Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 13:20, 15 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 research 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:

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 OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk) 02:37, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Decline reason:

There are, I am afraid, serious problems with your editing. If you cannot see that, then I suggest spending some of the time of this block looking back at your editing history, and particularly your interactions with other editors, and try to imagine how it will look to an impartial outside observer. I am such an outside observer, never having been aware of your existence until I came here to assess this unblock request, and, to help you, I will give you a brief summary of how it looked to me when I arrived here and looked at your history.

Most of your comment in this unblock request do not address the reasons for the block, but simply tell us that you think everyone else is wrong, that you are the victim of a conspiracy, that anyone who disagrees with you is "biased" and "prejudiced", etc etc. Apparently you don't see that this kind of stuff is one of the major reasons why you are blocked, and that doing it in an unblock request serves only to confirm the validity of the block. It is certainly not likely to get you unblocked. It is clear that your whole perspective is coloured by your single-minded concern with the notion that you are RIGHT and anyone who expresses an opposing view is WRONG. You accuse anyone who disagrees with you of bias, prejudice, being part of a conspiracy, lying, etc etc. You persistently edit with about as blatant a conflict of interest as I have ever seen in a Misplaced Pages editor. You make endless attempts to use Misplaced Pages to promote and publicise your own work and your own opinions. You show no ability or willingness to collaborate, compromise, or to be willing to consider others' points of view, but instead exhibit a battleground attitude to all other editors. You show no respect at all for the principal that Misplaced Pages works by consensus, preferring the view that you know best, so your opinion should prevail. You edit war to try to force your versions of articles through. By your own account, the problem has existed for five years. I see that you yourself have used the word "paranoid" in reference to your attitude to other Misplaced Pages editors, and that is exactly how it looks from my perspective: paranoia, where anyone and anything that does not fit with your view is seen as an attack on you and on the truth. You say "I have been victim of editors with agendas here at Wiki". You may like to consider whether seeing yourself as a "victim" may be part of the very paranoia you refer to, and also to ask yourself who is likely to look to an impartial observer as though they have come here with an agenda. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:10, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Thanks James Watson. In the first place, I appear here at Wiki about once a year to check for dead links and repair them. That's all. Every time I do, DougWeller appears . I think he secretly has a crush on me. ;-) So do not accuse me of blatant self-promotion. During this last round, I asked and suggested to make changes to include the relics and other books and sources., to help the Roza Bal page, which had been reduced to 3-4 small paragraphs by editors. It turned into a mess but I stood my ground in defense of balanced presentations here at Wiki. The issue is not COI or self-promotion. I have web sites for that. I object to clear bias in construction of the Roza Bal article, which is construed to promote a Christian agenda with no tolerance for ideas beyond Christian fundamentalism. The relics, the mention of Jesus after crucifixion, it all is part of the reason why the tomb in Kashmir might be connected historically with Jesus. Instead of inserting anything that might balance the reporting,the article is slanted to appear that all serious research into Roza Bal can be dismissed as a hoax, and everyone who investigates the claims is somehow a hoaxer or a fraud, or in other ways made to appear less than trustworthy or sane. Negative comments reflecting views of fundamentalist Christians are emphasized. A case in point would be deleting all reference to the ancient relics found at the tomb, or, as one editor suggested, claiming they are 13th/14th century hoaxes. No such proof ever existed. It was apparently made up in the editor's head and is not what the Archaeology Survey of India research concludes. It is false information. My recent presence here has nothing to do with "self-promotion." Author Holger Kersten is also labeled a quack and dismissed as unreliable. Only one derogatory quote in existence about him is used, instead of all the praise and support for his work. Holger Kersetn is a graduate of Freiburg University. He has a degree in comparative religions and the study of educational methods. Only one negative comment was made in the entire world, and it appears here while the overwhelming support for Kersten is never mentioned. The Bible has 12 accounts of Jesus surviving crucifixion, not to mention independent witnesses outside the Bible. I was blocked for not sourcing properly, yet earlier I did provide sources and asked for time to gather more. The sources I did provide were removed. I am not promoting my book or my views here. I was hoping for fair and balanced editing about the Roza Bal article and that is not happening. I am given a list of pages that I cannot edit on, although I haven't edited on them anyway and they've existed for years at Misplaced Pages. Why was this brought up? To create a further bad image about my presence here? None of those topics was an issue for me because those pages were created and maintained by different editors and those editors HAVE been fair and balanced. Thank you for your reply. I'll take the 1 week ban instead. Others who come here to read about Roza Bal will instantly realize the real issues. You have a nice day. SuzanneOlsson (talk)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk)

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)

History2007, I am disappointed in you. I dont see having any further dialogue with you. According to the terms laid down about lifting the ban, you, Doug Weller, are free to write anything you want on the Roza Bal page, and I wont be challenging you. I feel hurt, sad, angry, and disappointed by the slanted prejudices of the Roza Bal page. There is nothing more I can say or do. So have at it. You've won the editing battle with me. Good for you. Bad for Roza Bal fair and balanced reporting. By the way, prayer beads have been in use long before Christianity. It may have started in India, passed on to Buddhism, then Christianity, then Islam. Hassnain may have erred calling them Rosary Beads, when the description 'prayer beads' would have been more fitting. But don't let that minor detail stop you. SuzanneOlsson (talk)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk)

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)

Ed Johnston, Judgement of other editors? And which editors might that be? The biased ones who have tried to make a joke and mockery of Roza Bal? Perhaps you should also forbid me to edit other things I mentioned in my book: information about DNA, terrorism, YuzAsaf, history of religions, comparative religions, crucifixion, Buddhism, Saint Thomas, Mary Magdalene, Mother Mary, Murree, Pakistan, Noah, Moses, Bible, Brahma, Sarasvati, tomb of Joseph in Sechem, cultural terrorism, ...and more. Well, I may have to do editing at Craig List as History2007 suggested. Do what you want. I am too disheartened by this to even respond to you. In my humble opinion, the whole historical concept of Roza bal and Yuz Asaf are about to reach a new low. SuzanneOlsson (talk)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk)

This doesn't sound to me like "I understand the concern and am willing to comply with WP policies." It is possible that this editor is able to contribute by providing tangible directions to (non-self published) print sources, and that would be welcomed. This contribution would need to be first demonstrated on Talk pages, not by direct editing of COI articles. In ictu oculi (talk) 05:48, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Actually the above response reminded me of what user:Fullstop said in 2008: "her assumption that she (and only she) is the sole arbitrator of truth". I think what is observed here may be a manifestation of that assumption, and that is why WP:RS sources are not the focus of the discussions. History2007 (talk) 06:09, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

"Manifestation of that assumption, that only "I" know the truth"...I do not know all truths,I do recognize outright lies, errors, and bias, such as trying to mislead people to believe that the relics are 13th century frauds....when not a shred of evidence exists to support your personal "theory".. by the way In ictu oculi, I did post sources. They were deleted. I certainly do understand wiki policies...and see them violated by the very same editors who would then find so much fault with me. SuzanneOlsson (talk)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk)

• As the blocking admin, I would indeed unblock if the terms suggested by EdJohnston were adhered to; I would however specify no editing of any religious articles at all, not merely of Jesus in the East or the Lost years, for a period of not less than one year, the topic ban could be re-examined after that point. Whether you accept this unblock offer or not, you are put on notice; if I see you trying to use your own book as a source, I will block you again for tendentious editing and self-promotion. KillerChihuahua 13:12, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

I would support this with the extension you suggest. I'll also note for the record that Roza Bal is on my watchlist, so unless I'm on a break I see every edit to it. Dougweller (talk) 13:58, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

In the first place, I appear here at Wiki about once a year to check for dead links and repair them on only two pages, Roza Bal and Yuz Asaf. That's all. Every time I do, DougWeller appears because I'm on his 'watch list' . I think he secretly has a crush on me. ;-) So do not accuse me of blatant self-promotion. During this last round, I asked and suggested to make changes to include the relics and other books and sources to help the Roza Bal page, which had been reduced to 3-4 small paragraphs by editors. This was agreed to.It turned into a mess but I stood my ground in defense of balanced presentations here at Wiki. The issue is not COI or self-promotion. I have web sites for that. I object to clear bias in construction of the Roza Bal article, which is construed to promote a Christian agenda with no tolerance for ideas beyond Christian fundamentalism. The relics, the mention of Jesus after crucifixion, it all is part of the reason why the tomb in Kashmir might be connected historically with Jesus. Instead of inserting anything that might balance the reporting,the article is slanted to appear that all serious research into Roza Bal can be dismissed as a hoax, and everyone who investigates the claims is somehow a hoaxer or a fraud, or in other ways made to appear less than trustworthy or sane. Negative comments reflecting views of fundamentalist Christians are emphasized. A case in point would be deleting all reference to the ancient relics found at the tomb, or, as one editor suggested, claiming they are 13th/14th century hoaxes. No such proof ever existed. It was apparently made up in the editor's head and is not what the Archaeology Survey of India research concludes. It is false information. My recent presence here has nothing to do with "self-promotion." Author Holger Kersten is also labeled a quack and dismissed as unreliable. Only one derogatory quote in existence about him is used, instead of all the praise and support for his work. Holger Kersetn is a graduate of Freiburg University. He has a degree in comparative religions and the study of educational methods. Only one negative comment was made in the entire world, and it appears here while the overwhelming support for Kersten is never mentioned. The Bible has 12 accounts of Jesus surviving crucifixion, not to mention independent witnesses outside the Bible. I was blocked for not sourcing properly, yet earlier I did provide sources and asked for time to gather more. The sources I did provide were removed. I am not promoting my book or my views here. That is also false information. Ban me for a year? Now you really are laying on the tar and featghers! That is totally unwarented and excessive, I have done absolutely nothing to warrent that. I was hoping for fair and balanced editing about the Roza Bal article and that is not happening. I am given a list of pages that I cannot edit on, although I have never edited on them anyway and they've existed for years at Misplaced Pages. Why was this brought up? To create a further bad image about my presence here? I have never used my own book for a source..that too is a blatant error intended to mislead. None of those topics was an issue for me because those pages were created and maintained by different editors and those editors HAVE been fair and balanced. I'll take the 1 week ban instead. Others who come here to read about Roza Bal conflicts will instantly realize the real issues. They have become very transparent by now. You have a nice day. SuzanneOlsson (talk)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk)

You are not banned, for one week or any period. You cannot "take the one week ban" because you have no ban to "take". You are blocked. Please read the linked pages so you do not make the same error again. I am suggesting you be topic banned for a year, and that is likely to happen whether you wish it or not. You will still be able to edit all of Misplaced Pages except those pages which fall under the general category of religious topics, broadly construed. Do you understand the difference now, and what a topic ban means, and what a block means? Please limit your reply to what I have written here, and do not waste time and space writing about other editors at all. KillerChihuahua 14:46, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Why should I be banned for a year? That is assuming I did something terribly wrong, and I did not. I have not edited anything here for years except the occassional broken link. The conflict with other Wiki editors always revolves around actions initiated by Doug weller and spirals from there. I did not self-promote, I listed most sources immediately and asked for a day or so to locate the additional sources (which I have). I have not edited any of those "other" pages at Misplaced Pages, religious content or otherwise ...not one. When a paragraph at Roza bal was deliberately inaccurate or misleading, I spoke up, mainly in consideration of the religious sensitivities of others such as the Ahmaddiss. So what justification do you feel warrants these excessive blocks on me? SuzanneOlsson (talk)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk)

You would not be site banned, you would be topic banned. You would be allowed to edit all of Misplaced Pages except religious articles. Do you understand that no one is (currently) talking about site banning you, only about topic banning you? Also, what part of me telling you not to write about other editors did you fail to comprehend? Do not blame Doug Weller or any other editor; I blocked you due to your own actions. You need to stop accusing others. KillerChihuahua 14:59, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Sure, it's all my fault, but I did not edit or self promote any pages here at Wiki that warrant these "topic blocks." This appears to be 'made-up' and punitive. Couldn't I just buy you coffee and a box of donuts and call it settled? By the way, I have two killer Maltese. SuzanneOlsson (talk)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk)

I'm going to try one last time. There is no such thing as a "topic block". You are not banned. No one is talking about a general site ban. I am talking about a topic ban. Please read WP:BAN and WP:BLOCK, and study them until you are absolutely certain you understand the difference between a block, a topic ban and a site ban. Until you do, we cannot possibly communicate effectively. Your ignorance bars any meaningful dialogue. KillerChihuahua 15:28, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Chihuahua..site ban-topic ban-block-yes sir! I've got it! It's not ignorance, it's a devastatingly hectic morning here and I am still trying to give you full 100% attention and responses. Sorry if I err, but be assured I have been putting you first all morning..More coffee? SuzanneOlsson (talk)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk)

It's either ignorance, or an appalling lack of care on your part. Block and ban are not synonyms, and you've been using them as if they were. As a side note, I am female. "Yes sir" is inappropriate. KillerChihuahua 15:39, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

You are female? WOOHOO! Delighted to hear thaty. My son died a few days ago. We are having a memorial service here today. I have done the best I can under circumstances to pay attention and respond to you. Today is probably one of the most 'ignorant' days of my life, yet I am still trying to respond so you dont think I'm ignoring you. I'm just heavily and emotionally overburdened today...But you have my attention! Thank you mam. SuzanneOlsson (talk)Suzanne Olsso~~

You have my deepest sympathies, I cannot begin to fathom the depth of your loss. There is no need to respond here quickly; please take care of your personal business and return here only when you feel up to it. KillerChihuahua 15:56, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

DAM IT! Stop being so nice. Now you made me cry. All week I've been beating up DougWeller and History2007- if they hadn't been available, I probably would have hit a cop and spent this week in jail. It's been hard..really hard. I want to scream at the whole universe. Thank you for your kind words. There are expected 25-30 people here today- I'm rushing between front door and kitchen...It'll be a long hard day. If we can resume this late tonight or tomorrow morning, that would be best. Blessings, Sue SuzanneOlsson (talk)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk)

I'm not sure how much I'll be able to be here tomorrow and Sat as I have company coming this weekend, but I will try to check when I can spare a moment. Post whenever you like, I will reply when I can. Again, I am so, so sorry to hear of this loss. KillerChihuahua 17:07, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

As for Holger Kersten, surely no one here said anything worse than " The noted German scholar of New Testament Apocrypha Wilhelm Schneemelcher, in a revision of his standard work prior to his death in 2003, and in unusually strong language for the scholarly community states that Kersten's work is based on "fantasy, untruth and ignorance (above all in the linguistic area)" and "has nothing to do with historical research."Gerald O'Collins and Daniel Kendall view that "Kersten's discredited book" is simply the repackaging of Notovich and Ahmad's material for consumption by the general public." If they are critical it isn't unreasonable to expected editors here to be crirical. Dougweller (talk) 15:26, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Was he a Christian critic, Doug? That makes a huge difference on his interpretation. For those with Christian inclinations, suggesting that Jesus survived beyond crucifixion is blasphemy and every effort is made to discredit such claims.

I suspect they all are. Specialists in the New Testament usually are. I think I forgot to say how sorry I am for your loss - I'm glad I've been available as a punchbag. Kirsten can't be used for factual assertions but his views might be appropriate. Dougweller (talk) 17:47, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Just a minor note that this issue is not a Muslim/Christian scholarly debate, and the Ahmadi views which are the subject of this discussion are not supported by mainstream Muslims at large, and those scholars do not accept them. On the other issue, some of the most respected New Testament scholars such as Amy-Jill Levine, Geza Vermes or Paula Fredriksen are Jewish. And there are Japanese scholars such as Wataru Mizugaki, etc. After much searching we have not seen any mainstream scholars from major universities writing books that support the Roza Bal hypothesis, hence the self-published issues. If one searches for global warming, there are views on all sides. Here there are not. I will, however, have to stop watching this page and the Roza Bal page for I have spent far more time on it than ever intended. I had already offered my condolences to Ms Olsson on article talk, but let me offer them again now. History2007 (talk) 21:04, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Dear All, Thank you for kind wishes and condolences. I can think of little to add. Holger Kersten spent several weeks in Srinagar, and became fast friends with several scholars there, including Aziz Kashmiri and Dr. Hassnain. They are in touch to this day (as best as men of their age can be) and exchange research related to Roza Bal. I dont know what if anything Holger Kersten wrote about the esoteric. I know he has written extensively in German, scholarly books related to the field of education (his special area of expertise) as related to me by Professor Hassnain. This is why I believe that reviewer was biased and unfair. He classed one book by Kersten as writing "fantasy, untruths, and ignorance"...I could not finish Kersten's book. He drifted off on some Buddhist quest to the end. I couldn't follow him. From all that I've read on the topic, I think the best research by far has been done by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. He was clearly intent on destroying Christian beliefs, believing they would then see the 'truths' of Islam and convert.Regardless what anyone believes about his claims, the relics of Roza Bal have existed and acknowledged at least since the 1700's court case. I dont know what documents exist in India to support the historicity of the tomb. Much has still never been translated from Sanskrit and Urdu and Hindi and Farsi.Hassnain and others who can read these languages have more knowledge than I do about these supporting documents. To this day I believe that all this can be settled with scientific analysis of the tomb, the artifacts, and especially the DNA. It stands for nothing by itself, but if combined with DNA from The Cave of the Patriarchs or the Cave of Machpelah-Abraham and Sarah, and the DNA of Muhammad, who also claimed decent from Abraham. This would settle it all, once and for all. I have spent years writing letters and meeting with groups including National Geographic and Oxford University hoping to gain support and funding for such a huge undertaking. I have even offered to mortgage/sell my own home to finance the project....but it seems never enough. One day perhaps it will happen. Till then, everything is speculation. I stand by the historicity based primarily on the artifacts. No one I am aware of to this date has been able to disprove their background and age. Doug and History2007, I'm sorry I was so difficult last week. You two kept my mind off matters at hand, that I had to face eventually. I dont know what else I can say or do here. You and chihuhua make whatever decisions you are so inclined to make. It is what it is. Had I meant harm or deceit I would never have entered with my full name and same old ISP. The Roza Bal page has come a long way and I know you'll nurture the jewel in the lotus and help it grow into a really great page. Get those pictures and background info of artifacts from Roza Bal! These can be found on the Internet and in most books on the topic. Ken Lee at 'eleven shadows' website has some great pics taken when he visited Roza Bal. The Rod only gets photographed about once every 30 years. It needs some serious scientific research. I'll leave you to it. If I can help in any way, or provide any background information, let me know. I wish you the best. SuzanneOlsson (talk)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk)

No one thinks that you intended harm or deceit, or any ill at all. We all believe you to be trying to help make sure Misplaced Pages is accurate, and your good will is appreciated. Unfortunately, we, as an encyclopedia, must adhere to what the recognized literature and experts have to say. Misplaced Pages is not a place to set matters straight. That must happen elsewhere, before we can consider it being here. While this may mean some articles are a bit behind the curve on the most cutting edge thinking, it prevents us from giving a soapbox to every fringe theory to come along. We wait for the dust to settle. We don't help it do so. I wish you all the best in your quest; I imagine it is very exciting and interesting. However, we cannot give it the weight which you would prefer to see. KillerChihuahua 23:49, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Dear Killer Chihuahua, thank you for kind words...I do understand. I think what "motivates" me to react at all is knowing so many Ahmaddiis..when anything about their religious beliefs appears "ridiculed" or demeaned in any way, they suffer. Their rate of persecution and deaths is appalling. It's OK to regard it as a 'fringe' theory, but it is not OK to give even more ammunition to people who would use it as justification for continued murder and suffering of these people...How something is worded can make all the difference- especially on "that" side of the world. Many thanks for all your help. SuzanneOlsson (talk)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk)

I'm not sure we should be editing to protect the sensitivities of adherents of any religion, but I can assure you that Ahmadiyya is on my watchlist & I protect it from attacks by other Muslims. Dougweller (talk) 11:01, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Topic_ban_on_user_SuzanneOlsson regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --Biker Biker (talk) 04:35, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Misplaced Pages pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 05:20, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

How to use strike through

Suzanne, aside from the Urdu page numbers and ISBNs, you should note what BikerBiker said about WP:NPA. Your comments today on Dougweller are not acceptable (not least because he's one of the most balanced and respected editors in this field) and you should strike them, to do that you can use < s > text < / s>. Best wishes. In ictu oculi (talk) 06:31, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

I am not sure what exactly is "unacceptable" when I look at the comments made about me here. However, I do resent that the next notice I got from Wiki (out of the blue) was to consider a ban on my website, or me, or an url, or all of it from Wiki. I thought we just got done with all that, and now he wants more? Doug insinuated that I "might" try to insert my website as self-promotion or COI, and this is simply not true. Since that last fiasco, I haven't edited any wiki pages- I haven't added or deleted any urls on wiki pages. I hadn't even intended on returning if that notice on bans had not been brought to my attention. I dont think this is fair, especially since you claim that Doug is such a respected editor here. I would have to disagree totally with that opinion based solely on what I've seen. Ayways....strike-out some lines? I'll try to figure out which ones are offending him...did it have something to do with bowling alleys and sports? All the best, Sue SuzanneOlsson (talk) 07:09, 14 February 2013 (UTC)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk) 07:09, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

I did not say "Doug is offended" - the issue is not Dougweller it is your edits. As an experienced admin he'd have very broad shoulders, what I said was "you should note what BikerBiker said about WP:NPA. Your comments today on Dougweller are not acceptable," not acceptable by WP:NPA. Please see WP:NPA for what is and what isn't acceptable. Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:55, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

I would like to repeat- I do not believe that my edits are or ever were the problem here. Even when contributions were made by others about me, they were deleted or challenged on the assumption that I somehow arranged these. As I pointed out earlier, I was even asked for my birth certificate to prove my birthdate here on Misplaced Pages. I was asked for things that were unreasonable and clearly intended to demean me and remove any edits I contributed in good faith. When the dust finally settled (for a while) I remained away from Misplaced Pages. When I returned in mid January 2013, there was only one difference. I had acquired the domain name 'rozabal'. Nothing else had changed, except the attitude that I was somehow 'sinister' and 'suspect ... I asked those who were maintaining the Roza Bal page to consider expanding the article in view of the numerous additions to the research over the years (documentaries, et cetera). I expressed alarmed that the wording is offensive to several million Ahmaddi Muslims worldwide, and this is not the intention of Misplaced Pages. Mr. Dougweller claims he is concerned about their feelings. On the other hand, he only allows comments on the page that claim the theory is fringe and crackpot. A heated discussion followed that includes accusations about local shopkeepers, fake and manufactured relics for the tourist industry, and copying Nicholas Notovich's lies (an accusation made about Holger Kersten) Reliable and credible sources such as Fida Hassnain, former head of the entire Archaeology Division, were ridiculed and demeaned. These kinds of comments are demeaning, insulting, and plainly not true. Instead of showing Mr. Dougweller's impartiality, such comments show a clear prejudice about this entire topic, and that's what I have objected to since the beginning. It will be very easy for any editor to find COI with me now, since I acquired the new domain. Someone even suggested I be barred from editing anything related to religions, Christianity, bloodlines, Jesus, et cetera. Now the goal seems to be my complete removal from Misplaced Pages because of personal animosity between myself and DougWeller. I want to emphasize this is being done without me having made any contributions for years, and then only minor and insignificant ones at that. I didn not check my emails past 24 hours...I will check soon and hope I have some replies to the questions you asked yesterday. I will help in any way I can if you or anyone else wants to ask questions. It is not about conflicts of interest. It is about truthfullness and fairness here at Wiki. That should be the paramount consideration.Have a nice day and Best wishes, SueSuzanneOlsson (talk) 13:20, 15 February 2013 (UTC)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk) 13:20, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:FidaHassnain.jpg

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on File:FidaHassnain.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Misplaced Pages takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Misplaced Pages to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Misplaced Pages:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Misplaced Pages:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that your page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. ukexpat (talk) 16:10, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

I have had permission from Fida Hassnain to use that jpg- photo of him for many years. He gave me this copy in India personally and I still have the original. With his permission I used this photo on my website, and a copy was contributed to the TOJ website- all done with his approval and gratitude. He is 95 years old now. I am not too sure if he accesses computers much these days. He does have volunteer students who come to his home several times a week to assist him with emails and letter writing. By what means would you like me to verify I legally own, and have full permission to use this JPG? I can try to contact Hassnain and get a direct reply for you. Would that do? Because there is clearly no copyright infringement here. 66.177.27.120 (talk) 12:56, 15 February 2013 (UTC)Suzanne Olsson66.177.27.120 (talk) 12:56, 15 February 2013 (UTC)