Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 04:01, 1 February 2013

Welcome!

Hello, SuzanneOlsson, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Loremaster (talk) 16:59, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Jesus bloodline

I have improved the Jesus bloodline article as much as I can in light of the fact that there are some books I haven't read and probably won't read anytime soon. I would appreciate your comments on the Talk:Jesus bloodline page. --Loremaster (talk) 16:59, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

article

Hey Suzanne, I've answered here. Cheers, Gwen Gale (talk) 15:51, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:SuzanneOlsson/sandbox

User:SuzanneOlsson/sandbox, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/User:SuzanneOlsson/sandbox and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:SuzanneOlsson/sandbox during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Gwen Gale (talk) 23:43, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Your article is now at User:SuzanneOlsson/Sandbox

The MfD (Miscellany for Deletion) is still open for your article, but I expect that it will determnine that the article can be kept, at least for a time, in your Sandbox. I had moved it to my user space to protect it more effectively, but another user moved it back, actually, it got moved twice and eventually ended up back in your Sandbox where it had been when nominated. The other user argued that you had a perfect right to have it in your user space, which I agree with, though sometimes if there is no hope that a page can be improved to become an article, user pages will get deleted. (User pages are supposed to have a purpose that at least potentially helps the project. Some editors have argued that there is totally no hope, but .... let me just say that there are some editors who argue this way almost no matter what. If they don't like an article, must mean it doesn't belong. I actually have no idea how they could possibly know that there are no reliable sources, as they claim. You might take a look at the MfD if you want to see what we are up against. But if you can find those sources, it might be doable.

In any case, happy belated birthday. --Abd (talk) 02:53, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi Adb and thank you for getting the page set up for me..I know nil about HTML. Never had a necessity to learn it. I am completely self-taught on use of computers and programming. The years I lived abroad under some less than Hilton standards I never had a computer (after theft of first two laptops I gave up). So I had a lot of technical catching up to do and I still struggle and lag far behind you, who had access to real rolls of TP paper all these years. Thanks for birthday wishes. I learned everything I know about telling my age from Mae West. I AM 39. I am 39. I am 39. Got it? Actually that seems old now. There's a 19 year old still alive and kicking in this old heart, She's always trying to sneak out again and get me into trouble. Do I have a dual personality? Naw. Just a great sense of humor and fun. OK...Now to tackle that troublesome page ,,,Thanks and Kindest best wishesSuzanneOlsson (talk) 20:23, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

39? That's so young. I'm that age made famous by the Beatles. 64. But, besides my grown children and grandchildren (5 and 5 respectively) I've got kids 5 and 6, from Ethiopia and China. We are a real multicultural family, I'm straight, the mother of the kids -- we are still married but that's ending and this is why: -- is gay. I'm Muslim and she's thought of converting to Judaism. If we can get along, maybe there is hope for the world. Easy? Not. But we must for the kids, and, indeed, they make it all worthwhile. God bless her and them.

By the way, Misplaced Pages language isn't HTML. It's a special wiki language supposedly easy to learn. You can actually just type stuff in the edit window, but, gradually, you learn to do things like create links, add in-line references, etc., etc. I only started editing heavily about nine months ago, even though I registered as an editor in 2005. Took me the better part of a year or more to figure out how to sign a post. --Abd (talk) 04:27, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

--Abd (talk) 04:27, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Took me the better part of a year or more to figure out how to sign a post. I'll loan you my new scarf once in a while when you feel necessity to hide behind a few good excuses now and then. For me it's down to either 'blond' or senior as an excuse, and you KNOW I aint going there! There's so much going on right now. I know it appears I am trying to self-promote my book but it's more than that for me and for others who hope to gain merit through association with me. The better I look, the better they will succeed in their endeavors by using my name as a reference (if that makes any sense to you). During this interim I have to be a very VERY dumb blond, and a quiet one too. I will gradually add to the page as you suggested. Oh! BtW I just read your user page. Dunno how I missed that one before now. Interesting biography. You are a convert. I have been to Ethiopia, I lived there for about six months. I temporarily 'adopted' an entire family in need! I loved it in the Great Rift Valley and parts north, in Axum where I lived. I had an awesome experience there with the priests, who even exceeded the Buddhists I knew in Thailand when it came to performing feats of the mind. The Ethiopians I've known have been deeply spiritual people.....in fact they leave Buddhists trailing far behind.  :-) You seem like a very interesting fellow, a few cuts above the average editors here. It is a pleasure working with you. Kindest best wishes, SuzanneOlsson (talk) 19:02, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'm a guy, which may make a difference, and I notice -- and must accept -- that I'm ... inattentive or distracted or whatever, in ways that I wasn't, probably, when younger. (Or maybe I was, actually, but I had more parallel processing power behind it, I used to be able to carry on a phone conversation and read a book at the same time. I lost that one about fifteen years ago.) If I can admit it promptly, then I don't need to defend myself against my children -- or their mother, who is 17 years younger than I -- when they say I'm not paying enough attention to them, or losing it, or whatever. I am. So? Get over it! I'm bloody 64! (Actually, I regret it when this causes them pain, but there are limits to what I can change.) Likewise, it was actually a huge relief when I finally realized that my life story was largely written by my Attention deficit disorder, only a bit over a year ago. I should have known. Once I knew what to ask about, I found that my brother, who is eleven years older than me, was treated for hyperactivity before 1950, at a clinic where the use of stimulants was probably taking place on an experimental basis, some of the earliest work, it would have been. It's a family thing. And he led, and continues to lead, quite an amazing life, absolutely not normal. And that's actually a good thing.

For years, my wife would say, "Any normal person would understand what I'm trying to say." Right. I'm not a normal person. I'm a very, very unusual person, highly skilled and proficient in certain ways, and developmentally delayed in others. I can understand things that are way beyond what most people can manage (Including certain kinds of "people things," because of my ability to, under the right conditions, hyperfocus. And certain things -- social understandings, the unwritten rules of relationships, perhaps -- I can be clueless about, or it takes a lot of rationalization, repetition, and special learning, for what comes naturally to most. Yes. Ethiopia. Fantastic place, I visited the nearest town to where Birtukan was born, and met with her grandparents. (Unfortunately, I did not have the preparation or time to visit their village, which was four hours by donkey trail from the nearest mud road). Beautiful country, lush and green (the south, Kambata Tribal Region, that's her tribe, she has characteristic eye scars). Beautiful people, who have something that is rare here. While they are, by our standards, in some ways, very poor, they smiled more, and more deeply and beautifully, and more routinely, than anything I've seen anywhere. And Birtukan has that smile, it's a total killer.

As to blond, sorry, I don't believe it for a minute. You don't do what you have done as a "dumb blond." --Abd (talk) 20:27, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

My daughter had ADD and an IQ of over 150. Only kid I know who had to repeat kindergarten..I used to dance like this (see YouTube video) with friends in Ethiopia: Burtukan is a lovely woman but not much experience in politics: http://youtube.com/watch?v=DXvoI2n8TYA

You mean Birtukan Mideksa? I'd only known her name as Birtukan, and I hadn't followed the news, she was released from jail a year after we joined with our daughter in Addis Ababa, I will be glad to tell our Birtukan that the brave woman we had told her about was released. As to the dancing, Birtukan, when she first came here, at three, could do the shoulder shimmy that is characteristically Ethiopian. We've gone to see Ethiopian dancers on occasion, and Birtukan went to Ethiopian Culture Camp a few weeks ago, got her hair beautifully braided. (She has very kinky, nappy hair.) --Abd (talk) 03:29, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Dam; where did I put that scarf? I need to hide my head in shame. I didn't realize you were speaking about your daughter! :-( Yes, I know a little about the intricate hair weaves and facial tatoos...that each village has its own distinct style. I took the four-day bus trip from Addis Adabba to Axum because I thought I would enjoy seeing more of rural Ethiopia that way...I was terrified and actually paid one very delighted couple to swap seats with me so I sat on the inside, away from the edge of the cliffs as we climbed up from the Great Rift Valley basin. Most terrifying part of any journey I ever made anywhere! It seems there was barely an inch of washed out dirt road in places, one slip and the bus would go from here to eternity, where we would arrive looking like we went through a meat grinder. I'd still rather take my chances with kalashnikovs, thank you. Tell Birtukan I said hello. :-) Sue —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.122.23.179 (talk) 03:33, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Article moved to User:SuzanneOlsson/Draft article

Fida Hassnain

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Fida Hassnain. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Perhaps it would be best to discuss issues you and other editors have with the article rather than blanking the page. If an article should be removed from Misplaced Pages, the appropriate action is to flag it for deletion by an administrator, not to unilaterally blank the page. --Ericdn (talk) 13:40, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

You've got mail!

WikiWomen's Collaborative

WikiWomen Unite!

Hi SuzanneOlsson! Women around the world who edit and contribute to Misplaced Pages are coming together to celebrate each other's work, support one another, and engage new women to also join in on the empowering experience of shaping the sum of all the world's knowledge - through the WikiWomen's Collaborative. As a WikiWoman, we'd love to have you involved! You can do this by: Liking the WikiWomen's Collaborative on Facebook and share your tips, projects, and connect with other WikiWomen Join the conversation on our Twitter feed Reading and writing for our blog channel We can't wait to have you involved, and feel free to drop by our meta page (under construction) to see how else you can get involved! Can't wait to have you involved! SarahStierch (talk) 05:02, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

WikiWomen's Collaborative: Come join us (and check out our new website)!

WikiWomen - We need you!

Hi SuzanneOlsson! The WikiWomen's Collaborative is a group of women from around the world who edit Misplaced Pages, contribute to its sister projects, and support the mission of free knowledge. We recently updated our website, created new volunteer positions, and more! Get involved by: Visiting our website for resources, events, and more Meet other women and share your story in our profile space Participate at and "like" our Facebook group Join the conversation on our Twitter feed Reading and writing for our blog channel Volunteer to write for our blog, recruit blog writers, translate content, and co-run our Facebook and receive perks for volunteering Already participating? Take our survey and share your experience! Thanks for editing Misplaced Pages, and we look forward to you being a part of the Collaborative! -- EdwardsBot (talk) 01:18, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:SuzanneOlsson/sandbox

User:SuzanneOlsson/sandbox, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/User:SuzanneOlsson/sandbox (2nd nomination) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:SuzanneOlsson/sandbox during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Dougweller (talk) 06:31, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

January 2013

Hello, SuzanneOlsson. We welcome your contributions to Misplaced Pages, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Roza Bal, you may need to consider our guidance on conflicts of interest.

All editors are required to comply with Misplaced Pages's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

• Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
• Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
• Avoid linking to the Misplaced Pages article or website of your organization in other articles (see Misplaced Pages:Spam).
• Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Misplaced Pages's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Misplaced Pages when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Note that you aren't being singled out, I've warned at least one other editor and removed his link in the last day. Dougweller (talk) 15:54, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

] SuzanneOlsson (talk)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk)

It seems that COI is determined by ISP- If someone in California or Brazil submits the exact same info that I submitted, this would no longer be COI..Have I understood this correctly? SuzanneOlsson

[[Doug Weller said: A long-running problem. See for instance Talk:Roza Bal - the discussions go back to 2008, up to the 24th of this month where she asks "would it resolve these issues if the very same information was submitted by someone else, preferably far away in a different State or country?". It's not just COI it's RS and EL issues as well. rozabal.com is her own domain, thus a personal website. See also her post at User talk:Katchu2. I'm sure she can get other people to edit for her, eg her grandchild User talk:Kashmir2. Dougweller (talk) 11:30, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

==Personal Conflicts== My new domain, rozabal.com, just went 'live' about 3 weeks ago. I have been trying to get that domain for years! Do you know why Dooug? Because that is my main researchh field for years. A Shroud of Turin website would aptly be named 'Shroud of Turin" in the same way Ih ave been attempting to update sites where this is relevent. Roza Bal topic at Wiki is one of the key places people look for information about Roza Bal. There are maybe 4 people in the entire world who can contribute to this topic. I am one of them, and have been for over 10 years, and so of course my name is coming up everywhere this topic comes up. Several years ago Dougweller, myself, and others clashed over this topic. At that time Doug believed it was a 'fringe' wacko theory and didn't want it to have any presence at Misplaced Pages. From then till Doug taken over the Roza Bal page being sure to delete every legitimate lead there.

The other day I tested this by posting links to several other books on the same topic...books written by other investigators. Doug deleted all of them. Roza Bal now appears to be an obscure topic supported by a lone group of Ahmaddis (whom Doug does tolerate but only after arguments with him years ago). Further Doug has relentlessly followed me around Misplaced Pages to argue, delete, and comment on everything I do here. At the top of this page in bright red letters is a 'warning' about harassment.Doug,I consider you harassing me. This has nothing to do with Roza Bal anymore. You have taken this to a whole new personal level. How can you determine that it's OK for the Tomb of Jesus website to remain on the page? How can you allow Fida Hassnain, my co-author to remain on this page (and in other Wiki pages) as a source and reference, but not me? How can you allow the TOJ and Ahmaddi views and sources remain on the page, places that have used me as a source reference for years, but you do not tolerate me or my web site, www.rozabal.com, even if the contribution is made by my grandaughter or someone in China? You are clearly prejudiced and blindsided. You couldn't make that any more obvious than in your posts here. You have become the worse kind of Wiki editor. Shame on you Dougweller.]] SuzanneOlsson (talk) 13:18, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Noticeboard discussion

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. Thank you. This will make the discussion more transparent. Dougweller (talk) 11:31, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

WP:MEAT

Based on this edit, I think you need to read WP:MEAT and be aware of it. History2007 (talk) 17:43, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

==meat! == History2007, I think you are going too far and making insinuations intended to deliberately obfuscate the discussions at hand. You know what? I think I'll just go ahead and write to Misplaced Pages , including how this all started years ago and let's see if they see the same pattern over time. Just 2 days ago, quite a lot of my contributions were deleted- where there was obviously no COI. SuzanneOlsson (talk) 05:36, 28 January 2013 (UTC)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk) 05:36, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

You need to see Misplaced Pages:Contact us - Readers for the email address. Dougweller (talk) 09:17, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Oh that is so sweet of you to help me, Doug. Thank you.SuzanneOlsson (talk) 09:21, 28 January 2013 (UTC)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk) 09:21, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Everyone has a right to complain. Replies are handled by volunteers and I'm afraid there is a backlog so don't be surprised if there's a delay in anyone responding. Dougweller (talk) 09:25, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

I quite understand, since all "editors" are also all volunteers from all walks of life and all kinds of backgrounds, there are bound to be conflicts. I shall be patient. Do you want a copy of the letter when I send it? SuzanneOlsson (talk) 09:27, 28 January 2013 (UTC) Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk) 09:27, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Actually Ms Olsson can complain to the United Nations for all I care. I know policy and I have been following it, so she may get a WP:Boomerang out of it anyway. Neither Doug nor myself are advocating our self-published books here. That is clear. History2007 (talk) 13:01, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Well, if you had written something notable, or were "famous" as Doug pointed out earlier, then maybe MAYBE your self published books could be represented here. It is very important to follow policy. The point is not policy, the point is harassment and discrimination, which has become evident through the years, determined not by COI but by what well founded contributions I have made that are also deleted, always by exactly the same person(s). SuzanneOlsson (talk) 13:14, 28 January 2013 (UTC)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk) 13:14, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

WP:RS and WP:OR

Please do not add unsourced material to Misplaced Pages as you did in this edit, where you also removed sourced content which had WP:RS sources. The continued deletion of sourced content with WP:RS sources and the addition of unsourced original research and self-published items reduced encyclopedic quality and may result in a a block on your account. History2007 (talk) 13:17, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for that, History2007. I did indeed check your links and I am indeed well within the Misplaced Pages guidelines. I am not finished with the article revisions yet...so please be patient. In a few days the article will be as polished and well done as the article abut the Talpiot Tomb. I am gathering additional photos documentary films, and references.It should be the goal of every Wiki editor to see all pages done well.

Misplaced Pages articles should be based on reliable, published sources, making sure that all majority and significant minority views that have appeared in those sources are covered (see Misplaced Pages:Neutral point of view).

Information- Definition of source

The word "source" as used on Misplaced Pages has three related meanings:

           the piece of work itself (the article, book),
           the creator of the work (the writer, journalist),
           and the publisher of the work (for example, Random House or Cambridge University Press).

Any of the three can affect reliability. Reliable sources may be published materials with a reliable publication process, authors who are regarded as authoritative in relation to the subject, or both. These qualifications should be demonstrable to other people.

I am confident about being well within these guidelines. By the way, the link to the old TOJ site is not valid. The site crashed months ago and has not been rebuilt. When it is, I am sure someone will post a link to the new siteSuzanneOlsson (talk) 13:40, 28 January 2013 (UTC)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk) 13:40, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

No, I am sorry your sources are not WP:RS because you had no sources for several of your statements. What is the source for "In recent years independent researchers have continued to suggest that this is Jesus's tomb" and found "the 8 foot rod with the inscriptions"? You added no source. Some of the material seems to have come from your own book. Not a WP:RS item, and as I stated on the talk there Aziz Kashmir is not WP:RS either, as far as I can tell. You can discuss that on the talk there. On that note you need to read WP:Primary and WP:Secondary as well. And again, please read WP:Walls of text to avoid huge chunks of text as above. History2007 (talk) 13:53, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Aziz Kashmiri was a scholar at Kashmir University with many puublications to his credit. Atika Sadeeq is also a well known scholar. She has both conventional published and self published to her credit.I am still working on the page. Obviously because you are so intent on shredding it, I would be super careful that no references, statements or sources point back to me as the originator. Just give it a few days and I will have it completed. Unfortuenatly I have somethign called a life that prevents me from beinng here 24-7 to quickly respond to your doubts.

As I said, these sources should be discussed on article talk really. Aziz Kashmiri was a small time local author and the book does not have a WP:RS publisher. It is no WP:RS source as far as I can tell. Atika Sadeeqa's book is by Booksurge (as is your book) and neither is WP:RS. Let me say this again:

• Do not use Booksurge, or other self-published items.
• Try to find a book by Oxford University Press and use that.

Is that clear? Look, by stooping down to these self-published items, you have already lost the argument. If you had Cambridge University Press on your side you might have had a prayer. Now you do not. What everyone knows is that every author hopes to get a great publisher. After the rejection letter from Princeton University Press arrives, the rejected authors go out and self-publish. Everyone knows that. Everyone. But you really need to discuss sources on article talk. History2007 (talk) 14:05, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

About self-publishing, I can find hundreds of examples that are allowed to rest here on Misplaced Pages. I will refrain from directing you to them so they too don't get harassed or deleted. Unfortunately, as you say, if very decent scholarly work is not picked up by Princeton University, many are compelled to self-publish. That is not a criteria for determining the scholarly value of a book, or its value to society. That these books were written by published scholars should be helpful in determining their value. Further, you show a prejudice against authors who are writing in languages, and from places that you are not familiar with. You were quick to dismiss both Aziz Kashmiri and Atika Sadeeq without being able to relate to their image as scholars in India and Kashmir and other places in Central Asia. Because they usually wrote in languages more comfortable and more suitable for them such as Hindi, Urdu, and Sanskrit, and because they did not make it to mainstream America does not diminish their value or worth. It simply shows your total lack of familiarity with this topic. I would recommend that you stop insisting on only publishers like Princeton University, or many pages here at Wiki will have to be severely edited or comletely deleted. I hope that I can get at least one picture posted at the Roza bal site today. I have no idea where 'article talk' is...I have to follow the trail of links back till I find it..SuzanneOlsson (talk) 15:19, 28 January 2013 (UTC)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk) 15:19, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Article talk is here. And "value to society" means nothing in Misplaced Pages. Policies of Misplaced Pages are clear. You need to read WP:RS and respect those policies. They are not subject to debate. As for my insisting on reliable sources, note that I started the list of self-publishers on Misplaced Pages long before this, with the exact purpose of weeding them out. I was against self-publishing long before this. And Misplaced Pages policy is on my side. Craigslist has no such policies and may be more suitable for self-published authors. History2007 (talk) 15:50, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Ohhh sounds like History2007 needs some lunch!Did you weed them all out History2007? How long did that take you? Days? Weeks? Months? That must have been a very important project for you. Did Misplaced Pages thank you? I certainly hope so! You must be a very important editor here at Misplaced Pages. In that case, I will ask for your help as I make these contributions to Misplaced Pages...I dont know how to use all the codes. to insert pictures, to make links to sources and references. I may have known years ago, but I have to refresh my skills here. So just bear with me as I try to make Roza Bal into a really wonderful page that even an esteemed editor as yourself would be proud of....but it must be fair and include much more information..including the Ahmaddi views about the tomb. This is critical as they are just as important as one or two lone researchers who happen to get published by Princetion. Otherwise you might be though guilty of intellectual snobbery and religious predjudices and I wont tolerate that about History2007! No I wont. So be sure you also understand balanced and fair reporting, even if you personally think we are all loonies.SuzanneOlsson (talk) 16:11, 28 January 2013 (UTC)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk) 16:11, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Jan 2013edits lacking proper sources

In this edit you again added items such as youtube which are not WP:RS, and some more less than WP:RS sources. I will not revert you not to start an edit war, but do advise you to self-revert. History2007 (talk) 18:18, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

WP:3RR

You have not reached WP:3RR at the moment, but in this edit you are beginning to approach that line. Please avoid reverting other editors, read the WP:3RR page and note that it is a "bright line rule" so if you cross it your access will be blocked, and excuses will not be accepted. History2007 (talk) 18:18, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello SuzanneOlson. As an administrator I've been watching the edits at Roza Bal. Blocking of COI-affected editors is one of the possible remedies when such editors appear to be ignoring all advice about policy. Plenty of people have come to this page to raise concerns with you, but that seems to make no impression. You are expected to seek consensus for controversial changes. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 18:27, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Long term user behavior issues

Based on the comment above, I took a quick look around, given that I had only noticed this user a few days ago after an edit to add her new website to a page and the WP:FTN post about it. Now I think it was an absolute waste of time on my part to tell her to go and read WP:RS:

• She has been on Misplaced Pages for many years and was told about reliable sourcing in May 2008 by user:PaulB (Please note that he was also asking for my birth certificate to prove my age- and was deemed ridiculous by other editors-Suzanne Olsson))

• She was also told in May 2008 not to add self-published items to Misplaced Pages by user:Dougweller.

• And user:itsmejudith told her in clear terms that the Olsson book is not reliable and should not be used; but she is still using it (It is a personal choice to deem a book "unreliable" and clearly meant to stigmatize the author. Suzanne Olsson)

In fact it seems that she was editing as user:NewYork10021 in 2008, as user:PaulB noticed.

And it gets worse in that:

• In May 2008 there is a statement by user:Fullstop that: "Not only is SuzanneOlson not following what she's quoting, she has a general lack of understanding of how WP works. (Perhaps the Wiki editors made some errors that triggered all this? Suzanne Olsson).

So multiple users have been telling her to follow policy until they have turned blue in the face and got tired of telling her that. Now, I have to tell her to go and read WP:RS again after she quoted Jimmy Wales on sourcing back in 2008 and still does not source properly? (I certainly have sourced properly. I can point to many similar examples on Wiki. Suzanne Olsson)

If she did not listen in 2008, and then in 2013, is she ever going to listen and follow policy? I think this user will be blocked out sooner or later, and in my opinion the time is now. History2007 (talk) 22:02, 28 January 2013 (UTC) History2007.

• I believe you are being unfair. The Wiki page about Roza Bal was begun years ago, and not by me. When I found the page, it contained many errors. At that time myself and the members of the 'Tomb of Jesus' website tried to help with contributing current and relevant information. At that time we also started an author bio page. Time after time valuable and valid information was deleted. I see that HIstory2007 tends to favor editing Christian and religious pages. The Ahmaddiis were even called a fringe crank group at one time by a Wiki editor...when in fact there are millions of Ahmadiis worldwide and everything relevant to Roza Bal is relevant to them. Roza Bal is part of their religious faith. Yet all this was edited out. The article was reduced by prejudiced editors to describing a mere building and the least amount of history in 2-4 paragraphs. I asked you all to compare it with the page about the Talpiot tomb, another tomb for Jesus, and a wiki page that is constantly updated and is exceptionally well done. At my bio page, it didn't matter who edited or what went there. It was challenged and deleted. I was even asked for my birth certificate to prove claims about my age! And so I do not have the warmest respect for Wiki editors. Doug Weller apparently has my name and ISP in a special place. When ever I post he is right there ready to challenge and delete. Yes, I did write a book about Roza bal- yes, I did just acquire the Roza Bal domain name. Of course I take a special interest in how well the page is displayed and what accurate and complete information is there. This is no COI...it it common sense! Someone in California whom I dont know and only met once or twice on the Internet wanted to contribute something positive- purely on his own because he was interested in the topic. As soon as he posted my name he too was shot down and his contributions deleted. I am not a warm fuzzy person,. I feel ready to challenge every Wiki editor who enters this fruckas..when I see examples all over the Internet of others making contributions, referencing self-published books, "advertising" themselves by inserting links to their material, and even when I make editors here aware of it...they are ignored and I am challenged. That's why I take this so personally. You are not being fair. My name is Suzanne Olsson. I wrote a book about religious conflicts, cultural terrorism, Jesus survival of crucifixion, the name Yuz Asaf, his demise and burial at Roza Bal tomb. The book also includes a lot of genealogy and DNA info. There are probably dozens of relevant pages here at Wiki where my book could have been used as reference. It isn't a totally worthless book and I truly resent inferences from people like Doug and History2007 that something is "wrong" with me or my book. I spent ten years in that region gathering info. I came out with a lot of new previously unknown info that historians were grateful for...before it's all gone, destroyed by fundamentalists. There are clear reasons why I could not, and did not get a mainstream publisher- two of those reasons involve direct lifting of my copyright material by other authors who did mainstream publish. I could not get a publisher in the USA after that (although I do have a publisher in India that I am reluctant to use), and I even began a lawsuit against one of those authors. I had to drop that when lawyers wanted to hold title to my home for additional legal fees. I am self-published. That is better than not published at all. Last week I returned to Wiki to correct a bad link that had previously been left alone for several years. As soon as I did that, Doug Weller tried to delete that entry and challenged me on everything again. The fact is that link was already there, and had been for years. The link to the TOJ website is also a dead link. I am reluctant to remove it or make corrections..that is usually done by the TOJ staff, of course their contributions around the internet are NOT regarded as conflict of interest by you, although I, a Christian was also once the Vice President of that Ahmaddi group. That's how I figured out you are not being fair, and it is my name only that is drawing your attention. I made the decision to stand up to this abuse and discrimination. You are editors, people who may have been truck drivers and lemonade sellers in your private lives. Some of you are clearly prejudiced and discrimination. I do stand up to that kind of ridiculousness. Thank you. Have a nice day. Sue. (Above posted by Suzanne Olsson)

I really don't know what to tell you. For half a decade (yes, half a decade) user after user has been telling you not to use your self-published book on Misplaced Pages. Now on Jan 29, 2013 you are still arguing for its use in Misplaced Pages. This is as clear a case of WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT as one can get. That is all I can say. History2007 (talk) 15:14, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

When adding links to material on external sites, as you did to Roza Bal, please ensure that the external site is not violating the creator's copyright. Linking to websites that display copyrighted works is acceptable as long as the website's operator has created or licensed the work. Knowingly directing others to a site that violates copyright may be considered contributory infringement. This is particularly relevant when linking to sites such as YouTube, where due care should be taken to avoid linking to material that violates its creator's copyright. Misplaced Pages takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If you believe the linked site is not violating copyright with respect to the material, then you should do one of the following:

• If the linked site is the copyright holder, leave a message explaining the details on the article Talk page;
• If a note on the linked site credibly claims permission to host the material, or a note on the copyright holder's site grants such permission, leave a note on the article Talk page with a link to where we can find that note;
• If you are the copyright holder or the external site administrator, adjust the linked site to indicate permission as above and leave a note on the article Talk page;

If the material is available on a different site that satisfies one of the above conditions, link to that site instead. The BBC YouTube link is clearly copyvio. And as we assume copyright, the Indian documentary has been removed until it can be shown to be definitely copyright free or an official site used as a link. Dougweller (talk) 15:25, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

:::: Doug and History 2007- I would like to point your attention to this article about the changing attitude toward self published books- and the New York Times review of such books. New York Times Acceptance of Self- Published Books Drawing distinctions purely on the way that a book has been published now says more about the person making the comparison than the books they are comparing. The best of self-publishing can compete on equal terms with the best of traditional publishing I will have to check with Yashendra, the film producer in India. I know there was some conflict, but I thought it was resolved. I am also unaware of copyright conflict with the BC- There are so many links on the Internet to these films, Thank You for checking. We need to find the legitimate links!. SuzanneOlsson (talk) 16:14, 29 January 2013 (UTC)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk) 16:14, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

World attitudes may one day change Misplaced Pages policy. When policy changes, then those issues can be discussed. But Misplaced Pages policy has not changed. When it does that is a separate matter, but even discussing it would be shades of WP:CRYSTAL in some sense. History2007 (talk) 16:20, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

And we have articles on individual self-published books because they were best-sellers and covered widely in the mainstream press. You can always ask at WP:RSN if you want to argue that a certain self-published book is a reliable source. And if a world famous expert published a book - in their field of expertise - that would be ok also. Dougweller (talk) 16:26, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I often say that Milton Friedman could have written something on a paper napkin and it could have been RS. But in general, one can not just accept self-published items at large. History2007 (talk) 16:37, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Obviously, as the article about the NY Times makes clear, attitude toward self-published books is a personal call, saying more about the person making the call. You have already displayed your personal predjudices in this regard by allowing more compliant- less authoritative authors self-published fiction books to remain. I understand perfectly where you are coming from. Due to time difference between East Coast and India,I cannot contact India until after midnight tonight. I am doing best I can. SuzanneOlsson (talk) 17:03, 29 January 2013 (UTC)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk) 17:03, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Which books are these? And why haven't you removed them? Dougweller (talk) 17:09, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Why Doug, haven't you been following? I have pointed some out and raised the same questions. I was told they were "great" writers who attained some degree of public notoriety, while I was somewhere down there with Craig List editors and writers, or perhaps even lower than whale doodoo. 66.177.27.120 (talk) 05:04, 30 January 2013 (UTC)Suzanne Olsson66.177.27.120 (talk) 05:04, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

So no answer? You don't make it easy to follow, walls of text, formatting problems, etc. But if you won't name them, there's no need to take this complaint seriously. Dougweller (talk) 19:48, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

I have just noticed the complete removal of my book and links....I did not place those here originally. I returned recently to update a link I noticed that had been there for years. It pointed to my website. This is not COI, but normal maintenance, especially if the link had been there for several years ... You are exhibiting extreme prejudice and unfairness.You are even changing what has formerly remained for several years. You are being mean and spiteful. It has nothing to do with COI.We have been through this before .I have replaced the links. Please leave them alone. This is just plain harassment and discrimination on your part, animosity that now spans five years and is always initiated by Doug Weller. Of course you bring other editors in t support your views, but there are as many editors who will not.You are making personal and spiteful decisions. Didn't we have a mediator several years ago? And wasn't it decided to leave these links? I thhink I will have to seek mediation again to resolve this issue again. I am looking into that right now. SuzanneOlsson (talk) 05:18, 30 January 2013 (UTC)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk) 05:18, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi. I came to your talk page, but see it has already been said. History2007 and Dougweller are just making mainstream edits. If you want to add something useful to the article please do so from mainstream print sources. It could for example do with one glaring obvious hole filled. Who do the local Sunnis say Yuz Asuf is? What are their sources for believing it to be a muslim holy man? In ictu oculi (talk) 10:10, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Ictu oculi>1 Corinthians 15:52: In momento, in ictu oculi, in novissima tuba (in the blink /twinkling of an eye). The question about local business men starting a rumor about Yuz Asaf is simply not true. The local caretaker made up that story in front of news cameras, including the Government of India film Board. He changed his stories often. He threatened local film crews with violece if they returned. It was a bad situation. Several film crews have this filmed.. There are huge undercurrents due to the animosity between Sunni, Shia, and Ahmaddi Muslims. Ahmaddis are considered heretical outcasts from mainstream Islam. If they see Jesus is buried in Roza Bal, then local Sunni/Shia business men will deny this, mock the claims, and even attempt to destroy the tomb in their hatred for Ahmaddis. Thus the tomb is on a delicate tightrope. On the one hand it generates huge profits for just 5 men who control it. On the other hand it goes against their Sunni religious beliefs, and so they must appear to maintain the tomb even as they desecrate it and destroy evidence. That is why it is important to seek out and include any info prior to founding of the Ahmaddis in 1889. What drew the founder to conclude that Jesus was buried in Roza Bal? What evidence suggested Jesus was Yuz Asaf before then?Another thing that appears often and is simply not true is the meaning of "Yuz Asaf". it does not and never has meant 'the gatherer'..It means 'son of Joseph' and this is quite clear in ancient Persian writings. That is how the term asaf is used. Gondopharnes had a son known as Gundasaf. I have to find the sources, but this is exactly how the term is used is Farsi and Dari and Pashtu. I cannot thank you all enough for bringing the Roza Bal page up to higher standards. I will do anything I can to help you obtain substantiating references, photos, or additional info. SuzanneOlsson (talk)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk)

I was just contacted by someone who read the revised "Roza Bal' article. It is clearly meant to persuade a reader that it is a fantasy with no merit. Because the significant relics, plus matters relating to the historicity of the tomb, such as the Court case in the 1700's, have been omitted, the intention from the slant of the article is to mislead the reader and denigrate the tomb and its research. Further proof is that self-published fiction, such as 'The RozaBal Line' is mentioned, whilst more reliable first hand research is omitted. This further substantiates the bias of the editors. However, it is a start and certainly an improvement over its previous version. There are relics and photos and much more literature that could have, and one day will be included. There is certainly more substantiation for this tomb of Jesus than even for the Talpiot Tomb in Jerusalem. I might add that many scholars think James Tabor and Simon Jacobovici are mad archaeologists who are wishful thinking, using spotty and poor research to build their cases.This is mentioned a their Wiki site. Once the relics from Roza Bal are included in this article, it will not be so misleading and the historical basis for the claims can be more clearly understood by readers and researchers. As it stands now, the article appears biased and is missing valuable and relevant information. However, I thank God for small favors and trust that other editors will continue to arrive here, take an interest, and build on the article. I have not got reply back from India yet. Soon as I know the correct link to their film, I will provide it for you. Again, my thanks to those who got it this far. I am grateful to you. SuzanneOlsson (talk)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk)

Repeated addition of unsourced material and original research

Please do not add original research and unsourced material as you did in this edit, once again. History2007 (talk) 18:28, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

• Foul Play History 2007. The only one guilty of disruptive editing here is you. Exactly what part of that entry was "poorly sourced"? You already removed the sources I provided. You don't play fair. You edit like a bully with an agenda. Shame on you. You should be blocked for deliberately planting false information on this wiki page, such as the untruths about the first appearance of the Christian cross. When I tried to correct that, I got blocked. Your bias and prejudice are now glaringly apparent. You have slanted information in too many ways. You really are a very bad "editor" here at Wiki, guilty of the worse kind of distortion of information..SuzanneOlsson (talk)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk)

I am sorry, I did not remove any of your text that I complained about in the above. I only tagged it as needing better sources. History2007 (talk) 01:29, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Please note that much of your text was removed in this edit by another editor, and I think rightly so given that you specifically thanked that editor yourself, said the "page looks really wonderful now" after he had deleted your material, and offered to send him a copy of your book. He did very well in fact, as all agreed on the talk page. I never stated on the talk page that the "Cross" was not an early Christian symbol. I stated on the talk page that the "Rosary" was not an early Christian symbol. Note that you had used the term carved images of a crucifix and a rosary in the material removed in that edit. I never stated on the talk page that a "Cross" was not an early Christian symbol. I specifically stated that about the "Rosary", and I will say that again: the Rosary was a 13th century item. Please be careful about what you state. History2007 (talk) 02:54, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

I apologize. I have become paranoid dealing with some Wiki editors. Why would he just "stumble in" and decide to make those edits and block me? Random acts of editing? Hmmm. I did thank an editor, then his edits started getting edited...and changed. I thought you were familiar enough with the material to know the background story about the "Rosary beads" as Hassnain called them. This was later challenged and the description changed. The fact is they have been totally scratched out by the local caretakers and dont even exist anymore. There is also a sword in a stone that appears in several books about the tomb. Hassnain called this a cross, but others identified it as a sword. Regardless, one thing no one has EVER raised issue with (except you) is the authenticity of the relics. I have not seen all the information contained in the Archaeology Survey of India reports. I am not sure if they are even published outside a few places. They contain reports substantiating the claimed age of the relics. All that remains to be done is carbon 14 dating, which till now has been blocked by the caretakers. The situation is this: The Ahmaddis are considered a sect by all other Muslim groups. They are not even allowed to call themselves Muslims or perform Haj (required visit to mecca by all Muslims). The rate at which they are persecuted is appalling. Every effort has been made to discredit them and their beliefs. Hassnain was a Sunni Muslim when he, and other Sunni Muslims, and Hindus, worked for the India Archaeology Survey. Every chance they got they would have taken to discredit the relics, thus discrediting the very foundations of Ahmaddii beliefs. But what happened? Instead of discrediting the Ahmaddis, Hassnain also became a believer (in the authenticity of the relics). The evidence withstood their examination and not one- NOT ONE- professional archaeologist/historian has ever come forward and caste doubt on the authenticity of the relics, although it was within their religious beliefs to do so any way they could. I am shocked that you question the authenticity of the relics. This has never ever been an issue and should not be in the future. I have begged for these relics to be well documented and carbon 14 dated. What is holding this p is the attitude of the caretakers. They don't want any proof that might help the Ahmaddi position. It is that simple. And that complicated. I hope you are not making things worse by the way you are slanting things on the Roza bal pageSuzanneOlsson (talk)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk)

Well, that is a detailed "content discussion" now. What I was pointing out was that I referred to Rosary and not Cross, and that I did not delete your text. History2007 (talk) 03:23, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

You have been blocked

SuzanneOlsson (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2= I have been victim of editors with agendas here at Wiki. This has been ongoing for 5 years. The problems raised are always initiated by DougWeller and an occasional editor who joins his ranks, as the current editor calling himself History2007. I am accused of COI and being a worthless self-published writer posting pseudo-history. These editors have included self-published fictional editors as reference material while eliminating more serious scholarly works. I believe it is apparent the page Roza Bal is being edited to make it appear a joke, based on 'faked relics' from the 13th and 4th centuries. There is no basis for this claim. It is completely made up by the editor. That has never EVER before been an issue raised about the relics at Roza Bal tomb. Photos of the relics appear in almost every book written about Roza Bal. I included one of the books, 'The Fifth Gospel' by Fida Hassnain, and included sources. These have been removed. The information appearing under 'Relics" has been edited to seemingly support the idea the relics are fake. The evidence to support their authenticity can and should be included. Much of this has been removed. A statement made by History2007 that crosses/crucifixes were not in use to represent Christianity during the first and second century is a blatantly false statement. Further, calling a cross on a string "Rosary Beads' may be an innocent error by someone not familiar with the religion of Christianity. When I tried to correct this, I was suddenly blocked for "disruptive editing". The only thing I did disruptive was to point out the falsehoods in another editor's statements. I even pointed to the Wiki page that supported the correct facts. I believe these editors are acting in a very irresponsible way, allowing only negative information about Roza bal that supports their very biased views, deleting books on a whim, even those by respected scholars in India. I would like the ban on my editing removed. I would like to revise that entire page to remove their bias and religious prejudices. To allow the page to stand as it is, is an affront to the true spirit of Misplaced Pages. For me this is not about a COI but about presenting the truth in a fair and balanced manner. If I dont stand up for fair and balanced Wiki pages, then who will? Please remove the block. It was placed unfairly. Thank You. Suzanne Olsson] (]) 02:37, 1 February 2013 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1= I have been victim of editors with agendas here at Wiki. This has been ongoing for 5 years. The problems raised are always initiated by DougWeller and an occasional editor who joins his ranks, as the current editor calling himself History2007. I am accused of COI and being a worthless self-published writer posting pseudo-history. These editors have included self-published fictional editors as reference material while eliminating more serious scholarly works. I believe it is apparent the page Roza Bal is being edited to make it appear a joke, based on 'faked relics' from the 13th and 4th centuries. There is no basis for this claim. It is completely made up by the editor. That has never EVER before been an issue raised about the relics at Roza Bal tomb. Photos of the relics appear in almost every book written about Roza Bal. I included one of the books, 'The Fifth Gospel' by Fida Hassnain, and included sources. These have been removed. The information appearing under 'Relics" has been edited to seemingly support the idea the relics are fake. The evidence to support their authenticity can and should be included. Much of this has been removed. A statement made by History2007 that crosses/crucifixes were not in use to represent Christianity during the first and second century is a blatantly false statement. Further, calling a cross on a string "Rosary Beads' may be an innocent error by someone not familiar with the religion of Christianity. When I tried to correct this, I was suddenly blocked for "disruptive editing". The only thing I did disruptive was to point out the falsehoods in another editor's statements. I even pointed to the Wiki page that supported the correct facts. I believe these editors are acting in a very irresponsible way, allowing only negative information about Roza bal that supports their very biased views, deleting books on a whim, even those by respected scholars in India. I would like the ban on my editing removed. I would like to revise that entire page to remove their bias and religious prejudices. To allow the page to stand as it is, is an affront to the true spirit of Misplaced Pages. For me this is not about a COI but about presenting the truth in a fair and balanced manner. If I dont stand up for fair and balanced Wiki pages, then who will? Please remove the block. It was placed unfairly. Thank You. Suzanne Olsson] (]) 02:37, 1 February 2013 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1= I have been victim of editors with agendas here at Wiki. This has been ongoing for 5 years. The problems raised are always initiated by DougWeller and an occasional editor who joins his ranks, as the current editor calling himself History2007. I am accused of COI and being a worthless self-published writer posting pseudo-history. These editors have included self-published fictional editors as reference material while eliminating more serious scholarly works. I believe it is apparent the page Roza Bal is being edited to make it appear a joke, based on 'faked relics' from the 13th and 4th centuries. There is no basis for this claim. It is completely made up by the editor. That has never EVER before been an issue raised about the relics at Roza Bal tomb. Photos of the relics appear in almost every book written about Roza Bal. I included one of the books, 'The Fifth Gospel' by Fida Hassnain, and included sources. These have been removed. The information appearing under 'Relics" has been edited to seemingly support the idea the relics are fake. The evidence to support their authenticity can and should be included. Much of this has been removed. A statement made by History2007 that crosses/crucifixes were not in use to represent Christianity during the first and second century is a blatantly false statement. Further, calling a cross on a string "Rosary Beads' may be an innocent error by someone not familiar with the religion of Christianity. When I tried to correct this, I was suddenly blocked for "disruptive editing". The only thing I did disruptive was to point out the falsehoods in another editor's statements. I even pointed to the Wiki page that supported the correct facts. I believe these editors are acting in a very irresponsible way, allowing only negative information about Roza bal that supports their very biased views, deleting books on a whim, even those by respected scholars in India. I would like the ban on my editing removed. I would like to revise that entire page to remove their bias and religious prejudices. To allow the page to stand as it is, is an affront to the true spirit of Misplaced Pages. For me this is not about a COI but about presenting the truth in a fair and balanced manner. If I dont stand up for fair and balanced Wiki pages, then who will? Please remove the block. It was placed unfairly. Thank You. Suzanne Olsson] (]) 02:37, 1 February 2013 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

Ms Olsson, I will respond above. But your assertions about my statements are less than accurate, as above. History2007 (talk) 02:46, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello SuzanneOlsson. It's my guess that the blocking admin would lift your sanction if you would agree *not* to make any more edits to articles in areas where you have a conflict of interest. You would not edit any Misplaced Pages articles on topics where you have written any books or articles yourself or posted anything on your own website, www.rozabal.com. That would include anything about the lost years of Jesus or the topic of Jesus in the East. You could not create any new articles on people who have written about these topics. In particular you would have to avoid the following articles:

• Unknown years of Jesus
• Jesus in Ahmadiyya Islam
• Jesus bloodline
• Nicolas Notovitch
• Fida Hassnain
• Roza Bal

You would not be able to edit these articles directly, but you could still post on their talk pages. You would agree to edit Misplaced Pages under only one single account, and not recruit anyone from off Misplaced Pages to edit these articles. You would agree to leave any questions about the scope of this restriction to the judgment of other editors at WP:COIN or any admin noticeboard. Let me know if you will make this agreement. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 04:01, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

• Requests for unblock