User:Kuru/archive-41

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Happy New Year, Kuru!

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Help needed

Kuru I need help. I'm not good with the messaging on Wikipedia's UI and I'm really worried. I recently received this:

NOTICE OF INTENDED LITIGATION. On inspecting your recent contributions to wikipedia, we have determined that you have brought the site into disrepute. This kind of reputational damage to a world-leading website (and to one of the international community's most respected individuals/philanthropists) costs in excess of hundreds of thousands of US$ per year. We are therefore to commence legal proceedings against the operator of this IP immediately, and will be seeking a large sum in compensation, largerthan you can afford! Ha.

Jimbo Wales

I'm scared and confused right now. What's going on?

Ignore it; just a random troll. See here. Kuru (talk) 21:07, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
Thank you for your edits. Fixing Things 42824282 (talk) 07:38, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jimarey

Five or six years later, Jimarey is return as an IP 82.53.179.230 to focus on Chris Brown or others. 123.136.111.80 (talk) 00:57, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

regarding Draft:Dredging Corporation of India edit note

hi Kuru, I am trying to revamp the article which got deleted in its earlier avatar (for justified reasons though, no contest on that part). Could you please help me to understand the {{cn}} you put against the Trivia section. I found it interesting for reading so retained it and linked with the article. Your inputs will help gain knowledge into the past transactions and take a decision on retaining / altering it suitably. Devopam (talk) 03:37, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Certainly. Some other websites copy Wikipedia material and use it for their own purposes. This happens all the time, and is okay as long as they add the proper attribution. The site you used as a reference ("everything.explained.today") is one such mirror. It copied the material from here before the article was deleted. You cannot use it as a source, since you are basically self-referencing. You are, of course, free to use other sources as long as they meet our policy on reliable sourcing. Kuru (talk) 03:43, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

You've got mail

Mail-message-new.svg
Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Destiny Leo (talk) 07:05, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

I have no e-mail from you. Kuru (talk) 12:22, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Texas flag

I tried to add a 'similar' flag reference to the 'Acadian' flag... And I see comments how it was poorly worded and 'did not cite references' . Well not being a wiki editing expert - and only a lowly exec of one of the worlds largest companies, I was not overly familiar with the format requirements in how to 'properly' format I guess... And on references, I could not figure out how to format that per the standard as the instructions are archaic 'GML' type and while I apparently got that wrong, the reference was actually another wiki page of your own. And for the editor to say it was only similar in flag look is completely ridiculous as the flags are extremely similar... I would much more prefer a collaboration and assistance rather than an arrogant critique, then removal. Mrdoiron (talk) 14:02, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

The other editor's commentary is entirely correct. It may be harsh, but such is the nature of communications when you're limited to the written word and space constraints in an edit summary. We cannot source ourselves or our observations; this constitutes original research. I've attempted to go through the other items on that list and provide reliable sources that specific support the claims in the section; in this case, an acceptable source that specifically makes the connection between the two flags. In some cases, this was easy to find. In others, I could not find anything. You may want to start by looking at the edits I made and follow the example, or you can join the discussion on the article's talk page here to lay out your sources. Alternatively, if you have specific policy questions, I'm happy to help. Kuru (talk) 15:57, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Liz Fraser

Hi Karu, Although not the author of the article Liz Fraser I have added several references and citations in order to try and satisfy the following bio criteria. "This biographical article needs additional citations for verification. Please help by adding reliable sources. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous or harmful. (April 2010)". I was wondering how can that notice be removed now I've added sources as requested? I can't see how to do that by editing her page. Regards, Alfshire (talk) 12:23, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes, the article was largely unreferenced before your edits in late January. I would say that your additions have addressed the concerns and that the tag can be removed. Kuru (talk) 12:50, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Don't look now

Hi, I am the creator of the Don't look now wikipedia page and the person who left the last reference, What was your reason for removing it?

Davidgoodheart

America.pink is a poor quality copy of wikipedia pages, and not suitable as a reliable source. See here and WP:MIRROR for more info. Kuru (talk) 04:03, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello again..

Hello there and real sorry for bothering you again (please bear with me, I'm too curious). I've been following WP:OP for some time now and I've learned a lot since then and I've a fair knowledge on open proxies. That aside, my question to you is regarding this request. I see there is a squid proxy operating on port 443. I tried connecting and I got the error, The page you are trying to view cannot be shown because the authenticity of the received data could not be verified. What is happening here? How did you connect and how did you know that was a zenmate proxy? Thanks in advance and regards—UY Scuti Talk 15:33, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Connecting usually only works on wide open proxies. Use a scanner like Nmap. In this case, the service scan identified "ZenMate/1.5.0" as the service, with explicit references to ZenMate in the ssl-cert and the http-title. This was the same pattern for another IP used on the same article. Many of the usual VPNs are pretty open about being an exit node - they only care that the original IP is masked, not that it is unidentifiable as a proxy (i'm guessing). Kuru (talk) 00:54, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Mirror text from cite book on I Kissed a Girl

<ref>{{cite book|first= C. |last= Duthel |year= 2012 |edition= 1st |title= [[Katy Perry - The Teenage Dream]] |publisher= [[Lulu.com]] |page= 33 |isbn= 978-1-4710-9245-9 |quote= "I Kissed a Girl" is a pop-rock and electropop song with a length of three minutes. The song contains influences of New Wave and runs through a throbbing beat and an organic instrumental thump, according to About.com's Bill Lamb.}}

Or a copied to Google Books.

Is the quote text is really came from a mirror from Wikipedia, or any blogs? 123.136.106.127 (talk) 14:31, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Before even looking at the origin of the text, I would note lulu.com is a self-publishing platform and not an acceptable WP:RS. A quick glance at some of the material shows that it was copied wholesale from various other sites, and not in any way an acceptable source. Kuru (talk) 14:46, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Comparison Table

Hey Kuru,

I would like to discuss the edit of the Comparison_of_time-tracking_software page. It was noted that their was not a page for Timeless Time & Expense. Can you explain?

Thanks Pdmead0 (talk) 21:22, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Certainly; thanks for asking. All lists in Wikipedia have inclusion criteria. In some cases, it's pretty easy: a list of former presidents of the United States establishes the criteria simply by existing. There's a very small number of people who fit that bill, and we can include all of them easily, and it's obvious who is or is not a former president. No problem. For other lists, it is much more difficult. Take the "list of companies of the United States". There are millions of them. What does "of the US" mean: headquartered or present in the country? Current companies or defunct ones? Such a list simply can't be maintained. So criteria for inclusion are set.
This list is even worse; it's one of those "comparison" lists which includes a ton of detail about every list item. You really need to have reliable sourcing for every element in there, preferably third party sourcing, and it's almost impossible to maintain it again. Also, what is the threshold for inclusion? I could whip up a neat excel spreadsheet and slap a website together in a few hours. Should that be included? Of the hundreds of time tracking products, where does one draw the line? In this case, it appears it was settled that the criteria is simply "is there an existing Wikipedia article dedicated to the software"? If you edit the article, as you did, there is a notice at the top of the page:
"Please note: IF YOU DON'T PAY ATTENTION TO THIS MESSAGE, YOUR EDIT WILL BE ROLLED BACK WITHOUT WARNING. Only place entries here that are links to actual Wikipedia articles about notable time-tracking software. External links, redlinks, substubs, non-notable sites or sites that are not time-tracking software will be removed. If you have questions, use the talk page. Please try to keep entries in alphabetical order. Adding unnecessary links or text to any other section (such as the "References" section) will also be removed."
Frankly, these articles tend to turn into spam magnets if the inclusion criteria is not pretty solid. It most cases, it's really, really easy to construct an article which meets WP:NSOFT. I hope this helps, if I can provide more info I will. Kuru (talk) 00:09, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
And after typing all that up, I just noticed that you already did create an article, you just miss-linked it. Crap. I'll move your article to the correctly capitalized name and revert myself at the list. My apologies and know that I have been punished by typing up that mini-essay above. Kuru (talk) 00:12, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
All fixed; again, my apologies. Kuru (talk) 00:15, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Deleting Citation

How could you delete source from List of people from Brahmanbaria. What kind of stupidity is that? Dont do it again Bangla1234 (talk

As noted in the edit summary, the site "Revolvy" copies content from Wikipedia (note the "Content from Wikipedia" link at the bottom of the article, which makes this mirror fairly easy to spot). This may not be used as a reference for reasons that seem obvious. You can read more about this at WP:MIRROR or my own notes here. Despite your warning, I will indeed remove this source if you add it again. If you feel this is "stupid", you can always contest it at WP:RSN - I would wish you the best of luck with that. Kuru (talk) 12:55, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Reply to your note

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Kuru. You have new messages at Darranc's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

77.47.80.202

Thanks for blocking this IP address. Could you please consider also blocking 2001:4C50:19F:9C00:11BD:D1CC:C8C8:EE65, another IP which is obviously being used by the same individual? That IP is edit warring at the same pages as 77.47.80.202. Thank you. Deli nk (talk) 18:54, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Looking at it; history seems to go back a little farther, so digging into that. My usual preference is to block the primary IP and then the others if they are used again (as block evasion). Kuru (talk) 19:12, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
OK, I understand. Deli nk (talk) 19:17, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
@Deli nk:, after looking at the history of both IPs and their self-professed predecessors, this is clearly Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Best known for IP editing from yet another location. I've blocked both IPs for a longer period. As he is community banned, you can revert on sight. Kuru (talk) 19:45, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Blocked editor part 2 (maybe part 25)

Hi Kuru, Yesterday you blocked [2001:4C50:19F:9C00:9199:E297:E0BC:F1D]. Today that person is back as [2001:4C50:19F:9C00:29C4:B8A4:FE0C:991A]. I suspect this person might possibly be a sock of a 20+ time permanently blocked User:DegenFarang. 2005 (talk) 16:49, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Will look at it, but it looked a lot more like Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Best known for IP than your old friend. Kuru (talk) 21:28, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
Okay, thanks, but here is another one 2001:4C50:19F:9C00:14C7:5439:D452:2E1C. 2005 (talk) 02:06, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

User now at AE

Please see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Result concerning Beautifulpeoplelikeyou. You may have some familiarity with this case because you blocked this user for edit warring on March 14 on Electronic harassment. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 13:49, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Was looking in to it. I've asked him a follow up on his talk page to see if he wants to be transparent; this does not appear to be his first rodeo. Kuru (talk) 23:44, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Promotional editsd

Hi Kuru, thank you for the message. I do not fully agree with your reasoning. The contribution gives a lot of prominence to US based robo-advisor, very much neglecting the existence of its European counter-parties. It is therefore that I added the link, in order to provide the reader with a source of possible service providers outside the US. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnDoeBock (talkcontribs) 17:40, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

It's not a WP:RS. It does not explicitly support the preceding comment, not does it even need to be there as the material is already sourced. It also appears to be your site. Use the article's talk page to discuss addition if you must, but this just appears to be a lazy attempt at promoting your site. Kuru (talk) 17:47, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

References

Hi, Are you sure this is copied material and can you find any better sources?

Davidgoodheart

Yes, I'm sure. I really don't have any intention of doing any research for wrestling articles. Sorry; if the claim cannot be sourced then simply remove it. Kuru (talk) 03:06, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Jack Tretton

Hello Kuru, a few days ago you made a revision to Jack Tretton regarding an unsourced nickname, with the explanation that it does not appear to be in common use by the subject. I would appreciate it if you would offer your opinion on a discussion at the talk page regarding this subject. Thank you. Trut-h-urts man (TC) 21:10, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

done. Kuru (talk) 11:11, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Noe Zhordania

Hello,

I have been notified that I am using the liquidsearch.com site as a source, however, I would like to outline that I am translating the source by myself and verifying the correctness of the information in different books ( which are indicated accordingly in the reference section).

Please let me know where I have used it , so I will modify it accordingly.

Kind regards,

Nanaantidze (talk) 07:12, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

I've removed the link three times in the last month: here, here, and here. The request was for you to not use the link as a reference in the future. Kuru (talk) 11:12, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Risk Register Reference

Forgive any formatting/etc issues - I'm not 100% familiar with wiki syntax or talk etiquette.

Looking at your edit is it better to have no reference over what's considered a poor one? The site that was linked looks to be down right now - not sure if that's a temporary thing or not so this might be a moot point. I was the one who wrote the linked article and added it to the page - I didn't see WP:SELFSOURCE until I saw your comment about WP:RS but I thought I had checked other articles to see if it was okay (if I recall I was in a chat room and asked). Anyways - just trying to learn so I don't make this mistake in the future. :)

Ackis (talk) 14:19, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Primarily it's the WP:USERGENERATED section; this appears to be a group blog, with no editorial control. Yes, if the reference does not meet WP:RS, it's better to have none at all. If the material cannot be sourced, then it should be removed. Kuru (talk) 01:46, 1 April 2016 (UTC)