Yes, iNaturalist mirrors Wikipedia articles, but their use of the common name Keever's onion predates my creation of the stub on Allium keeverae. Abductive (reasoning) 18:09, 4 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Abductive: Man, that is a fast mirror - I had not noticed you had created the article same day. The rest of the material is still WP:UGC, no? I was working from this conversation from last year, but happy to stop if something has changed since then. Sam Kuru (talk) 18:35, 4 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sometimes an article I create appears on iNat in seconds. And they do a dump from Wikipedia at least weekly to round up any strays. As for its reliablity, I feel that its raw observation data is unusable, and other sources are available for taxonomy, but common names appear to be controlled editorially and other sources are hard to find. Abductive (reasoning) 18:45, 4 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I see your point, the prior discussion linked from last year did not agree with that, but this is not my area of expertise. I'm slowly going through the links for that site, but will defer on common name claims vs. material sourced to mirrors or user-generated content. Sam Kuru (talk) 20:14, 4 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cool. I will try to avoid using iNat as a source going forward. I found a more authoritative source on the common name for this one. Abductive (reasoning) 21:23, 4 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Kuru. I would like to know why my page about (Flamingo) https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Albert_Aretz&action=edit&redlink=1 was deleted. Flamingo is a widely known youtuber who has over 11 million subscribers on YouTube. I’ve seen Minecraft YouTubers like TommyInnit have their page on Wikipedia, but why not (Flamingo)? People would love to know more about their favorite youtuber and (Flamingo) is widely regarded as most people’s favorite youtuber. Please redo this deletion if you can. Thanks, Angelzaed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angelzaed (talk • contribs) 21:31, 4 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It was a completely unsourced biography, laden with vague, informal puffery like "Outside of recording, he's a good guy" and "Albert can be seen rocking the shaggy haircut in real life". Frankly, the entire thing read like a fan page; that's just not what this site is. Some of the negative unsourced content also falls afoul of our policy on biographies of living persons. You can start again in the draft space (here), just make sure every part of it is sourced to reliable sources, and avoid the gossip and fan page material. Sam Kuru (talk) 22:23, 4 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Kuru, I saw the changes you made to the draft. Thank you for the help. Afimaame (talk) 01:35, 9 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Kuru could kindly look at my article and give constructive review. I would very much appreciate that thanks

My article is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CW8hkx2AZY&ab_channel=AhmedFitness 119.73.117.196 (talk) 06:14, 28 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

sorry the above post was not the link to the article, but this one is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Raimond_Magomedaliev

Apologies for the dumb mistake i made. Anyways plz review my article 119.73.117.196 (talk) 06:16, 28 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm not really in to the topic, but you've tagged the article for review correctly, and a reviewer will be along shortly to assess. Sam Kuru (talk) 11:17, 28 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Kuru, I'm withdrawing my question. I figured it out.Ghamilton5000 (talk) 18:49, 3 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for revising the unreliable source on last paragraph on marriage for "Family" in the Emmanuel Iwuanyanwu entry. I have now added three reliable sources for that information. Encomium Magazine, Business Hallmark, and The Free Library. Obinnanduka (talk) 05:07, 9 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Kuru,

I reverted a contribution that I did, and you deleted. It is not self publish material, I thought that it is a good overview for 'erdoganism' in a larger context. Thank you for your supervisions. You do a great job! Ashmole1652 (talk) 08:39, 15 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Asmole1652: As noted, it's an open blogging platform that accepts any submission with no editorial control. The blogger is labeled as a "self media writer" and there is a massive disclaimer at the bottom of the article which outlines that this is user-generated material. Of course, you could just read the article, which is littered with grammatical errors and written like a high school term paper. I've removed the "reference" for you again. Sam Kuru (talk) 21:58, 15 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Good day @Kuru. Thank you for making some notes on the page Dedert Corporation which I submitted. I have made suggested improvements, and with the contribution of other editors, the advertising content of the article have been toned down. Could you spare a moment to to take a second look? RazaqDesigner (talk) 14:40, 20 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Need much better sourcing. I commented at the AFD. Sam Kuru (talk) 19:54, 20 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for helping and pointing out errors from other contributors in a respectful way.

Connor W (talk) 18:13, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Kuru,

thank you for your edits ( Draft:Sanjay Mathur). I was looking for an other source (13) but couldn't find the information anywhere else listed. I can simply delete the sentence otherwise. Since I am not an expert on writing Wikipedia articles I would highly appreciate a short feedback from your side on how to move forward.

Thank you so much

Wildkirsche90 (talk) 13:57, 25 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Wildkirsche90: I just saw the one source in a recurring search I do; prabook is a fairly deceptive scraper that copies material from other websites without any attribution (even from Wikipedia on occasion, although that's obviously not the case here). We have pretty strict sourcing requirements on biographies of living persons, so there really needs to be a reliable source for person background material like that. I usually do a scan of articles when I touch a draft, and I didn't see anything else that looked out of place. Thank you for your contributions! Sam Kuru (talk) 03:16, 26 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks a lot for your fast answer. If there is anything I can do in the meantime to improve the article, I would be very to do so. Wildkirsche90 (talk) 10:54, 26 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Kuru

Please can you send me the draft article I submitted to Wikipedia about Natalie Petouhoff? You did a rapid deletion on it around Monday May 8th. Please let me know if you need any other information from me.

Thanks in advance, Judith UnderTheRedwoods (talk) 09:29, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, sorry to bother you, I know you're busy and you've continually been a great help. I wanted to let you know, in case you haven't seen already, that I've requested a change to the PRSA page, specifically the second paragraph in "Services," to update the Strategies & Tactics information, and I have included third party sources. I look forward to your reviewing this, and thank you again for your continuous help.

Rod Granger Rhdg1 (talk) 18:45, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Rhdg1: Will take a look at it over the weekend. Sam Kuru (talk) 03:58, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I wanted to check in to see if you have had a chance to review my request regarding updating the information on Strategies & Tactics. Let me know when you have a chance, and thanks again for your help.

Rod Granger

Rhdg1 (talk) 13:52, 12 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, just wanted to touch base again. Would it be easier if I made the suggested edits and then you reviewed the changes? I of course want to follow protocol, as I always have, but would also like to get these changes made.

Thanks again for your help

Rhdg1 (talk) 14:44, 20 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Rod Granger Rhdg1 (talk) 14:44, 20 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, checking in again to see if you've had a chance to review my request regarding updating the information on Strategies & Tactics. Would it work if I made the changes and then had you review it that way? Please let me know the best way to proceed on this.

Thanks,

Rod

Rhdg1 (talk) Rhdg1 (talk) 17:04, 10 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, on June 2 you said you would take a look at my request over the weekend. Since then I have left numerous messages trying to follow up and have not received a response to any of them. Can you let me know if you've been receiving these messages, and what else I can do to get a response?

Thank you.

Rod

Rhdg1 (talk) Rhdg1 (talk) 20:36, 30 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You blocked this editor a little over a year ago for excessive use of poor quality sources. It looks like in their latest unblock request, they've made a pretty decent effort to understand how to evaluate the reliability of a reference. Given that, would you have any objection to unblocking them? Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 03:43, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Seraphimblade: It's been a year, no harm in seeing if anything took. Sam Kuru (talk) 03:57, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

	The No Spam Barnstar
	For your anti-spam efforts today. I dream of horses (Contribs) (Talk) 03:55, 3 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you. Miles to go, I fear. Sam Kuru (talk) 16:35, 3 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, Kuru. As you may have noticed, this article has undergone extensive editing by two single-purpose accounts (one of which alleges themself to be Maharaj). Realnoise has previously been advised on their talk page back in January to avoid COI editing, and I have escalated this further by warning them against undisclosed paid editing. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 10:18, 3 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ah, I did not notice. I was just chasing that particular source. Will bookmark the page to keep tabs. Sam Kuru (talk) 16:36, 3 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, Kuru. I hope this message finds you well. I am writing to request a review of my draft article titled Draft:Musa_Muhammed_Olayinka I have worked diligently on this draft and believe it is ready for evaluation and potential publication as a Wikipedia article. The draft provides a comprehensive overview of the subject matter, highlighting their accomplishments, contributions, and significance in their field. I have included reliable sources to support the information presented in the article, ensuring its compliance with Wikipedia's content guidelines. I would greatly appreciate it if an administrator could spare some time to review my draft and provide feedback or guidance on any improvements that could be made. Your expertise and input would be invaluable in helping me shape the article to meet Wikipedia's standards. Thank you in advance for your assistance. I look forward to hearing from you soon. Best regards Sammarkk (talk) 18:22, 10 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'll look at it in full when I have more time. On a quick glance, you will need to source everything to reliable sources - no silly press releases or fake SEO blogs. I'm not sure what the notability claim is? Those are self-published books. Sam Kuru (talk) 11:35, 11 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

All is updated and rewrite sir Sammarkk (talk) 13:56, 11 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Kuru Hope you don't forget sir

Draft:Musa_Muhammed_Olayinka Sammarkk (talk) 11:26, 13 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I reviewed it again; you've again used advertorials and obvious silly PR. Additionally, you re-added fake sources (blackhat PR/SEO blogs that pretend to be news sites). I've deleted the article as promotional. It would be best if you concentrate on other topics until you have a feel for what constitutes reliable sourcing.Sam Kuru (talk) 00:23, 14 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for the edit you made on Johnel. Please assist in reviewing it. Adambenji (talk) 19:45, 16 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Kuru, I was editing an article about The New Life Mission (Draft:About The New Life Mission) and realized that it had been deleted while publishing. Can you please clarify the exact issue and how it can be resolved. Thank you. Being born again according to the scriptures (talk) 12:09, 21 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The material was promotional adcopy for a religious institution. Text such as "renowned for its generous distribution of gospel books worldwide" and other puffery is not acceptable here. The material needs to be completely neutral and encyclopedic, and sourced to reliable third-party sources. It is also best practice to identify your conflict of interests. Thanks. Sam Kuru (talk) 12:29, 21 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Okay. noted. Will remove the promotional terms and include more third party sources to make sure the article is neutral. Thank you. Being born again according to the scriptures (talk) 12:36, 21 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Kuru, can you let me know why the draft which is still under development was deleted? The link is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:The_gospel_of_the_water_and_the_Spirit, I have not even submitted it for review but you deleted it with reason that it contains unambiguous advertisement or promotion. Can a draft under development be deleted? BluePurpleScarlet (talk) 18:16, 21 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Same as the section above; please consult with your friend. Sam Kuru (talk) 18:29, 21 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can a draft under development be deleted? BluePurpleScarlet (talk) 18:34, 21 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If it's unambiguous adcopy for your institution/sect, then sure. As above, neutral material that does not promote your church, supported by solid, reliable sources would be a good start. Sam Kuru (talk) 18:44, 21 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am knew here and appreciate the input- please forgive any inappropriate means or methods. The reason I proposed that change is because there is no time constraint on 3PL- I have managed and started 3PL operations and often contracts may only be for a day or so.

Cheers!

Von VonZipper412 (talk) 16:42, 22 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I've reached out several times and haven't heard back (I know you're busy and you've continually been a great help), but wanted to let you know again that I've requested a change to the PRSA page, specifically the second paragraph in "Services," to update the Strategies & Tactics information, and I have included third party sources. I look forward to your reviewing this, and thank you again for your continuous help. I'm happy to make the edit myself and then have you review it if you think that would work.

Rod Granger Rhdg1 (talk) 17:41, 12 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Aw shucks...I was enjoying removing the egregious bubbles of guff from this. Article would have ended up as a very short para....TheLongTone (talk) 14:05, 13 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@TheLongTone: Yup, that was over-the-top. I did copy "vast bubbles of vainglorious guff" into my list of rotating edit summaries for "this article is a hot mess". Sam Kuru (talk) 14:19, 13 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Glad to be of service!TheLongTone (talk) 14:38, 15 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can you explain why you consider this a "promotional addition"? The table simply listed the sites with an explanation. There were no hyperlinks to the sites. Google doesn't have any references to these sites and Wikipedia fails also because it lacks any information about them. Your removal of the table is analogous to removing a discography from an artist's Wikipedia page. Eugbug (talk) 10:18, 16 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It wasn't for a lack of trying; the editor attemted to spam 20+ blacklisted links, and originally just did a cut&paste of the adcopy from the site. The edit removed sourced content and added unsourced puffery like "The platform celebrates the 'everyday expert' and seeks to create a community where authors and readers can discover and create original, in-depth, useful, media-rich pages on topics they are passionate about" and "HubPages employs a full-time team of editors and moderators who work with authors to make the content on the HubPages Network the best it can be." Please let me know if you have any other questions. Sam Kuru (talk) 18:43, 16 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What do you mean by "blacklisted links"? Who blacklisted them? Eugbug (talk) 14:11, 17 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See Wikipedia:Spam blacklist. Sam Kuru (talk) 16:22, 17 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I presume the sites can still be cited in the references? 109.79.29.219 (talk) 12:23, 19 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The About Us page and Editorial Policy on HubPages both back up the "unsourced puffery" you referenced, but I was unable to list them as sources since all HubPages domains are blacklisted. Many other companies on Wikipedia have robust sections detailing every feature of their site/business/products/etc. (e.g., YouTube#Services or List of Ford vehicles). Why is a table listing which sites are in the HubPages network and what topics they cover considered a "promotional addition"? Rox Robbins (talk) 15:56, 17 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See response above, you cannot use the site itself to support your adcopy. third-party, reliable and neutral sources, please. Thanks. Sam Kuru (talk) 16:22, 17 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The "Self-published and questionable sources as sources on themselves" section seems to indicate that in certain cases, it is permissible to use these types of sources ("may be used as sources of information about themselves, especially in articles about themselves"). If that isn't the case here, can you explain why? Can you also explain why the table was removed? Rox Robbins (talk) 17:31, 17 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Certainly they can; for non-controversial statements of fact. "Was opened in Seattle in 1905" is likely fine, although we'd still prefer non-primary sourcing. "...create original, in-depth, useful, media-rich pages on topics they are passionate about" is silly marketing, and no reliable source would ever state that. Given the business model there, it would be best to stick to third-party rock solid sources throughout and tread carefully. You may want to also read WP:COI. Sam Kuru (talk) 17:51, 17 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What part of describing the author base and saying that there are editors working on the site is controversial? The following are the criteria listed in that section, which seem to be met:

1. The material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim.
2. It does not involve claims about third parties (such as people, organizations, or other entities).
3. It does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject.
4. There is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity.
5. The Wikipedia article is not based primarily on such sources.

Why was the table removed? Rox Robbins (talk) 21:00, 17 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I would prefer to focus on one thing at a time, in order to avoid the typical shifting goalposts from COI editors. Do you understand why your replacement of the neutral introduction and other materials were inappropriate? Or do you feel that copying the marketing gibberish directly from the site describing the "author base and saying that there are editors working on the site" might actually be not just controversial, but absurdly promotional? Sam Kuru (talk) 21:13, 17 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Proposed sources:

- editorial team https://seochatter.com/medium-alternatives/

- author base https://beebom.com/medium-alternatives/ Rox Robbins (talk) 22:52, 17 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Kuru, if you're unable to confirm whether those sources are acceptable, let's circle back to the table. Why was that removed? Rox Robbins (talk) 19:45, 21 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Apologies, I missed the last message above. Seochatter looks like a wordpress blog that is mainly the work of one person - the post is from a group account that does not identify the author. The content is generally written neutrally with some editorial comments. Beebom looks much better as a source as there are clear editors on staff, a cursory editorial policy is indicated, and the author is named and works as a technical writer. I don't know what specifically you're trying to use it to source, though. You can't use this to source the material you originally tried to add, but could use it to source neutral additions. I would suggest doing two things: put a note on your page identifying your WP:COI, then use the article's talk page to propose a specific addition, with clear sourcing. Sam Kuru (talk) 20:21, 21 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello. I was just wondering what you meant by "rmv reference to clearly identified wikipedia mirror per WP:CIRCULAR" on the Entertainments National Service Association article? I am in the process of writing the biography of Muriel Lanchester, one half of the Lanchester Marionettes, together with Waldo Lanchester. I'm curious why you removed their details from the list of entertainers for ENSA? Is it because there needs to be an article specifically about the Lanchester Marionettes? Thanks BJCHK (talk) 19:47, 18 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As noted, the source you included copies material from Wikipedia and is not a reliable source. If you feel the entries to that generally sourced list are common and intuitive, then just re-add, but the preference would be to maintain sourcing on the material. Sam Kuru (talk) 19:53, 18 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Kuru. I noticed you reverted a redirect. Marshmallo is a safety-focused dating app that I think bears mentioning given there aren't dating apps that check ID, selfies and profile pictures to prevent catfishing. It is spelled differently than Marshmello. I think we should undo your reverted redirect. --Yesukhan (talk) 17:27, 20 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Yesukhan: It did not look even remotely notable, there were no sources, and it appeared promotional; I would suggest creating a draft first and get assistance in creating a viable article. Sam Kuru (talk) 17:35, 20 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Kuru can you retrieve Superior Codelabs Page as its an IT Services & Consulting Company in Bangalore. Robot26072001 (talk) 06:40, 21 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, it was complete unsourced spam and puffery. There's an older version that can be restored as a stub to get you started, if you'd like. Sam Kuru (talk) 11:01, 21 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey Kuru, I saw the image from an article I worked on (Kevin Gruft) got removed. I asked the musician if he could upload a free image to Commons and he kindly did, I specified that he had to own its copyright. Was wondering how could he prove this. Thanks! Loganmac (talk) 15:34, 25 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There are a few option enumerated at Wikipedia:DONATEIMAGE. Since the image was previously published under another license, we'd need proof that they are the actual person who owns the copyright and that they are re-releasing it under a compatible license. So, tag the image with the license somewhere official, or contact UTRS basically. Sam Kuru (talk) 15:49, 25 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Would this suffice? https://twitter.com/kthrash/status/1683916887783243777 or maybe if he replied below with the license text? Loganmac (talk) 22:18, 25 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not clear; does not seem to state a license and I'm really not sure on the state of verifiability of Twitter accounts these days. I mean "X" accounts or whatever fever dream Elon is having this week. It would be a good idea to consult with the experts over on Commons before asking the esteemed Mr. Thrasher to jump through more hoops. They have a help desk here. Sam Kuru (talk) 00:02, 26 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Alright, thanks. I'm pretty sure he has linked to that account via verified profiles. --Loganmac (talk) 02:06, 27 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ya, sorry, Copyright law is fickle and complex. Usually best to use images you've created directly vs. previously published works. Sam Kuru (talk) 02:13, 27 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have nominated Cracker Barrel for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 16:03, 25 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey - in that particular instance, I don't disagree with your decline, since you had independently come to your own conclusion based on behaviour. Generally speaking though, I'd suggest that it's best to let another CU evaluate an unblock request on a CU block - partly because the blocking CU might have made a mistake in evaluating the CU data (it happens), but also because they will run another check and potentially discover any new accounts they've created since being blocked. Hope that makes sense, cheers Girth Summit _(blether) 12:05, 29 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks, I'm aware. As you note, in that rare instance, I'm 100% convinced that all of those accounts are either the exact same person, or possibly one other person coordinating. I have a long list of notes detailing the obscure spammed domains, technical connections between the sites, and consistent patterns in behavior. For that particular account, it was not just the one obscure domain they spammed, there were two others that were previously spammed by other accounts in the group.

I understand completely that checkuser data is tricky as hell and that sometimes the toolset is more like reading tea leaves, especially in certain geographical regions of the world, and that different checkusers may see different things. Thanks again for jumping in from just the AIV report. Sam Kuru (talk) 12:48, 29 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sure thing. Sounds like this is a recurring problem, so please do let me know if you think they've come back. Cheers Girth Summit _(blether) 13:36, 29 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm talking about S.A.L.E.M.: The Secret Archive of Legends, Enchantments, and Monsters. Its one of those indie animations, which I expected, back in 2021, would come out soon but it did not... Historyday01 (talk) 15:23, 31 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So what's the problem? is licensed under the same license as Wikipedia is? I don't see the problem. From newworldencyclopedia.org:

"New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

Apocalypse of Peter history

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

History of "Apocalypse of Peter"

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed."

New World Encyclopedia: About under Purpose:

"The New World Encyclopedia is intended for use by teachers and students who are drawn to the ease of use of Wikipedia, but are concerned about quality, consistency, and core values. New World Encyclopedia combines the great benefits of open source internet media with those of traditional and careful editorial supervision by scholars. Here we have the benefit of hyperlinks and greater detail found in on-line encyclopedias, combined with the traditional review of facts, grammar, and values."

Supervised by scholars as lot better than Wikipedia for quality and reliability. ;-)

It's written from a neutral point of view. Why didn't you check the talk page before reverting it?

From the Talk:Apocalypse of Peter:

"NEW content under the content section

I added some content from NWE is it okay its licensed under creative Commons attribution share-like? in fact they used a old version of this Wikipedia article to make it. Scroll down to see the license on New World Encyclopedia."

It's a way better than what is currently on Wikipedia for this article. with its licensing it would be compatible with Wikipedia. I don't see a violating any Wikipedia policies. Please explain?

Accoun1 (talk) 20:04, 5 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

We've had discussions about that particular site before; see this discussion at RSN. It's essentially a Wikipedia fork, and they often leave in large chunks of our original material. We obviously cannot use that to "resource" ourselves. Additionally, fact-based material re-written to be "more in line with" the Unification Church values and doctrines is not a good starting point. I would suggest better sourcing, otherwise please start a new discussion at WP:RSN. Sam Kuru (talk) 20:21, 5 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

O.k. Accoun1 (talk) 20:47, 5 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for your input on the Kalamazoo Kings. I would suggest you look at the editing requirement for Baseball Reference as it is not an open, editable Wiki. They have strict requirements for documentation support for any and all edits, data, and narratives. For baseball research, I would think it's an acceptable source. I added a source to confirm the BR statement regarding Fran Riordan, just to meet your editing requirements. Take a look at Baseball Reference as a source and their requirements. I'd be curious as to your view. --- Heathens87 (talk) 18:10, 21 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Heathens87: You're welcome. I've looked extensively. You can read the last consensus at WP:RSN here: Bullpen RSN. That discussion also contains links to prior discussions. Just looked at it again, and nothing has changed: anyone can get an account as it is an open editing wiki. I rarely saw strict sourcing on the articles there, and if there is sourcing, you can just use that. Sam Kuru (talk) 18:18, 21 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Interesting. That's referring to the BR Bullpen, a specific section of Baseball Reference. That helps. Thank you! Heathens87 (talk) 20:23, 21 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ah, maybe that's the confusion; BR is totally fine. The part of that site which is user-created (the Bullpen) is problematic. Sam Kuru (talk) 21:16, 21 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@DosileTakeover: I've modified the entry in my list. I'm still deeply concerned about the amount of abuse that's occurred on Wiki with the site, and all of the easy-to-find ads for 'guest posting' and paid placement. Will re-evaluate when I get time. Sam Kuru (talk) 23:05, 22 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Much appreciated, Kuru. I seriously took everything you mentioned in our last conversation last year and changed everything up. It was truthfully a good wakeup call. And anything that happened here on Wiki certainly wasn't my doing. I'm truly surprised at myself for getting this far in leaving you a message. I truthfully don't know how any of this works. Regardless, happy to work with you anyway I can. Feel free to reach out anytime. DosileTakeover (talk) 17:18, 23 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Actually, I don’t understand why I can’t use this link for GCLS:https://staging-gcls.site-ym.com/page/ABOUT-History

I’m sure there must be a reason, but it doesn’t seem to me to be a link to Wikipedia. What am I missing? V.F. Dodge (talk) 12:42, 23 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@V.F. Dodge: That's not one of the links I removed. Here are the four edits I have made to remove mirrors: [1], [2], [3], [4]. In each case, it's to remove 'en-academic.com/dic.nsf/enwiki/10134269', which is a copy of Golden Crown Literary Society from 2010. The site notes 'Wikipedia' at the top of the article, and credits the 'Wikipedia Foundation 2010' at the bottom of the page. While many sites mirror our content under our license terms, that one fails to do so and is essentially a copyright violation. Sam Kuru (talk) 13:25, 23 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think I understand. I’ll try to make things right later today. Thanks, 2601:483:5580:1A0:34A1:F3F6:DAB:9839 (talk) 13:30, 23 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just to check for later. Does this also need to be linked to sources other than Wikipedia? This was in the original page that I have been editing. Thanks:

In recent years, more than 300 titles from more than three dozen publishers (such as Alyson, Bedazzled Ink, Bella Books, Blue Feather, Bold Strokes Books, Carroll & Graf Publishers, Copper Canyon Press, Farrar Straus Giroux, Flashpoint Publications, Haworth Press, Intaglio, Launch Point Press, Sapphire Books, Spinsters Ink, St. Martin's Press and various university presses) have been nominated for consideration. V.F. Dodge (talk) 13:47, 23 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ideally, every statement is sourced to reliable, independent sources. Also, we seek to avoid using primary sources wherever possible. This means all of the links to the organization's web site need to be carefully evaluated; they can be used for sure, but if the primary material makes marketing claims or other puffery, then we usually cannot. For example, if a restaurant's site notes that they serve the "best coffee in Texas", our article can't say "restaurant X serves the best coffee in Texas" and source it to the site. In your example, I'd really want a good source for the claim - a summary in an article about the organization, etc. Sam Kuru (talk) 15:15, 23 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Something like this? https://www.pw.org/small_presses/bella_books V.F. Dodge (talk) 15:40, 23 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think the most current changes to the GCLS website are the best I can do. Maybe someone else can figure out what is needed if I didn't get it done correctly. Thanks for your help! Best, V.F. Dodge V.F. Dodge (talk) 18:48, 23 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey, thanks for catching that. I felt kind of skeptical about that, since it was another Encyclopedia online. The only reason I did include it was because it sourced a known author, that numerous other articles have referenced, in regards to Barrow. But I am still improving as time goes by; no more "quick and easy" routes w/ sources then. I'll do my best to find the author (I forgot his name offhand) somewhere else more reliable, if I can, to further substantiate its entry on the list. --Cinemaniac⁸⁶_{Dane_Cook_Hater_Extraordinaire} 15:29, 4 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See [5]. I can't figure out where the Academic.edu source about measuring photons from other dimensions, tunnels, etc. was added. I very much doubt you did it but what am I missing? Thanks. Doug Weller talk 12:24, 6 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Doug Weller: That was added by the sock account Totsmeimme (talk · contribs) in this edit. I removed the obvious garbage refs to opera and medium subsequent to that, but somehow missed the opportunity to remove the one purporting "energy photography" in the title. Sam Kuru (talk) 12:51, 6 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks. Not sure how I missed that. I've raised another one, an article in Face2Face Africa at RSN. So many bad sources. I noticed a discussion on some fringe claims about these pyramids on the Facebook group Fraudulent Archaeology Wall of Shame. Doug Weller talk 12:55, 6 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

i am not advertising the website this link direct related this article MRTECHMARK (talk) 11:49, 7 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's a garbage, one-month old job spam site with zero encyclopedic value. Do not add this link again. Sam Kuru (talk) 11:54, 7 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you Sam Kuru for your advice. Anita Bobasso is part of the history of Argentina singers from the 20 century ( she was born in 19 century). Back in time, there was not the kind of press and material available like we have now. Just a few newspapers and magazines, maybe radio and nothing else. Also they did not kept copies like they do today. BUT I was lucky to find several things in the internet ( a lot) from Europe archives, Brazil archives, google books and from the last 2 movies she did when she was 90 years old. please check the bio again and let me know. I believe I did a good job. Thank you again.!!!Alfredomaraw (talk) 20:01, 8 September 2023 (UTC)alfredo marawReply[reply]

I think my only edit there was to remove an obvious Wikipedia mirror. I just scanned it quickly again - if you're looking for feedback.

• Familysearch is usually user-generated material and is a generally unreliable source; might want to replace with something reliable. I can't immediately access the site, so not sure what's there.
• Wix is a hosting site/user-created page; it looks like you're just housing newspaper clips there. Cite the actual newspaper, not this site - you don't have to have a link - maybe just as a courtesy. Basically - just like you cited all the other old newspapers, except you're not required to have an internet-accessible link (it's just preferred, of course, since it's hard to track down old papers).
• the google books search result (currently #16) is not a good ref; need to replace with something specific. search results change over time, and drawing conclusions from a collection of random hits is WP:OR

Other than that, the rest looks good. I did not check the claims against the sources, really. My Spanish is rusty. Sam Kuru (talk) 20:18, 8 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Manjola Nallbani. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it needs more sources to establish notability. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Oaktree b (talk) 01:06, 10 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Kuru!

I noticed you recently deleted Rajesh Kumar Ram. I just want to bring Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rajesh56om to your attention, as it involves that article.

Cheers!

— Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 01:06, 10 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey, you just removed a tone of information typed up for MC David J. Why do you keep removing this information? Can you stop please? Quite a bit of time was spent writing up that and now its deleted for no reason. Booksourceman1001 (talk) 00:31, 11 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As I noted in my edit summaries and on your talk page - use reliable sources, not paid placement and SEO blogs. Sam Kuru (talk) 00:32, 11 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, Outlook (Indian magazine) is a reliable news source for Wikipedia. Isn't it? Admantine123 (talk) 13:26, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Outlook is working really hard to become an unreliable source. Several sections of their site run unmarked paid placement - essentially advertorials and brand media pass-throughs. Avoid "brand connect", or any of their "spotlight" material. I would be very careful evaluating any sources on that article - the subject appears to engage in a ton of PR and blackhat SEO. Sam Kuru (talk) 13:33, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Got it, basically i have written mostly biographies of politicians as of now, and never got reverted wherever i used outlook. But, will keep in mind about their spotlight material.-

Admantine123 (talk) 16:58, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Draft:Siddharth Sukhlal kushwaha was moved to draftspace by someone, who was very hurry. I was just expanding it. Moreover, many stub articles on politicians exist on Wikipedia. This subject qualifies WP:NPOL. He is an elected legislator at the state level. Can you please move it to mainspace. Admantine123 (talk) 19:32, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Kuru,

I get a notification that you have removed highly relevant external link from the Real estate investing,

The external link that I believe is highly valuable and related to this topic, It is very comprehensive and can be very beneficial who are interested in real estate/property investments.

Please reconsider the adding the this external link to the page: (removed)

Best GoodOldDaysUK (talk) 16:11, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Howdy. This appears to be a link to a company's content marketing blog. Given the broad topic, I'm sure you can find plenty of published material that is reliable and without adcopy. Sam Kuru (talk) 19:52, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I think you inadvertently removed this highly reliable source from article of an Indian politician. It is archived and from original website of Indian Parliament. Nothing can be more reliable than it. Admantine123 (talk) 16:32, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The original link was to a raw IP link not registered to the government, that did not resolve for me - nor did this person resolve through the current actual government URL. I'll check it again later tonight. Sam Kuru (talk) 19:55, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It is archived as of now. The government link becomes inaccessible after some time. Consider checking archived link, which i have restored. It contains all the stuff uploaded by Lok Sabha website after 2014 Indian General Election about the subject. Admantine123 (talk) 03:55, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

[6], here you will get archived profile of all the Members of Parliament of India of 16th Lok Sabha, constituted after 2014 general elections. All other sources about these legislators are taken from here only. Admantine123 (talk) 03:58, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello,

I want to edit this Wikipedia page but the page has protected status. I just wanted to know if I can do any edits at all on this page since I found some new information from reliable sources that would improve it.

Please Let me know.

Best regards,

Ricktheelectric Ricktheelectric (talk) 19:36, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just use the article's talk page to propose your edit. Make sure it is very specific and backed by very clear reliable sources. Fake sites like 'forbesnewyork' are obviously not acceptable. Sam Kuru (talk) 19:59, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Kuru, Thanks for taking time to cleanup and edit 'Chitra Gangadharan' page which I created. Also for pointing the DH newspaper source, which was a news article of their own football cup. It missed my eye.

Regarding the year she captained the country, the source was given in the tournaments and I brought it up where you placed 'citation needed'. Since it is from a reliable newspaper like Hindustan Times, hope it is ok.

thanks a lot. Davidindia (talk) 14:35, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not a problem; there are many reputable newspapers that are engaging in paid placement these days - at least Deccan Herald is up front about it. Some others are being a little shady about marking their advertorials. Sam Kuru (talk) 20:55, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you I will never do that again. YusufuAM (talk) 21:38, 27 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Chik, Syska these two are notable Companies of India, they just don't have wikipedia article. Sayeed2k (talk) 07:01, 30 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Great to hear that; let's create the articles for them first, then we can add them to company lists. Thanks. Sam Kuru (talk) 21:10, 1 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You're probably right about Prabook. I had my doubts about it but in this case to information seemed to be correct. I expect I can find better sources (for most of it I certainly can). Anyway, thanks for your correction. Athel cb (talk) 13:19, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks; Prabook is a long-running scam and we should probably block it at some point to avoid confusion. Much of their material is completely plagiarized, so those sources should exist somewhere. Sometimes its the "Who's who" type books if that helps. Sam Kuru (talk) 13:22, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Kuru. I wanted to ask why the page was deleted. I was hoping you'd make changes or suggestions as i was still hoping to make more edits on the page. Please, i'd appreciate your help. Thank you. Nuel Jr (talk) 18:35, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Nuel Jr 12th October, 2023Reply[reply]

There are numerous problems. Given that you're trying to create a biography, each fact needs to be sourced to reliable, third-party sources. You should not be adding puffery or marketing nonsense, like "...which has helped several young and aspiring professionals in the cybersecurity field to better understand the complex concepts" or "he helps include self-learners, ambitious individuals from diverse educational backgrounds and promotes diversity in the field". One of your prior drafts included links to a fake SEO blog, which you had creatively misspelled in order to circumvent our blocked links list. That type of link is typically a very bad sign. All of that makes it unambiguously promotional, and subjects it to quick deletion. Without those problems, you still have an individual that does not seem terribly notable - the single book mentioned is just a self-published amazon work. There is nothing notable about being a mentor or a "cybersecurity expert". Additionally, you have a serious conflict of interest, which appears to be blinding your attempts to write neutrally about this person. If you decide to recreate this article, please use the draft space here: Draft:Toluope A. Michael, but make sure to avoid the clearly promotional language, and clearly identify your COI on the draft's talk page. Sam Kuru (talk) 19:21, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank You Kuru. I'l revisit and make necessary adjustments as you've suggested. Highly appreciated. Nuel Jr (talk) 23:17, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey, kuru! I would like to know why the page "Draft:Shreyash Shandiliya" which I was creating got deleted from draft, it was yet to complete and publish. I was still working on it. Please let me know about it.

Thanks and Regards,

MSSC31 MSSC31 (talk) 08:35, 16 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Spam will be removed from anywhere. It was silly puffery sourced to paid placement advertorials, circular refs, and youtube, etc. Fun prose like "Renowned for his remarkable vocal range and musical versatility...", "His passion for nurturing emerging talent led him to mentor and guide young artists in the Indian music scene.", or "...diligently sought knowledge and information related to his passion from diverse sources" is a non-starter. Sam Kuru (talk) 10:39, 16 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Kuru, thank you for looking at my submission but I was a little confused as to why you think this contribution is a “paid placement”? Or why it is “seo”? Looking through people of interest in NJ, this was something I thought was an interesting addition to this page. Can you clarify further or let me know how I might edit to revert? Thanks again. MagoLass (talk) 11:37, 21 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@MagoLass: "Disrupt Magazine" is a vanity publication that accepts undisclosed advertorials and anonymous "guest posts", and that article is fairly obviously one of them. The link is, by no measure, a reliable source. Please be more cautious when sourcing biographies of living persons, especially ones that are protected from prior abused. If you would like to re-add the material, find a carefully evaluated and reliable source - be aware it may be more difficult for subjects that have engaged in extensive PR activities. Sam Kuru (talk) 13:05, 21 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I just noticed your history in this and see what you were referring to now. I went ahead and got those sources out of there, and cleaned it up. There were two magazines in what was removed. I figured those were reputable but I removed them and it's updated. Thanks! Anonamistad (talk) 15:32, 21 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

why have you deleted all the facts which I had added on IDBI Bank awards recognition list. All the facts where taken from IDBI's owned websites and I myself currently working in the organization. kindly reverse it as soon as possible. it's my humble request to you. if you have any doubts you yourself can cross check it out whether it's wright or wrong. Dipak8961 (talk) 22:14, 24 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As noted in my edit summary, it would be best to source these to third party reliable sources. Most industry awards these days are paid marketing gimmicks; I'm really not clear on how any of that junk is notable. Sam Kuru (talk) 22:31, 24 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Have a look at this. Thanks. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:57, 27 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hard to interpret his complaint about Hancock on the talk page is anything else. Lying about who you are is stupid but also disruptive. Doug Weller talk 08:44, 1 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

From his talk page: "@Doug Weller (A/CU/OS)I'll swing by your place sometime this week and provide you with my credentials in person, is that okay? TheOminousDarkness (talk) 05:33, 2 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Doug WellerLet me clarify my previous statement: I'll be more than happy to meet you in a public setting, and provide you with any documentation you would like to see. Or, I can email or fax it to you. TheOminousDarkness (talk) 06:52, 2 November 2023 (UTC" How can he say that without kn owing where I live? He's said he'll email me. Doug Weller talk 07:41, 2 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Way over the line considering the prior legal threat. This is why I deleted city information from my userpage long ago; too many stalkers. I've reblocked, and some other admin can review. Sam Kuru (talk) 13:23, 2 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks. As I said elsewhere, pretty sure this is a troll anyway. Doug Weller talk 15:35, 2 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry to bother you but I have a pretty important question. I am currently on vacation travelling and I was wondering if I can edit Wikipedia while I am in a different country. I heard that it's against Wikipedia's policies when someone starts editing from a new ip address. Can I edit from a different ip address than I did before or is this against Wikipedia's rules? Please let me know. This is very urgent. Ricktheelectric (talk) 19:58, 4 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sure. Sam Kuru (talk) 21:45, 4 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So in other words I can keep editing even though I'm in a different country on vacation right now? Just double checking. Ricktheelectric (talk) 22:30, 4 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No one can see your location, other than a handful of special admins that can check IPs. It does not matter where you're editing from. Sam Kuru (talk) 22:35, 4 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Okay. Thank you for clarifying this for me. Ricktheelectric (talk) 23:38, 4 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Sam Kuru ,

I'd like to engage in a discussion regarding the removal of the iCareBilling Forbes Advisor link for "Best E-Prescribing Companies in the U.S." marked with "Request for Comments." My perspective on Forbes Advisor is that the editor's opinions and evaluations are conducted independently, irrespective of whether any company pays for leads on the Forbes Advisor listing.

Upon reviewing the Forbes Advisor page for the "Best E-Prescribing Companies," it's evident that some companies feature a "Learn More" button, indicating that they have chosen to pay Forbes for the acquisition of leads. Companies like RXNT, Kareo, and DrChrono have invested in dedicated pages to access lead information. In contrast, companies such as Charmhealth, Elationhealth, Benchmark Systems, ScriptSure, iCareBilling, and AthenaOne have not made such payments to Forbes. They have not paid to be listed on Forbes or to capture leads. This demonstrates that Forbes' listing decisions are not based on financial transactions, and this information can be substantiated if necessary by contacting Forbes.com directly to align with Wikipedia guidelines and requirements.

Furthermore, it's important to note the disclaimer at the top of the page, which states, "Editorial Note: We earn a commission from partner links on Forbes Advisor. Commissions do not affect our editors' opinions or evaluations." This disclosure reinforces the independence of Forbes Advisor's editorial decisions.

Additionally, your reference to "UGC - User Generated Content" should be considered in the context of the entire Forbes Advisor website. Forbes Advisor does not provide a platform for users to create accounts, upload their logos, company information, or select their own listings. The inclusion of companies on the Forbes Advisor listing is entirely at the discretion of Forbes.com's editorial team, establishing it as a reliable and notable source.

I kindly request your reconsideration of the iCareBilling Forbes Advisor link as a reputable and dependable source, given the above points. Your decision to retain this resource on Wikipedia would contribute to the accuracy and comprehensiveness of the information available to Wikipedia users.

Thank you for your time and consideration. Johnaustin2500 (talk) 00:39, 8 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I referenced a prior RFC, a formal discussion on the reliability of Forbes Advisor, in my edit summary. You can read that here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_337#RFC_Forbes_Advisor. Given the nature of "contributor" involvement, the general decline of Forbes as a journalistic entity, and the overall set up of affiliate "picks", I would agree with the outcome of the RFC. Given the overall poor quality of the sources you added, including paid placement and press releases, and your attempt add a blacklisted PR source, I would implore you to stick to high quality sources and avoid any gray press. You may also want to review WP:PAID and WP:COI. Sam Kuru (talk) 01:23, 8 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Sam Kuru,

Thank you for your response and for providing the link to the prior RFC on the reliability of Forbes Advisor. I appreciate your insights into the overall quality of sources and the potential concerns regarding affiliate "picks" and gray press. It's important to maintain the highest standards of reliability and neutrality on Wikipedia.

I have on question, or I would say need your guidance here. Regarding government resources, they are generally considered reliable sources on Wikipedia, especially for factual information like company formation or incorporation details and I do have some other references, which I thought to add them. As for the Awards and History sections, is concerned, you are right we may be open to remove those section but can we keep the Intro and only product and services with only products information to initially keep the page live and to improve the overall quality of the page. This would allow us to adhere to Wikipedia's content guidelines while still providing valuable information to readers about the company which is quite verifiable. Additionally two big investment analytics firms has also done the analysis on iCareBilling (CB-Insight, and Pitch Book) and those can be used to reference for the small page just an intro and products, that's it.

I would also appreciate if you can shed some lights concerning the inclusion of press releases, it's possible to reference them on a Wikipedia page, particularly if they contain factual information about acquisitions, fundraising, or other significant developments related to the company. So my question is, can we use the press release to reference the services company offers in a neutral, encyclopedic tone and avoid promotional language. We should aim for a balanced representation of the company's activities.

I'm willing to work together to ensure that the page meets Wikipedia's standards and guidelines. Please let me know how we can proceed to get the page quality improved to get this approved with the best available resources while maintaining the highest level of integrity and neutrality.

Thank you for your guidance and assistance. Johnaustin2500 (talk) 02:55, 8 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

At this point, you should start with rock-solid reliable sources and avoid anything even remotely advertorial. For example, the reference on the page to 'healthcourier.us' appears to be yet another fake seo blog, run by marketing people out of Budapest. Use the draft's talk page to request help, and as noted, please use your talk page or userpage to address your WP:PAID compliance. That's mandatory. Sam Kuru (talk) 03:28, 8 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Kuru, I was belated replying to this user on simple en, and noticed they are blocked on Wikidata as a sock. Now, that original account hadn't edited here at all but on commons, their deleted uploads [7] are mostly about the same company here. It looks like an IP has been editing the draft here and feels like it's the same editor and pushes even more to WP:UPE territory. Thought I'd make sure you knew about the other account. I think the company is borderline for notability, but the pushing from the IP's makes it tough and I think more than a few of their current sources are press releases disguised as news articles or sponsored to some extent. Ravensfire (talk) 02:19, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yeah, it's pretty clear at this point that it's just UDPE spamming. The latest addition to the draft was several random books where they identified 'medicare billing' as a reference to 'icare billing' and deemed it a source. All predated the formation of the entity. Again, no opinion on the notability of the company, but all of the garbage SEO/PR makes it harder to identify actual sources. Sam Kuru (talk) 02:34, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Re: [8] I don't see how the AllSides opinion piece demonstrates any encyclopedic value or due weight to MRC's opinion piece. I've removed it. - Hipal (talk) 19:24, 17 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Hipal: Totally on board. The original addition was misleading and just looked like political haymaking. Sam Kuru (talk) 21:30, 17 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Kuru, I would like to know why do you deleted the page of Ødyzon? It’s a famous musical artist/composer, he have a lot of good press and more than 200k listeners on Spotify, 150 millions+ streams on TikTok and others platforms… I am ready to make all the necessary edits to put the page back online! Thank you so much in advance for your reply ! 2A04:CEC0:110C:439F:CC72:6C78:698:C8E9 (talk) 15:43, 18 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You, and your associates, have continually added the same junk SEO blogs and other paid advertorials to the article in addition to promotional material. You're free to start a draft, but at this point you will need to stick to absolutely solid sourcing that clearly meets our guidelines on reliable sourcing. Additionally, please identify any conflicts of interest or paid associations, as required by our terms of service. Sam Kuru (talk) 15:49, 18 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

But I don’t understand why and how an administrator has accepted the page if it’s not good? 2A04:CEC0:110C:439F:CC72:6C78:698:C8E9 (talk) 15:52, 18 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm sorry if I was not clear: do not add another fake SEO source to this encyclopedia. Full stop. Sam Kuru (talk) 15:57, 18 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Okay! I didn't know that these were false sources of information, I took the articles that I had on hand. but now there are other articles on him like Flaunt, Attack Magazine, 24Hip-Hop, Rolling Hype, The Hype Magazine. Are these good articles or not? because I don't know anything about it and I don't know if it's fake SEO or good articles. THANKS 2A04:CEC0:110C:439F:CC72:6C78:698:C8E9 (talk) 16:07, 18 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Frankly, if I remember the draft correctly, I think that a G11 was out-of-process, as it definetly didn't need a complete rewrite. I remember seeing good sources, but perhaps some of them were online, not yet at the article. Please restore as draft, I'm willing to add sources and neutralize language if needed. NotAGenious (talk) 11:11, 21 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'll review it today and restore it to draft without the SEO junk. Advertorial blogs and paid placement guest blogs like "24hip-hop" and "hype magazine" are not reliable sources in any way. Sam Kuru (talk) 12:34, 21 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Kuru. Can you help me resolve the bugs on Ødyzon's page. I tried to correct as much as possible but I fear it won't be enough since "Mrswickson" asked for it to be deleted.. I don't understand anything anymore. help me please 2A04:CEC0:107A:1846:5DF0:F2F1:550:32D4 (talk) 13:47, 25 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@NotAGenious: Looking at the deleted material, I see your point. I'll restore the article to article-space, restore it to your last version (minus to junk sources and text that was added), and we can debate the sources that existed when you moved it from draft and evaluate any new sources.Sam Kuru (talk) 02:52, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, I just fixed few citations, and I will add a good picture soon.

can you tell me if it’s good for all citations, if it’s good press etc..

thank you for your help! 2A04:CEC0:1112:1525:2941:647:4217:420D (talk) 14:54, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Kuru, I saw Ødyzon has a IMDb page. It’s possible to re-upload the page for Ødyzon as a great version and I add IMDb page ?

https://m.imdb.com/name/nm15534761/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0_tt_2_nm_6_q_odyzon

thank you.

best 2A01:CB14:D77:500:6C08:541C:395B:A5A9 (talk) 10:20, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See WP:IMDB. The material there cannot be used for biographical information, nor can any user-generated or SEO directory listings. I think it's time for you to move on. Sam Kuru (talk) 12:03, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the guidance, can you explain what kind of sources is considered as reliable or more authenticate for Wikipedia?

I mean, According to Wikipedia what are the characteristic of an reliable source? Ashokkbhalse (talk) 11:23, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The message I left on your talk page has a link directly to our guidelines on reliable sources. Just in case you missed it: Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Sam Kuru (talk) 12:18, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fixed and added more references. Should be adequate now to assist with a better flow of information. Also can you or someone assist with a second-language translation of the subject Icetre, I am unable to do so as I do not have special privileges to do so. Any language will be appreciated if it can be done. Spanish, Japanese, Chinese, Swedish, any language will suffice. If so then please and thank you. Bunkytrap34 (talk) 23:28, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of companies of Australia, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of companies of Australia until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 23 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Respected editor @Kuru will you help me for this page how can i write proper article and what are my major mistakes, and will you please suggest me how can i improve this article. what mistakes i have done. Hemant Mishra Warm (talk) 12:28, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ya. Working through it now; needs much better sourcing. Thanks for removing the very clear promotional text. Sam Kuru (talk) 12:29, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you @Kuru for your kind support, i will research about this firm and then i will add some good citations in this page. Thank you once again respected editor. Hemant Mishra Warm (talk) 12:32, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Greetings great editor @Kuru. I have seen your edits and I must admit that you are very valuable to the Wikipedia project. I have learnt from you just by observation. I created the article, "Obasi Igwe" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obasi_Igwe without realizing that there was an older article of the same name which was deleted by the administrators. When I checked, I realized that the older article was not properly researched to prove notability, having only three weak references holding it. I found it in everybody wiki, by the way. I commenced serious research and was able to follow the WP:BIO policies to the letter in generating over thirty reliable references. Please could you kindly review the article and help push it to the main space if successful? The "Previously deleted" tag on it holds the potential of making it lie unreviewed for a long time. Thank you.Royalrumblebee (talk) 02:11, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I understand your concern about the external links that I've been adding. My intention was to provide a relevant source to improve the content quality, not to spam or promote anything. For this specific article on content marketing I added a link that is talking deeper in depth about Red Bull and how they do content marketing. Let me know if you still think this is inappropriate or not a great source that is related to content marketing.

Either way, thank you for the warning - I will be more careful going forward and can discuss any major edits with you before making them. Please let me know if you have any other concerns or advice for a new editor like myself. I want to contribute positively to Wikipedia within the established guidelines. Ilias Ism (talk) illyism (talk) 19:26, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Completely missed that tiny print line at the bottom of the ChemEurope article. Sorry about reverting! Thank you for catching that and correcting it. Tengu99 (talk) 03:44, 6 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I get it; I find about a dozen or so of these a day and they really don't work real hard to identify themselves. Thanks for working to fix up articles on old companies. Sam Kuru (talk) 03:46, 6 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, I didn't realize that was a mirrored link, thank you for correcting my mistake for me and apologies for the inconvenience. MiguelRamirez77 (talk) 03:11, 11 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No problem! It happens.Sam Kuru (talk) 03:50, 11 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Kuru, I see that you've removed Hype on the above mentioned article with a comment that reads "non-RS". Did you know there's a difference between this and that, where the former is a staff written article and latter is User written? dxneo (talk) 21:25, 12 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Howdy, dxneo. That was my error; I'm actually targeting the completely unrelated American 'thehypemagazine.com' links, which are almost exclusively paid placement/SEO garbage. I'm aware of the 'hypemagazine.co.za' links and have been actively avoiding those. I appear to have accidently removed that one in error and will restore it. My apologies. Sam Kuru (talk) 21:35, 12 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you Kuru, but there's no need as I have already added RS to the statements, happy editing Thank you. dxneo (talk) 21:41, 12 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Kuru, thanks for your feedback to my new article Makinohara Tunnel. If I just do cross-check my sources with the existing ja.wikipedia article, is it considered as not suggestable? Thanks again. Masgatotkaca (talk) 23:14, 17 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cross-checking as part of your development process is fine, but we cannot use the English language Wikipedia or any language version as an actual source in the article. Note that different versions of Wikipedia may have slightly different criteria for reliable sources - you'll need to use the definitions here. Sam Kuru (talk) 23:18, 17 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why are you running around removing citations to the Manchester Evening News, a newspaper established over 150 years ago, and particularly not removing the claims cited or even tagging with ((better source))? The sentence, "x is a reliable source" is meaningless in my opinion, unless you qualify what the claim is for. How is saying 'x' is in 'y' with a cite to the MEN "promoting something"? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:52, 18 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Ritchie333: I'm 'running around' removing citations to the publication's paid placement service. This is an advertorial, clearly labeled as an "Ad Feature" and "Partner Story" and written by a person who, at the time, only wrote their commercial placement. It's also littered with links that should give some clue as to who paid for the material. There's no question that the paper's normal reporting is reliable, and no such claim to the contrary was made. Almost all papers these days run advertorials, and almost all reputable papers identify them as such - as this one did. In this, and in all cases where I remove adverts like this, I will remove the material if it's sensitive or extraordinary, or I'll remove the cite and use the standard "citation needed". Happy to take a look again if you feel there's something redeeming there. Sam Kuru (talk) 17:12, 18 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"There's no question that the paper's normal reporting is reliable, and no such claim to the contrary was made. - I would interpret this edit, with the summary, "rmv non-WP:RS" to mean "removed, not a reliable source". In any case, the specific claim here is "though it is now expected in June 2023". I don't understand how you can give a "brand place / advertorial" of an expected opening date, can you clarify what you mean here? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:59, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am absolutely saying that ads in a newspaper are not reliable sources. This article is paid placement, and clearly marked as an ad. It is not a normal article by the paper. The material is littered with links to ticket sales and other social links for the entity that likely paid for the creation of the material, along with puffery like "world’s most exciting artists push the boundaries of possibility", "innovative and much-loved biannual festival", and "one of the world’s most beloved artists". The author is a ""Commercial Content Editor", a marketing position within the publication, and every article written by her is a self-identified sponsored ad, including fun material for vanity hydro: "designed to transform hydration by providing users with the cleanest, crispest water with every sip", CBD products: "CBD Sanctuary uses a smooth and intensely-velvety bean that grows in the volcanic soils of Mount Kilimanjaro and adds hemp to create ‘the entourage effect’, where the nutrients and compounds interact to promote a feeling of calming energy" and the usual casino-spam: "If you have a look at the new online slots, you’ll notice how diverse they are". These articles are within the clearly-delineated advertorial space of that publication, and are not themselves reliable sources. They're paid puffery and noted as such. This is not uncommon. Many large, reliable, publications do the same thing. It's only a problem when they fail to identify advertorials (not the case here), or when editors are confused. To circle back to the original question: no, I would not consider an ad with unidentified origins and other extraordinary claims as a source for anything. Sam Kuru (talk) 14:58, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't think I'm explaining myself well, so let me try another analogy. Pink Floyd : All The Songs by Jean-Michel Guesdon and Philip Margotin has prose completely unacceptable if reproduced directly in Wikipedia's voice, such as "It was a brilliant discovery by Rick Wright and Roger Waters that would lead to the shaping of this legendary track into its final form" That doesn't stop me from citing other parts of the source, such as the recording dates and names of the engineers, which are neutrally and factually reported. Elsewhere, my distrust and general hatred of The Sun doesn't stop it being cited in Tom Newton Dunn, with consensus.

So, hopefully that explains why I think that the world is just not black and white; there are shades of grey and a source may be okay for a basic fact such as a date, but not anything substantial. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:35, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ah, I was missing the point. Summarized: "this is a completely trivial factoid that probably wouldn't have been challenged otherwise and the promotional aspect of the ad has long since expired so stop being pedantic." Then, yes, point conceded. :) Sam Kuru (talk) 15:43, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Kuru,

I just came across this newly created article and tagged for CSD A7 deletion but then looked at the page log and saw you had some previous actions regarding articles on this subject and the editors that created them. Could you look this over and see what you think? Thanks. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:38, 20 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello @Kuru, @Liz i saw that something is going wrong on English Wikipedia and Simple English Wikipedia a big mastermind playing games of Sock puppet account i saw logs that few months ago Poybo Media article is deleted from English Wikipedia and when i saw logs on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/50mMidas/Archive of user: Dotdashmeredith that he creates this article and the same user creates Poybo Media on Simple English Wikipedia he focused on 3 Names Poybo Media , Justin Jin , The Vach , and The Vach currently live on Simple English Wikipedia. And created by the same user. And suddenly he actives today and creates 3 Acoounts on English Wikipedia with the names Poybo Media , Justin Jin (businessman) and The Vach under the username of User:Warming polity i think he is also a sock puppet and now he is trying to push spam articles on Simple English WikipediaSimple English Wikipedia. 103.149.126.107 (talk) 09:56, 20 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is a clear case of Sock Puppetry. 103.149.126.107 (talk) 09:57, 20 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Howdy. Seems to be a same group. Note the article was supported only by fake SEO refs; same ones as previous attempts. Sam Kuru (talk) 12:32, 20 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the thanks on the Fat Leonard article. I see that Craig Whitlock has no Wikipedia article, but probably should. I think his WaPo articles on the scandal have been cited 27 times in the WP article. He's been a Pulitzer nominee. If memory serves, his Afghanistan papers book rested on review of 59,000 documents produced on FOIAs. He's written a book on the FL scandal which is about to be published, and he was interviewed about it on cable TV this a.m. What do you think? Activist (talk) 22:08, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The book won't appear until mid-May, in hardcover, Kindle and audiobook editions, as I discovered when I just tried to order a copy. 22:28, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Activist (talk) 22:28, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'd say the odds are good, his existing article is old enough to drive a car: Craig Whitlock. Apparently he's a three times finalist for the Pulitzer. I was really disappointed when that news broke yesterday and you had not already added it to the article within five minutes... :) Sam Kuru (talk) 23:07, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello @Kuru i am here for asking help to you. a editor @Dotdotcomma who is blocked in Sock Puppet Case in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/50mMidas is now actively live on Simple English Wikipedia and recreaing all promotional pages on Simple The Vach , Poybo Media, Justin Jin, Bayu Prihandito these are deleted in English Wikipedia but he recreates on Simple English Wikipedia and recently he creates another Sock account Anwi6644 and tried again to create these above articles on English Wikipedia . Both account Dotdotcomma and @Anwi6644 found guilty in same case of Sock puppetry En:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/50mMidas but still Dotdotcomma this user is unblocked. First Admin @Fr33kman blocked @Dotdotcomma and suddenly after some times he unblocked him this is really questionable. I want a proper Investigation aginst them now i doubt they are paid or not. Brandom Mc Thompson (talk) 08:46, 22 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Kuru, you kicked out the praebook reference. I checked but cannot find another one. Shall I delete the "may be"-information on the scientist? --Tschips (talk) 17:26, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy First Edit Day! Hi Kuru! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you made your first edit and became a Wikipedian! The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:41, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Good day to you @Kuru, Thank you for your previous edits to the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chanel page. I have COI with Chanel and have spotted inaccurate information on their page.

The current Chanel article states that Chanel have continued to do business in Russia since the start of the war with Ukraine, which is is incorrect. Chanel have stopped doing business in Russia and have even gone as far as to stop selling to Russian buyers outside of their borders.

This has been widely reported in the following places:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/04/07/opinion/companies-ukraine-boycott.html

https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN2L12C7/

https://fr.fashionnetwork.com/news/Ukraine-chanel-applique-l-embargo-aussi-aux-russes-en-dehors-de-la-russie,1394353.html

https://www.bfmtv.com/economie/entreprises-francaises-en-russie-ou-en-est-on-un-an-apres_AV-202302260097.html

https://www.lefigaro.fr/societes/lvmh-hermes-et-chanel-ferment-temporairement-leurs-boutiques-en-russie-20220304

Would you be able to spare some time to update this paragraph so it is accurate? Many thanks, Occasionalpedestrian (talk) 15:35, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Howdy. For the record, I really don't do edits based on solicitation - especially from paid or conflicted editors. That said, there does seem to be some fairly obviously problematic material there. I've removed it since it was sourced to a tweet, and chimed in on the discussion you correctly started on the article's talk page. Thank you for following best practices on COI. Sam Kuru (talk) 02:33, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you, I appreciate your help Occasionalpedestrian (talk) 11:12, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Greetings Kuru,

Systumm has again promoted Bar Greenzaid (a clearly non-notable YouTuber) to mainspace without any improvements, despite your final warning. I think this type of behaviour is not acceptable from an already disclosed paid editor. Thanks. Maliner (talk) 18:33, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks. I've partially blocked the account for a few weeks. Hopefully that will suffice. Sam Kuru (talk) 12:19, 16 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, sir. I'm here to discuss Vipulanantha College, and the details I've shared are from their school book, Vipulam. As a former student near the school, I can attest to the accuracy of the information. It's common for schools in northern Sri Lanka to lack citations. If you need clarification, feel free to ask. Rather than removing new edits and promoting the outdated version without modern updates, I hope you understand. Thank you. Zeus2107 (talk) 13:52, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I understand completely. Unfortunately, verifiability is a core policy: WP:V - I cannot simply take your attestation, especially when the material contains puffery and promotional claims. If there's material that is published under strong editorial controls, then please add citations to references that can be accessed. It's also a good idea to avoid linking to mirrors of Wikipedia. Thanks. Sam Kuru (talk) 14:00, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mr. Kuru, could you please clarify for me without removing the content: What types of sources should be mentioned or are needed? Zeus2107 (talk) 14:03, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Good afternoon,

I received an unsolicited email from a group advertising its experience "for crafting impactful narratives" and offering the "prospect of immortalizing your story on Wikipedia." Out of curiosity, I asked for a specific user to validate the quality of the content this group can produce. In their reply, I was sent a link to this page along with a separate link to acewritingexperts.com. Not sure if you are affiliated with this effort, but if you are not, I thought you would want to know that this claim is being made. Dpapandria (talk) 19:35, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You're being scammed. I am not, in any way, associated with any garbage SEO firms. Unfortunately, this kind of claim has become common as a credibility exercise for PR firms. Sam Kuru (talk) 19:43, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Dpapandria: This is an ongoing scam targeting innocent people. Those fraudsters illegally use the names of our trusted editors, such as administrators, patrollers, and AFC reviewers, to make their fraudulent services look legit. But it is clearly a scam. I will suggest that you disregard those unsolicited emails. Thanks. Maliner (talk) 19:47, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I figured as much. I'll see if I can get more information and maybe some accounts to ban :). Dpapandria (talk) 20:27, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy to look in to it; if they provide a list of "sample articles", that may be helpful. I can't see any history of that "company" abusing the project, but the domain is just a skinned WordPress blog with a proxied domain that just seems to be a few months old. There are thousands of these guys, so may be hard to hunt down. Sam Kuru (talk) 20:31, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Came here by chance, judging by WHOIS it could be one of several Karachi-based companies (see list). Schminnte ^{[talk to me]} 23:15, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yup, I was only able to see that it was registered to WordPress' in-house registrar (automattic + sawbuck) and all of the data was redacted except for the province/country (Sindh, PK), which does line up to Karachi. The site is a hatchet job, so it's hard to tell what's real and what's cut&paste from a template. Sam Kuru (talk) 23:24, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Here is what they gave me:

some of the articles authored by our team members:

Janet Mielke Schwartz - Authored by Ibtehaj

Jun Li (chemist) - Authored by Sami

Benjamin Abella - Authored by Hasan

Scott Hughes - Authored by Sami

Clement Farabet - Authored by Hasan

It appears at least two of these have already been flagged as problematic. The listed authors do not correspond to the user names listed in the articles' histories.

I asked for references and they gave contacts for three of the individuals profiled. They recommended that I reach out to the following people on LinkedIn:

[9]https://www.linkedin.com/in/janetmschwartz/

[10]https://www.linkedin.com/in/scott-hughes-aaa89718/

[11]https://www.linkedin.com/in/jun-li-9357435/

The primary guy selling this (Owais Ahmed, owaiisahmedd<at>some email provider-starts with g.com) also offered to show me snapshots of email exchanges with the remaining two who did not want to be references (so shady!).

As far as the business, they offer a 35 day (!?!?) turn-around and ask a "standard fee" of US$3,555

I realize this is just the word of one guy. I'm happy to provide email messages and headers if that would be useful. Hope this helps you guys keep up the integrity of this invaluable resource. Dpapandria (talk) 03:04, 23 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Quick follow up:

• The Janet Mielke Schwartz article was obvious paid placement. It had a LA weekly marked advertorial from 'tedfuel', which appears to be a small SEO firm whose home page is a mashed-together wordpress site similar to the link above. There's also a 'reader's digest' marked advertorial and something from a gossip magazine blog that looks like another native ad, and some other blogs. Moved this to draft and removed the junk sources.
• The Jun Li (chemist) article by 'sami' was created by a blocked undisclosed paid editor, possibly a Wrathofyazdan sock. It was definately made via a Freelancer posted job handled by a Pakastani marketer who advertises creating Wikipedia articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard/Archive_203#Wrathofyazdan_socks). There's a long thread to look into here.
• Scott Hughes is pretty old; created in 2016. There was a recent edit to remove some negative information by a single purpose account that edited similar to the blocked editor at Jun Li (chemist). Will look in to that more as well.
• Benjamin Abella - Nothing obvious - recent addition by an IP and a low-volume account adding a selfie. This was created by a fairly prolific account that seems to focus on academic biographies.
• Clement Farabet - This seems likely to be a UDPE, the author has only created a few promotional biographies - one of which was filled with spam and moved out of mainspace by me in August; this included some really obvious advertorial and blackhat SEO sites. I left him a request for a paid editing disclosure which he seems to have ignored. Will look in to that more.

There's a few threads in there that I need to follow up on when I get some free time, but there's clearly paid editing involved in there. Sam Kuru (talk) 12:50, 23 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Appreciate your efforts. I did reply again asking for more articles, but I suspect they are wise to my schemes at this point. Thanks. Dpapandria (talk) 21:41, 23 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Apparently has not figured it out yet. Got a raft of email screen caps referencing the following (paid editor gmail addresses in parentheses):

Benjamin Arbella from 1/21/2024 (hazankhann)

Jun Li from 10/19/2023 (sheikhabdussamitariq)

Charitha Pattiaratchi from 11/28/2023 (elsakhannnnn)

Clement Farabet from 1/4/2024 (hazankhann)

Scott Hughes from 10/19/2023 (sheikhabdussamitariq)

Fun side note: the screens were captured on pirated copies of Windows.

I'm done at this point. Happy hunting. Dpapandria (talk) 13:59, 24 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey I saw that you edited my draft:deuce mayne. Thank you I appreciate it. I have cleaned up the errors. Is it possible for you to move my article to the mane space? Thank you Indie.expo (talk) 03:35, 23 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy adminship anniversary! Hi Kuru! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of your successful request for adminship. Enjoy this special day! The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:41, 25 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I had submitted a page based on an up and coming entrepreneur Tyler Dusty? I sourced him to TikTok And instagram where he has gained quite a following over the years and also added the articles where I had originally found him. It did not let me submit a citation to NY times though which was weird. Have never made a Wiki article before so I thought It would be cool since no one has made one for him yet, whats the reasoning for the deletion? I am Also not really familiar with how the platform works, maybe I submitted something wrong? Charlesdecar (talk) 17:46, 25 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

We need reliable sources for articles, not instagram, tiktok, or fake SEO sites like usinsider. Articles consisting solely of silly puffery like "his journey serves as an inspirational blueprint for young entrepreneurs and business leaders", or "a tenacious pursuit of industry dominance" are typically deleted on sight. You're welcome to try again, but please use the WP:DRAFT process, and please use strong, reliable sources and avoid the adcopy. Thanks. Sam Kuru (talk) 17:51, 25 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I will edit and try again. Thank you so much for the help! Charlesdecar (talk) 17:55, 25 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for editing my draft Melvin Sims III, means a lot. If you have any other suggestions or methods of helping out beginners, would be happy to hear! NeiraMiley (talk) 06:10, 29 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Kuru. Thanks for taking the time to review the edits I have to William Erbey's Wikipedia page. However, I'm not sure I understand why they were rejected. Could you expand on your comment "rmv redirect links to a blacklisted seo site" please? The edits were made to add in objective information, based on a reputable source of information (MSN). Thanks very much. Best, Denvercopito (talk) 10:14, 2 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

MSN functions as a news aggregator, republishing material from a number of shady sites. One of them, 'theubj' is a site that has been blacklisted globally across all Wikipedia projects as a SEO operation. Given the history of promotional edits on that article, it would be best to stick to quality sources. I'm sure you'll agree as a neutral editor that has absolutely nothing to do with the other spammer that was recently trying to whitewash that article. Sam Kuru (talk) 11:40, 2 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Sam. Thanks for your swift reply. That's interesting to know, I didn't realise MSN worked like that! I'll keep an eye on the page and see how if any other edits are made. Best. Denvercopito (talk) 09:29, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]