User talk:Mbz1/a7: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 04:42, 25 December 2010

This userpage has been blanked. If this is your userpage, you can retrieve the contents of this page in the page history. Alternatively, if you would like it deleted, simply replace the content of this page with {{db-u1}}.

“The rain it raineth on the just
And also on the unjust fella,
But chiefly on the just, because
The unjust steals the just's umbrella”

w:Charles Bowen

'Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?'
'That depends a good deal on where you want to get to,' said the Cat.
'I don't much care where —' said Alice.
'Then it doesn't matter which way you go,' said the Cat

Spumoni

'But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
'Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: 'we're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad.'
'How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
'You must be,' said the Cat, 'or you wouldn't have come here.'

Welcome back!

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Welcome back! Also, thanks for the barnstar. I think you deserve one of these too, for this particularly kind and civil conversation with a new user. I came across that conversation in December, from looking at one of the pictures that he had posted, and was happy to see that someone had been civil to him, especially since he seemed to be in a difficult situation! Cheers, CordeliaNaismith (talk) 02:56, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How daft of me!

I should have awarded you with this right away.

		The Photographer's Barnstar
		I, Pericles, award User:Mbz1 this honorary barnstar in recognition of her most excellent and thoughtful work in touching up File:Arm less man.JPG, drastically improving the visual quality of a valuable historic image used in Parthian Empire and several other articles at Wikipedia. I bow to you madam, and thank you! Pericles of Athens^Talk 17:23, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much!--Mbz1 (talk) 21:22, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're very welcome! You can keep track of the progress I'm making on my draft here if you like: User:PericlesofAthens/Draft for Parthian Empire. I've yet to add your picture, but it will be placed in an appropriate section, most likely "nobility" or "art and architecture". Cheers buddy.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 22:25, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well-deserved

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For your many generous donations of gorgeous images (especially those breathtaking photos at User:Mbz1/Mbz1 gallery/Underwater), please accept this as a small token of my appreciation. –xeno^talk 19:21, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Successful featured picture nomination

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Dead trees at Mammoth Hot Springs.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Maedin\^talk 18:00, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your Valued Picture

An image created by you has been promoted to valued picture status Your image, File:Kissing Prairie dog edit 3.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Elekhh (talk) 03:06, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the nomination! I've missed on it.--Mbz1 (talk) 05:33, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for List of Jewish Nobel Prize Winners

On March 10, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of Jewish Nobel Prize Winners, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Calmer Waters 06:05, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Ronald Levy

On March 10, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ronald Levy, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thelmadatter (talk) 23:43, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Successful featured picture nomination

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Development of Green Flash.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Maedin\^talk 18:38, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Successful featured picture nomination

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Mauna Loa from the air.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Maedin\^talk 20:09, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Successful featured picture nomination

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Carpilius convexus is consuming Heterocentrotus trigonarius in Hawaii.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Maedin\^talk 12:54, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Transit of Mercury

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Mercury transit 2.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Makeemlighter (talk) 19:01, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Aureole effect

On March 26, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Aureole effect, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Mifter (talk) 08:40, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Kohala at the Big Island of Hawaii

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Kohala coast at the Big Island of Hawaii from the air levels.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 13:02, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Maimonides Synagogue

On April 6, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Maimonides Synagogue, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 06:02, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Fata Morgana (mirage)

On April 6, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Fata Morgana (mirage), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 18:03, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see this made it onto the all-time most-viewed list. Congratulations! --Avenue (talk) 10:30, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it was a very big success as a DYK! Well done, especially on your great images. I was delighted to have been able to work on the text. Invertzoo (talk) 21:42, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Abraham Reuel

On April 12, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Abraham Reuel, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 22:52, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for The geological history of Point Lobos

On April 22, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The geological history of Point Lobos, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 06:02, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Looming, Towering, Stooping, and Sinking

On April 24, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Looming, Towering, Stooping, and Sinking, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 16:03, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Jewish pirates

On May 2, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jewish pirates, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 08:03, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Bernese Fassnacht (Carnival)

On May 2, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Bernese Fassnacht (Carnival), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 16:02, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Majorcan cartographic school

On May 14, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Majorcan cartographic school, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Legends of the Coco de Mer

On May 17, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Legends of the Coco de Mer, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Orchid hunters

On May 20, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Orchid hunters, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 18:02, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Carrier Pigeon (ship)

On May 24, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Carrier Pigeon (ship), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Bradjamesbrown (talk) 06:04, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Historically significant lunar eclipses

On May 27, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Historically significant lunar eclipses, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 18:03, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome Mila! Invertzoo (talk) 18:09, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Peacock flounder

On June 2, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Peacock flounder, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 12:02, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Underwater camouflage and mimicry

On June 10, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Underwater camouflage and mimicry, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 18:01, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for RMS Mulheim

On June 17, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article RMS Mulheim, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 06:02, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Australite

On June 21, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Australite, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 06:02, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Max Frauenthal

On June 22, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Max Frauenthal, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 00:02, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

I don't hand Barnstars out very often, in fact, I can't remember the last time I did so. I had promised you one, if Herrengasse 23 became a DYK but, it seems the world and Wikipedia must remain in ignorance. However, you have contributed greatly to my crusade to give recognition to lesser and little known buildings - so here it is and you desearve it:

		The Content Creativity Barnstar
		To Mbz1 for his tremendous work and research in bringing Herrengasse 23 to a wider puplic appreciation. Giacomo 18:58, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PS: I would like to give Sandstein something similar for the really good photos, but don't think it wise to hand him a sharp pointy object when I am the vicinity. I will thnk on it. Giacomo 18:58, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Herrengasse 23 (Bern)

On June 25, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Herrengasse 23 (Bern), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 00:02, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Jacob Barnet affair

On June 25, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jacob Barnet affair, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Mifter (talk) 12:04, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Sol Hachuel

On June 27, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sol Hachuel, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 00:02, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Frederick Mayer (the spy)

On July 4, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Frederick Mayer (the spy), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 12:03, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Schloss Reichenbach

On July 7, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Schloss Reichenbach, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 00:03, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for La Peregrina pearl

On July 7, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article La Peregrina pearl, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 06:02, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for The Holocaust's Arab Heroes

On July 10, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Holocaust's Arab Heroes, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 00:02, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Tub'a Abu Kariba As'ad

On July 11, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Tub'a Abu Kariba As'ad, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 06:03, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Paul the Octopus

On July 11, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Paul the Octopus, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 12:02, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Sefer ha-Temunah

On July 23, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sefer ha-Temunah, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Your image promoted to featured

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Peacock_Flounder_Bothus_mancus_in_Kona.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! I'ḏ ♥One 06:41, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for The Mountain of Israeli-Palestinian Friendship

On July 30, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Mountain of Israeli-Palestinian Friendship, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 12:02, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/360 degrees fogbow

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:360_degrees_fogbow.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Makeemlighter (talk) 03:10, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Yoni Jesner and Ahmed Khatib

On 12 August, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Yoni Jesner and Ahmed Khatib, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 12:02, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Operation Diamond

On 12 August, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Operation Diamond, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 12:03, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Ali Bushnaq, Dudu Yifrah and Micha Yaniv

On 13 August, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ali Bushnaq, Dudu Yifrah and Micha Yaniv, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 00:02, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for The Grand Design (book)

On 13 September 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Grand Design (book), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

-- Cirt (talk) 06:03, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Great Comet of 1264

On 25 August 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Great Comet of 1264, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 00:03, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Great Comet of 1556

On 25 August 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Great Comet of 1556, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 00:03, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Yolande Harmer

On 28 August 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Yolande Harmer, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 18:02, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Jewish pope Andreas

On 20 August 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jewish pope Andreas, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 06:03, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Sara Copia Sullam

On 14 October 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sara Copia Sullam, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 06:03, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Earth's shadow

On 26 October 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Earth's shadow, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 18:02, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mila, as you probably already know, Earth's shadow got 19.9k views on Oct 26th while it was a DYK! Invertzoo (talk) 13:56, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I did. Thank you for your great help.--Mbz1 (talk) 14:30, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes but you take the lion's share of the credit for putting together the article with your excellent image, and also most important, thinking of the idea in the first place! I did not even know what these colored bands were until I read the article!

By the way, when I was at Long Beach, Long Island 2 weeks ago, the same beach where I saw the superior mirage on the horizon a while ago, this time I saw an inferior mirage in the distance below Staten Island, which was on the horizon. I never saw an inferior mirage over the ocean before. I have learned a lot from you, Mila! I did not have my binoculars or a camera with me, but I will try to take them next time, although as I said before, on my regular camera the telephoto function does not give very much magnification at all. Anyway, thanks and good wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 19:53, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Susan! Such comments from such a great person and such a great, respectful editor as you are keeping me going on Wikipedia. I'm looking forward seeing some of your images. Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 21:55, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are very welcome Mila. I showed my husband some of your photos yesterday (the ones on your subpage) and he said that they are National Geographic quality. I agree. And by the way, it turns out that Earth's shadow got another 6.3k views on 27th October, so that makes a total of 26,200 views! I will put it on the "over 20,000" list. Invertzoo (talk) 22:52, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Susan!--Mbz1 (talk) 01:54, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome. And by the way, you now have your name on 4 out of the top 43 most-viewed DYKs so far in WP history. Only User:Materialscientist has as many as you in that list. I have 3, of which 2 of them are thanks to you. Invertzoo (talk) 19:28, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, Susan, I am an absolutely unique editor on Wikipedia

I am trying to be the first in everything I am doing:

The images I upload are one of the best

,

The articles I start are the most-viewed

...

My block log is one of the longest on Wikipedia

but I hope that my blocking administrators will see this thread,realize how good I am, and will block me never again

But on a serious note, Susan, most of the articles I started would have never got finished without your generous help, including my favorite Fata Morgana (mirage). I am so lucky I found you!

Best wishes, and thank you for everything.--Mbz1 (talk) 22:08, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is an honor to work with someone who is such a fine photographer, and one who is interested in so many different kinds of subjects! Invertzoo (talk) 16:05, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!--Mbz1 (talk) 02:50, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Broderick – Terry duel

On 4 November 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Broderick – Terry duel, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

-- Cirt (talk) 12:02, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Devastation in San Bruno.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Makeemlighter (talk) 04:36, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for 2004 Iraq churches attacks

On 24 November 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 2004 Iraq churches attacks, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that on August 1, 2004, five Christian churches were car-bombed in Iraq within a few minutes of each another? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 18:02, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for King Philip shipwreck

On 27 November 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article King Philip shipwreck, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that at Ocean Beach in San Francisco, every so often the sand recedes enough to allow the 19th century shipwreck of the King Philip clipper ship (pictured) to become visible? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 18:02, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Ravens of the Tower of London

On 12 December 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ravens of the Tower of London, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the ravens of the Tower of London are enlisted as soldiers of the Kingdom, and can be dismissed for unsatisfactory conduct? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 12:04, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

blocked

Straight off your interaction ban, you began wantonly hounding that editor and others, again. I have blocked you for one week, owing to harassment and disruption. If, when this block lifts, you carry on with this behaviour, your next block will be much longer. Gwen Gale (talk) 18:32, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Mbz1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I was blocked as a result of of this this thread The block reason is personal attacks, harassment and disruption. There was neither attack, nor harassment nor disruption. As you see the blocking admin has never provided any differences of any of my "crimes" . I was hounding nobody. I saw this post about user:Daedalus969 in my watch list and added my input to an/i. How it is hounding? I have no interaction ban with that user.--Mbz1 (talk) 18:38, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You know well by now that editors are supposed to be notified when they're discussed on ANI, so running around claiming "canvassing" is disingenuous at best. That frivolous SPI was clearly harassment, and you were properly blocked. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:28, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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.

See the ANI thread linked above along with Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Daedalus969, which has been closed by another admin as a bad faith CU report by Mbz1. Gwen Gale (talk) 18:48, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So you blocked me for a week for a bad faith report! It actually was not a bad faith report and it was not intended as a harassment. I really found this strange that a user will react the way they did on AN/I report that should have never been filed in the first place. I do not find it strange anymore, if even admin reacted the way she did. BTW may I please ask you to review what is wikihounding: Wiki-hounding is the singling out of one or more editors, and joining discussions on multiple pages or topics they may edit or multiple debates where they contribute, in order to repeatedly confront or inhibit their work. This is with an apparent aim of creating irritation, annoyance or distress to the other editor. Wikihounding usually involves following the target from place to place on Wikipedia. (highlighted by me) Now, when you have learned what is wikihounding please provide some examples of me ever wikihounding anybody. Please also provide examples of PA and disruption that were worth blocking for a weak or even for an hour for that matter.--Mbz1 (talk) 18:59, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the ANI thread speaks for itself. Meanwhile Prodego warned you to stay away from that editor earlier today. Gwen Gale (talk) 19:02, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry, but I cannot find any differences of me wikihounding or personally attacking somebody or anybody. Could you please be so kind and provide the exact differences of me wikihounding and personal attacking somebody. Please just take them from that very AN/I report and post them here. --Mbz1 (talk) 19:10, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly this AN/I report and the block look more and more as witch hunt, and witch hunt it is.--Mbz1 (talk) 19:13, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See the ANI thread which you linked to in your unblock request, along with this hollow arb enforcement request and the meaningless CU report I linked to above. If you don't understand what you've done, there may be a need to lengthen your block. Gwen Gale (talk) 19:15, 23 December

2010 (UTC)

And who decided that it was "this hollow arb enforcement request" You did? Let me see. On 17:35, 23 December 2010 that AE was first mentioned on AN/I. On 18:28, 23 December 2010 you blocked me after on 18:21, 23 December 2010 you made this edit ? So when you read the AE report and came to conclusion it is hollow? I do not believe you ever read it. I still see no evidences of wikihounding and or personal attacks. I do not believe you should keep your administrative tools.--Mbz1 (talk) 19:28, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) A few examples, just from your last 100 Contributions, which were mentioned in the ANI:

this: "user:Daedalus969 harassed and wikihounded me all over wikipedia until an interaction ban (that I enjoyed very much) was issued between the user and me. Too bad it has expired. That user user:Daedalus969 will never drop the stick, and he wants to be an administrator!"
this: "Even gatoclass never claimed anything about coatracks, but you right I did learn something, like how unpleasant some users, who hardly wrote a few articles themselves could be."
this: "Rant, rant, rant. The users as you are only good to drive content contributes away"
this edit summary: "get out of my section, even look of your signatue makes me sick"

Your Contributions page was linked from the very top of the ANI page, and as a result several different people requested that you be reminded of WP:BATTLEGROUND with a block. betsythedevine (talk) 19:32, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

Indef-blocked by Gwen Gale Rd232 ^talk 12:51, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mbz1, given your posts in the aftermath of this block, I think the likelihood of further harassment and disruption from you is much longer than one week and hence, I've lengthened the block to indefinite. You can appeal this block and its lenghtening by posting {{unblock|why I should be unblocked}} below. However, before posting another unblock request, I would think you should carefully read Wikipedia:Guide_to_appealing_blocks. Gwen Gale (talk) 19:38, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I could have responded and explained every difference that betsythedevine provided above, but I will not bother. There's no use. I am guilty of nothing.

Gwen Gale, don't worry. I am not going to post unblock request or/and appeal the block. I have done nothing to be blocked for, and you still did not present any differences to support the claim of wikihounding and personal attacks because the above differences are not personal attacks .

I have never done anything in purpose to harass and/or wikihound anybody. I was wikihounded and harass way too much myself to do this to anybody. This SPI I filed could have been filed as a mistake, in a hurry, but it was not filed in bad faith and it was not filed to harass anybody. I myself was the subject of 2 SPI with much less (practically no evidences) They both were approved, were run, came back as "unrelated" and nobody ever got even warn over any of them leave alone blocked. --Mbz1 (talk) 20:24, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This block isn't about guilt Mbz1, it's about things you have done which stalled building the encyclopedia by wasting the time of volunteer editors on this privately owned website, with all its flaws. Gwen Gale (talk) 20:31, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since you've edit warred over a misleading template at the top of this page, I have locked you out of your talk page. You can ask to be unblocked by email, through WP:BASC. Gwen Gale (talk) 21:01, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. This appears to be a flawed block. Ab initio, the blocking admin failed to supply any evidence to support the charge of "wantonly hounding that editor and others, again". The denial of the unblock request, which stood on grounds that differed from the original block, was similarly flawed. It cited "editors are supposed to be notified when they're discussed on ANI". That is true. Failure to do so happens all the time, for all sorts of reasons, and is on a regular basis addressed by other editors indicating it should be done or doing it themselves -- this is not by any means a blockable offense, and the assertion that it is suggest a wholly unequal application of the rules. Running around claiming "canvassing" where it is arguably disingenuous has happened as well in other areas without blocks being applied -- if Sarek really believes this is a blockable offense, I would like to know so I can direct him to editors who are doing precisely that, and ask him to block them forthwith -- nobody else has done so. Sarek's view that the SPI was frivolous is Sarek's point of view; that is not "clearly harassment". The diffs that Betsy provides are frivolous, and clearly not blockable offenses (really -- does she think it is a blockable offense to say "Rant, rant, rant. The users as you are only good to drive content contributes away" -- this only demonstrates how far she is reaching to try to make a silk purse out of a cow's ear). Gwen's extension of her own block to indef for what she perceives as "likelyhood [sic] of harassment" is as flawed as the spelling -- I see no basis for an extension of any sort, let alone an extension to indef, and find it odd that the same involved sysop is reacting to criticisms of her actions by engaging in further questionable actions.

I think we need some non-involved sysops who have not been formerly involved with this or with the blocked editor (and who are not wikifriends of the blockers) to review this. --Epeefleche (talk) 22:22, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have never (as far as I can remember) interacted with this editor, and am not "wikifriends" of the blocking editor (sorry Gwen, but you know what I mean). I have looked at the evidence here and can see nothing that says this block is incorrect. The user's block log is effectively the best evidence here - at some point we have to say "seriously, we are all volunteers here, and you're wasting our time - go and waste someone else's". Black Kite (t) (c) 22:41, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again BK. Thanks. Can you be more specific as to what in the above precisely warrants an indef block. Including, in draconian manner, a block on the user's own talk page? This seems quite out of the ordinary under these specific circumstances. I've addressed the circumstances with specificity above. Among other things, if you believe that running around claiming "canvassing" where it is arguably disingenuous is a blockable offense, I would like to know so I can direct you to editors who are doing precisely that, and ask you to block them forthwith. Uneven application of even-handed rules is, I know, something that you seek to avoid assiduously.--Epeefleche (talk) 23:56, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mbz seems to have gone out of his way to cause problems, agreed with my suggestion he avoid interacting with users with whom he has had problems in the past, and then did it again. I can't see any other explanation except that his only intention is to cause the maximal amount of disruption he can. Thus, I support an indefinite block as well, and I am uninvolved. Prodego ^talk 01:02, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this is pretty much what I see as well. This is the sort of behaviour one expects from a SPA or new editor, not an experienced one. When an experienced editor apparently deliberately does exactly what they've been asked not to do, it is difficult to assume good faith. Having said that, indefinite does not mean infinite - if Mbz1 can convince the community that they will cease their disruptive behaviour and stick to any interaction/topic ban that is organised, then I don't see any reason why they should not be unblocked, with the caveat that any further repeat of the behaviour will mean an actual indefinite ban. Black Kite (t) (c) 01:06, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Prodego raises an interesting point. If a sysop makes a suggestion that is not agreed with, which is simply a suggestion, that is one thing. But Prodego indicates that Mbz agreed with the suggestion, and then failed to follow up accordingly. I think that calls for an explanation from Mbz, and would be interested in what Mbz has to say on that point.--Epeefleche (talk) 07:41, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WRT the diffs I provided -- Mbz1 had repeatedly asked for diffs, claiming she made no attacks on anyone. I never suggested that any single diff was a blockable offense -- anybody can have a bad day. But what is striking in this case is the number of different kinds of examples of WP:BATTLEGROUND mentality, including but not limited to her offensive personal remarks to many different editors just in the top 100 edits of her contribution list, plus filing a nuisance SPI, plus accusing editors who were notifying others of their mention on an ANI of canvassing, plus starting an edit war on this talk page which is what led to Mbz1's being blocked from editing it. Not to mention wikilawyering about the exact wording of WP:WIKIHOUND because the word "hounding" was used in its conventional English meaning by the blocking admin. Instead of learning from the one-week block, Mbz1 continued to give more evidence that she did not feel she had to change her behavior in any way. betsythedevine (talk) 00:36, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The diffs both individually and as a whole are IMHO frivolous. And clearly not blockable (let alone indef blockable) offenses. The one cited is just a stark example of the extreme effort being made to turn nothing into something -- it would not even garner an incivility warning in the normal course.--Epeefleche (talk) 07:36, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I closed this arbitration enforcement request and agree with the block. It is needed at this time to prevent further disruption. Jehochman ^Talk 01:57, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I've reinstated Mbz1's talk page access, and added in the indef-block template (edit warring over this seemed the cause of the access removal) at the appropriate place in this thread. Removing talkpage access for a user who's just been indef-blocked for non-obvious reasons shouldn't be done lightly, and it wasn't absolutely necessary here. Rd232 ^talk 12:51, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've also started Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Block_review. Rd232 ^talk 12:59, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your e-mail

In reply to your e-mail,

"You are probably the last person I could count on to help me, but I will try. I am not asking you to review my block, but why my talk page access was removed. I only added the template http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Indefinite
I believe I am allowed to have such things at my talk page."

I believe that this issue is moot. The purpose of your talk page is for you to communicate with others with respect to your Wikipedia editing. If you no longer edit Wikipedia, the talk page has no purpose for you. Because you are indefinitely blocked and have said, above, that you do not intend to appeal your block, you have no need to edit your talk page. It is therefore not necessary for me to review whether the removal of your talk page access was correct. Sandstein 07:14, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds correct that (and I am not clear if this is the case) if the user does not wish to appeal his indef block, there is no need for access to this page to be granted. If the user were to wish to appeal his block, or to discuss the rationale for it with an eye to possibly appealing it, I would think that it would be appropriate to restore access for that purpose.--Epeefleche (talk) 07:30, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The access should be restored. Blocking Mbz1 might be appropriate. Blocking and gagging seems overly harsh and unnecessary.

Also, I want to go on the record as saying that this user clearly has something to offer WP. A quick review of some of the photography uploaded by this editor should make that blatantly clear. I'd call for more stringent topic/interaction bans over indef block. NickCT (talk) 08:01, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, topic or interaction bans require cooperation from the banned editor. All that admins can do to enforce those is to block (globally) for violations. Unlike parking tickets, which are for the same amount every time, it seems that blocks in Wikipedia are escalating in length. So, Mbz1 is the only one who can improve on this situation. Tijfo098 (talk) 11:13, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Given that there's ongoing discussion on ANI, including an unblock review, it seems only fair that Mbz1 have access to her talk page in order to address comments on ANI and answer questions, etc. Can we please at least do that much? - Alison ^❤ 13:20, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think Rd232 restored talk page access before you posted this. Tijfo098 (talk) 13:56, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cool beanz - thanks :) - Alison ^❤ 14:01, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just to make you smile

I know how you feel, but just to make you smile, I would like to remind you what Wikipedia consensus looks like. Feeling better already? Good :)--Broccoli (talk) 07:28, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I think this is the first time I'm posting to your talk page. I actually liked some of your articles, e.g. the one on the ravens of the Tower of London. You seem to be a valuable contributor, but please lay off filing a kiloton of administrative requests. I see no reason for the admins not to lift your block if you agree to that. Tijfo098 (talk) 10:39, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Christmas Card

Merry Christmas

At this festive time, I would like to say a very special thank you to my fellow editors, and take the time to wish you and your loved ones a very Merry Christmas, and a Happy New Year. And, in case you can't wait until the big day, I've left you each three special presents, click to unwrap :) Acather96 (talk) 10:10, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Yellow and Red present.gif

So let me see

What I was blocked for:

I filed AE concerning user:Supreme Deliciousness. The only thing I have done was to collect evidences presented about the user in other AEs by me and other editors and combine them in one place for an easy reading. I did add a few new ones. I even added this comment to explain filing of AE: *Comment to administrators: The purpose of this AE is mostly to make your life easier by putting all the evidences about SD that appear in a few different AEs together. Have I done something wrong by filing this AE? No, I did not. I have a great concern about user editing and filed an AE in a good faith. It was closed improperly. My block should not have impacted the discussion. AE should not have been closed by an admin, who never read it only because the filer is blocked. here on a different AE request at least 3 administrators have agreed that SD editing has is problematic Once again the only thing I have done was putting the evidences from 2 different AE in one for an easier reading and adding a few other ones. It was filed in a neutral tone, and at least one administrator was interested in getting SD explanations even it was opened for only a short time. I am not sorry for filing this AE report, it should be reopened, but I promise, if I am ever unblocked, never again contribute to AE.
My next "crime" was this post on AN/I thread started by somebody else. It was a good faith post not to harass anybody, but to help an editor, who found themselves in a similar situation I was.A few months back somebody helped me to deal with harassment by that user I felt obligated to support somebody else. There was no PA and, no harassment intended in that post, but I promise, if I am ever unblocked, never again contribute to AN/I and stay away from that user. Did my single AN/I post (a one sentence) in a thread that was stated by somebody else deserved deserved this battle ground reaction and ~~canvasing~~ sorry, notification of a willing administrator? No, it did not!
The list of my other "crimes" is "kindly" provided by user:Betsythedevine just above have no PA and no harassment in them. Besides my posts were taken out of content. If somebody blames me in plagiarism it is a rant. Also it should be noticed that English is not my first language, and sometimes I might use the words in a wrong way, but here's a dictionary entry for "rant" Does this look like it could be a PA?
SPI report. I did file it not to harass. Only idiots could file SPI to harass, if they know it will come out negative. Was it my mistake to file it? Yes, it was. Was it filed in a bad faith? No, it was not! Here I'd like to ask everybody to assume a good faith towards my action too, but I promise, if I am ever unblocked, never again file another SPI. It appears to be much safer to be a subject of one :) as I was on at least 2 occasions.
My accusation in users "canvasing" made my unblock request declined. Well, this is a tricky one. I read that "However canvassing which is done with the intention of influencing the outcome of a discussion in a particular way is considered inappropriate" I believed that notifying 3 users I had disagreement with without notifying any one, who might have supported me falls under this description of inappropriate canvasing. OK, I read the policy wrong. Did I really? Should I have been blocked for this? No, maybe warned, maybe explained, but not blocked!
The other "crime" I accused in is a disruption of the project. No, I did not disrupt the project, a valid AE request (and I insist it was valid), a 4 posts on AN/I (3 in a thread about me), and a a single wrong SPI could not, and should not be called a disruption.
Somebody suggested, if I am ever unblocked to post me on indefinite topic ban for I/P conflict related areas.I do not mind this sanction at all. It is much healthier to have such ban, but I would like to understand what I have done wrong in this area? I am not edit warring, I rarely edit in the area at all. Yes, I filed 2 AE requests in the last week. IMO and in opinion of at least 3 administrators they have at least some merits. But let's assume I have done something wrong with those AE. Then ban me from AE, but why to ban me from I/P conflict in whole? I asked this question only for my own understanding, as I said I am perfectly fine with being banned for the area.

OK, I am not saying that I was absolutely right in all my actions listed above. I believe no reasonable person could claim being absolutely right, but IMO I did not deserve to be blocked. Nothing of what I have done or said was done or said in a bad faith. Nothing of what I have done or said was done or said to harass somebody. Nothing of what I have done or said was done or said to wikihound anybody.
The following statement is not WP:NOTTHEM It is just to show that some of supporters of the block are involved with me. A few of the most loud of my accusers are involved with me. Please see this post made on wikipedia review by user:tarc about me: "I'll repost a response I made to that insufferable twat Mbz1" And now that very user has a nerve to support my indefinite block! But according to this it cannot be considered a good faith edit, and it is not.User:Bulldog123 what a name :) is very upset with the article I wrote List of Jewish Nobel laureates. He wants it out badly, as one could see from two deletion requests in a few month. Still it cannot explain his false accusation in me wikihounding 5 users. I wikihound none! My valid blocks count is 8, not 10 as bulldog is claiming and none before that one for PA and/or harassment.I am not sure why bulldog dislikes me so much. I guess he hopes that with me gone, the article he hates so much will be gone too.user:Bali ultimate falsely accused me in plagiarism at least in a few places.
I am not saying that I should be unblocked because of my many positive contributions. I am saying that any editor in my situation should have been unblocked (or rather never blocked).--Mbz1 (talk) 23:42, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You repeatedly asked for a list of diffs, and I provided links to only three of the five confrontational and aggressive remarks from your recent history that had been mentioned in the ANI. Concerning the first of these three diffs, your remark at an ANI which you describe above as "a one sentence", could you explain which one sentence you mean out of these four sentences: "The same happened to me a few month ago. user:Daedalus969 harassed and wikihounded me all over wikipedia until an interaction ban (that I enjoyed very much) was issued between the user and me. Too bad it has expired. That user user:Daedalus969 will never drop the stick, and he wants to be an administrator!" The second and third diffs I cited come from a talk page argument with Bali Ultimate. In the second you told Bali Ultimate he reminded you "how unpleasant some users, who hardly wrote a few articles themselves could be." Is that not a personal attack? In the third you said "The users as you are only good to drive content contributes away." Is that not a personal attack? And the motivation for all that unpleasantness was not some life-and-death matter or threat to the honor of a beloved country; Bali Ultimate was somehow frustrating your ambitions for yet another of your DYK-targeted articles. I completely agree with Mbz1 that saying "Rant rant rant", although uncivil, does not by itself constitute a WP:PA. If you still don't see any WP:PA in the first diff, here are the two I see: "harrassed and wikihounded me all over wikipedia" and "will never drop the stick". betsythedevine (talk) 03:10, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First of all you are right. I wrote 4 sentences. Sorry about this. About "harassed and wikihounded me all over wikipedia" and "will never drop the stick" I honestly do not believe it was PA. If it were a false accusation, then yes, but sadly it was the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. The user got involved themselves in the matter that did not concern them at all. Then the user left quite a few "warnings" at my talk page after I repeatedly asked them to stop. Then the user reported me as a vandal for...deleting his warnings from my own talk page! I was lucky the admin really looked into what was going on and instead blocking me for "vandalism" removing messages from my own talk page), warned the user in the very strong words. The warning did not really help because after that the user nominated on deletion at least 2 pages from my own user space. Then..I could have continued,but I believe it is enough. So, when I saw a similar situation with another editor, it just brought a painful memories back. I remembered how desperate I was, and I simply wanted to express my understanding, if you wish, to the editor. I came from an absolutely different culture. In my country saying "harassed and wikihounded me all over wikipedia" would not have been such a big deal at all. I cannot apologize for this comment. If it were a false accusation, I would have, but I said the truth. You saw down below that I did apologize to two editors I felt like apologizing. If I feel I have said something wrong, I will always apologize. This is not the case. Maybe I should not have posted to the thread, but I do not consider that post to be neither harassment, nor PA, nor a disruption. It was posted in a good faith. I am sorry for getting in such details, but you asked, and I simply wanted to show to you on one example only that it is not right to take my comment out of content. I could have explained the situations with my other posts too, but I believe I'll leave it here. I will only add one more time that I do not believe I am 100% right , but IMO I did not deserved to be blocked at all,leave alone indefinite leave alone removing talk page access.--Mbz1 (talk) 03:59, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My apology

Dear Rd232, may I please ask to accept my sincere apology for what I said to you in a past? You are a kind and a fair person and a great, unafraid administrator! I definitely do not deserve such kindness from you. If I were able, I would have given you a barnstar, but I am not able to do it at your talk page, and to post it here would be kind of silly i guess.

I would also like to apologize to Sandstein for emailing them last night. Silly me believed that it was OK to email an administrator and to ask to review removing of my talk page access, but thanks to user:Betsythedevine I realized now that I was "canvassing". So, Sandstein, I am really sorry I canvased you. It was a good faith email. It was not my intention at all to create you any troubles because of that. This all comes from my misunderstanding of the policy. You see, I believed that this is a good example of Canvassing because the message cannot be called "neutral" (IMO), and because this very administrator ended up blocking me, but now I am starting to realize how wrong my understanding of the policies really is! This message was simply a notification Wonder why only this particular administrator was "notified", but anyway.... My email to you was Canvassing. Maybe I should have emailed to my blocking administrator instead of emailing to you, but honestly I was simply afraid because, when I said "a" she blocked me for a week, when I said "b" a week long block was changed to indefinite, when I said "c" she removed my talk page access, so I was sure, if I am to email her (say "d") she will remove my email access too :)

To all, who posted here I wish to thank you for taking your time to stop by and for sharing your thoughts with me.

To everybody I wish Happy Holidays!

--Mbz1 (talk) 20:23, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify, WP:CANVASS says that messages regarding wiki matters must be limited in number AND neutral in wording AND nonppartisan in targeting AND open rather than secret. I felt your email to Sandstein fell short of the second of these requirements. (Also the fourth, but that was excusable since you had no wiki access.) Your explanation of why you lost talk page access was "I am not asking you to review my block, but why my talk page access was removed. I only added the template http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Indefinite I believe I am allowed to have such things at my talk page." You lost talk page access after refusing to acknowledge that any block was justified, after attacking the blocking admin and all your critics, and after edit-warring with the blocking admin. You did not "only" add the template, you removed your own long-standing statement that you are "Semi-retired" and instead added a pile of your past awards, etc. Doing her credit, Gwen did not remove your new trophy wall, but she did remove your new "blocked" template, explaining that putting it there would mislead other admins. You then, 3 minutes later, edit-warred her decision with an Undo. I think that summarizing all these actions by you as "I only added the template" is a misleading and non-neutral account of the behavior that got your talk page access blocked. That was why I called this particular piece of off-wiki solicitation for help "canvassing." betsythedevine (talk) 03:51, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You know what I kind of do not think one could edit-war on ones own talk page. According to the talk page policy I might delete and add to my talk page almost anything, and changing semiretired template with a indefinite blocking template did not violate talking page policy. The block was not justified. The blocking administrator was ~~canvased~~ sorry, notified about AN/I thread, she should not have removed my talk page access. Betsythedevine, may I please ask you from now on to stay off my talk page? Your messages at my talk page look more and more as wp:bait.Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 04:06, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I will be happy to stay off your talk pages if you do not post remarks about my actions on your talk pages. If you want to criticize me on your talk pages, please expect to see my answers appear here. betsythedevine (talk) 04:14, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See, your messages at my talk page are extremely unhelpful. Besides your statement about the reasons my talk pages was locked is false to say the least. Here's what my dear blocking admin wrote: "Since you've edit warred over a misleading template at the top of this page, I have locked you out of this your page.", and it is exactly what I wrote in my email to Sandstein. One more time I am asking you to stay off. You have AN/I to add my new "crimes" in. If you are to post here again, it will be deleted. Until my talk page is not locked for my editing I have the right to delete your messages, and I will.--Mbz1 (talk) 04:21, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 623: / Line 623: @@
 What I was blocked for:
-#I filed AE concerning [[:user:Supreme Deliciousness]]. The only thing I have done was to collect evidences presented about the user in other AEs by me and other editors and combine them in one place for an easy reading. I did add a few new ones. I even added this comment to explain filing of AE: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement&diff=prev&oldid=403818823 *'''Comment''' to administrators: The purpose of this AE is mostly to make your life easier by putting all the evidences about SD that appear in a few different AEs together.] Have I done something wrong by filing this AE? No, I did not. I have a great concern about user editing and filed an AE in a good faith. It was closed improperly. My block should not have impacted the discussion. AE should not have been closed by an admin, who never read it only because the filer is  blocked. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Result_concerning_Chesdovi here on a different AE request at least 3 administrators have agreed that SD editing has is problematic] Once again the only thing I have done was putting the evidences from 2 different AE in one for an easier reading and adding a few other ones. It was filed in a neutral tone, and at least one administrator  [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement&diff=prev&oldid=403876034 was interested in getting SD explanations] even it was opened for only a short time. I am not sorry for filing this AE report, it should be reopened, but I promise, if I am ever unblocked, never again contribute to AE.
+#I filed AE concerning [[:user:Supreme Deliciousness]]. The only thing I have done was to collect evidences presented about the user in other AEs by me and other editors and combine them in one place for an easy reading. I did add a few new ones. I even added this comment to explain filing of AE: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement&diff=prev&oldid=403818823 *'''Comment''' to administrators: The purpose of this AE is mostly to make your life easier by putting all the evidences about SD that appear in a few different AEs together.] Have I done something wrong by filing this AE? No, I did not. I have a great concern about user editing and filed an AE in a good faith. It was closed improperly. My block should not have impacted the discussion. AE should not have been closed by an admin, who never read it only because the filer is  blocked. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Result_concerning_Chesdovi here on a different AE request at least 3 administrators have agreed that SD editing has is problematic] Once again the only thing I have done was putting the evidences from 2 different AE in one for an easier reading and adding a few other ones. It was filed in a neutral tone, and at least one administrator  [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement&diff=prev&oldid=403876034 was interested in getting SD explanations] even it was opened for only a short time. I am not sorry for filing this AE report, it should be reopened, but I promise, '''if I am ever unblocked, never again contribute to AE.'''
-#My next "crime" was [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=403830930 this post] on AN/I thread started by somebody else. It was a good faith post not to harass anybody, but to help an editor, who found themselves in a similar situation I was.A few months back [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ADaedalus969&action=historysubmit&diff=349744944&oldid=349744484#Mbz1 somebody helped me to deal with harassment by that user] I felt obligated to support  somebody else. There was no PA and, no harassment intended in that post, but I promise, if I am ever unblocked, never again contribute to AN/I and stay away from that user. Did my single AN/I post (a one sentence) in a thread that was stated by somebody else deserved deserved [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=403832542 this battle ground reaction] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Gwen_Gale&diff=prev&oldid=403832903 <s>canvasing</s> sorry, notification] of a willing administrator? No, it did not!
+#My next "crime" was [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=403830930 this post] on AN/I thread started by somebody else. It was a good faith post not to harass anybody, but to help an editor, who found themselves in a similar situation I was.A few months back [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ADaedalus969&action=historysubmit&diff=349744944&oldid=349744484#Mbz1 somebody helped me to deal with harassment by that user] I felt obligated to support  somebody else. There was no PA and, no harassment intended in that post, but I promise, if I am ever unblocked, '''never again contribute to AN/I and stay away from that user'''. Did my single AN/I post (a one sentence) in a thread that was stated by somebody else deserved deserved [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=403832542 this battle ground reaction] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Gwen_Gale&diff=prev&oldid=403832903 <s>canvasing</s> sorry, notification] of a willing administrator? No, it did not!
 #The list of my other "crimes" is "kindly" provided by [[:user:Betsythedevine]] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mbz1&diff=prev&oldid=403914941 just above] have no PA and no harassment in them. Besides my posts were taken out of content. If somebody blames me in plagiarism it is a rant. Also it should be noticed that English is not my first language, and sometimes I might use the words in a wrong way, but here's [http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&defl=en&q=define:rant&sa=X&ei=CiMVTbH0G4TWtQPtuKSQCg&sqi=2&ved=0CBMQkAE a dictionary entry for "rant"] Does this look like it could be a PA?
-#SPI report. I did file it not to harass. Only idiots could file SPI to harass, if they know it will come out negative. Was it my mistake to file it? Yes, it was. Was it filed in a bad faith? No, it was not! Here I'd like to ask everybody to assume a good faith towards my action too, but I promise, if I am ever unblocked, never again file another SPI. It appears to be much safer to be a subject of one :) as I was on at least 2 occasions.
+#SPI report. I did file it not to harass. Only idiots could file SPI to harass, if they know it will come out negative. Was it my mistake to file it? Yes, it was. Was it filed in a bad faith? No, it was not! Here I'd like to ask everybody to assume a good faith towards my action too, but '''I promise, if I am ever unblocked, never again file another SPI'''. It appears to be much safer to be a subject of one :) as I was on at least 2 occasions.
 #My accusation in users "canvasing" made my unblock request declined. Well, this is a tricky one. I read that [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Canvassing "However canvassing which is done with the intention of influencing the outcome of a discussion in a particular way is considered inappropriate"] I believed that notifying 3 users I had disagreement with without notifying any one, who might have supported me falls under this description of inappropriate canvasing. OK, I read the policy wrong. <small>Did I really? </small> Should I have been blocked for this? No, maybe warned, maybe explained, but not blocked!
 #The other "crime" I accused in is a disruption of the project. No, I did not disrupt the project, a valid AE request (and I insist it was valid), a 4 posts on AN/I (3 in a thread about me), and a a single wrong SPI could not, and should not be called a disruption.