it will not be acted on. Sounds harsh, but I've watched that notice board myself in the past and it is very time consuming to research ambiguous requests and people are very hostile if you get it wrong. Give me a sec and I'll look at this. Kuru ^talk 16:27, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

So, yes; reporting this to AIV is useless since this is a slow vandal. There is no overt 3rr violation, so even a properly formed request there would be of little use. He had a final warning for this obvious vandalism, but the only two edits after that were fairly trivial. If he does anything blatant again, let me know and I'll block him for an extended period since it's clearly the same person at that IP. Thanks for keeping an eye on those articles. Kuru ^talk 16:35, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

THANK YOU for not biting me for not understanding how to get the edit numbers in there. Almost every other admin has been alright on this issue. This particular one seems to be a stickler for Wikipedia rules as interpreted by him. Trista 24.176.191.234 (talk) 16:37, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Why this website getting special favours from you ?

Regarding Retirement_Planning Page of wiki

You deleted a website from external links that I added, on the pretext that it is promotional content ,has Google ads etc.

If this is the parameter than how superretirementplans.com meets those standards as it is filled with all kinds of ads,the content is very low and the website has very low ranking in google .In fact the website is made purely for advertisements and affiliate marketing.

I don't understand why you kept that link in the external ,is this website immune to wiki policies or you personally have some liking for this website ? Boomer577 (talk) 04:48, 27 June 2009 (UTC)boomer577

As previously mentioned, I'd be delighted to review any other links you spot that do not comply with our external link guidelines. That, of course, has nothing to do with the link you spammed. Thanks. Kuru ^talk 11:59, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] listing 'online database'

Hi Kuru, If you could look at this link and see if you think it is appropriate to to add to the list of Online Databases: http://younicycle.com. It is an online SaaS Suite that allows users to create within their Schema, their own db with as many Tables as they need. A wysywig query editor is also built in for left, right, full, inner joins, expressions, etc.

I thought I'd ask - before I add it - and it gets deleted. Thanks. Hemmahemma (talk) 15:18, 28 June 2009 (UTC)Hemmahemma

[edit] Microsoft Dynamics NAV

Hi, you protected this page back in February due to spamming, but there is a new user on the talk page who wants to make good-faith edits to the page. I don't think it would hurt the page to unprotect it, so I'm asking you to do that. I can watch it myself to keep out any spam. ThemFromSpace 20:15, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the heads up - I seldom semi-protect indefinitely; it must have been in error. I've unprotected it. Kuru ^talk 03:06, 9 July 2009 (UTC)