Talk:Vultr

Vultr and censorship on behalf of Chinese government

Vultr is accused, with fairly strong evidence, of having cancelled service for GreatFire's FreeWeChat platform, which counters censorship in China, after being pursued to do just that by a company acting on behalf of the Chinese Tencent corporation, which owns WeChat, the social media whose censors content GreatFire makes available. Details are here: https://en.greatfire.org/blog/2025/dec/tencent-enlisting-american-cloud-hosting-providers-enforce-censorship ~2025-39151-94 (talk) 02:49, 8 December 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia request for takedown

Hello,

I am posting with a conflict of interest, as I represent Vultr, and therefore will not edit the article directly. The following statement has been provided for inclusion on this Talk page:

"Vultr requests that the following statement under 'Controversy' be removed, as it is factually incorrect and includes unsubstantiated claims: '...without thoroughly investigating the claims, ignoring responses from GreatFire and letters of support from human rights organizations.'

Vultr conducted a months-long legal review with outside counsel and acted based on counsel’s assessment of legal obligation, including responding to GreatFire's claims directly.

Additionally, the current Wikipedia wording appears to rely in part on GreatFire’s own blog post about the dispute. As a self-published account from an involved party, this may not meet Wikipedia’s reliable sourcing standards for claims about third parties."

For the purposes of Wikipedia policy, I note that GreatFire’s blog would be considered a self-published primary source and may not meet the requirements of WP:RS for contentious statements about living persons or organizations.

I respectfully request that an uninvolved editor review the sourcing for this sentence and remove it if it does not meet Wikipedia’s verifiability and neutrality standards.

Thank you. ScratchMC (talk) 00:28, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello,

I am posting with a conflict of interest, as I represent Vultr, and therefore will not edit the article directly. The following statement has been provided for inclusion on this Talk page:

"Vultr requests that the following statement under 'Controversy' be removed, as it is factually incorrect and includes unsubstantiated claims: '...without thoroughly investigating the claims, ignoring responses from GreatFire and letters of support from human rights organizations.'

Vultr conducted a months-long legal review with outside counsel and acted based on counsel’s assessment of legal obligation, including responding to GreatFire's claims directly.

Additionally, the current Wikipedia wording appears to rely in part on GreatFire’s own blog post about the dispute. As a self-published account from an involved party, this may not meet Wikipedia’s reliable sourcing standards for claims about third parties."

For the purposes of Wikipedia policy, I note that GreatFire’s blog would be considered a self-published primary source and may not meet the requirements of WP:RS for contentious statements about living persons or organizations.

I respectfully request that an uninvolved editor review the sourcing for this sentence and remove it if it does not meet Wikipedia’s verifiability and neutrality standards.

Thank you.

ScratchMC (talk) 19:52, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

Partly done: I've replaced the GreatFire blog post with a better source and trimmed the section down a bit. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 02:52, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

COI disclosure — latency citation

Disclosure: I am the author of the cited source (https://blog.byte-guard.net/vps-uptime-latency-benchmark-2026/) added to the Operations section. Per WP:COI I am posting the source for review here. The cited data is a 50-packet ICMP latency probe from a Helsinki vantage point on 2026-05-10. Happy to revise or remove if the citation is judged self-promotional. Enimefl (talk) 15:23, 1 June 2026 (UTC)