User talk:Mbz1

Spumoni

Spumoni

archives 1

House in Cappadocia, Turkey.

I am writing a book on interior design and I would like to use this image. I think that I can download your photo from this website, but as a matter of courtesy I am letting you know. Would you happen to have a hi-res image of this house? I will credit you in the usual way. Publishers are A C Black of London.

Tony Sully - sultony at gotadsl dot co dot uk —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.110.170.59 (talk) 20:46, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

I guess you are asking about this image. You may use it, but it should be released with the same license I released it with. I do not care about credit. I will see, if I have a higher resolution, but this will take some time. Regards.--Mbz1 (talk) 21:04, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Clare Solomon

Hi there. You just added this article to Category:Antisemitism ([1]); I have reverted your edit. While that category states that being included in it does not necessarily indicate that the subject is antisemitic, I nonetheless think it is one which should be used with extreme caution on living people, under WP:BLP policy. It should only be used where there is a clear, strong and uncontroversial association between the subject and antisemitism, and where it is a significant part of that person's life; anything less would arguably not be justified. It shouldn't be used just where someone has alleged that the subject made antisemitic comments. (The same goes for similar categories like Category:Homophobia.) I don't think it was appropriate here. Robofish (talk) 23:35, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, I will not re-add the category, because in general I try avoid touching anything concerning antisemites (they are way too dirty to touch), but I believe you are wrong. There are living "persons" in that category. For example Libby Davies or that one Farouk Hosny. I have neither time nor a wish to look for more, but there are more. --Mbz1 (talk) 23:41, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

February 2011

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Israeli animal spy conspiracy theories. Users who edit disruptively or refuse to collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue.

In particular, the three-revert rule states that:

1. Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
2. Editors violating the rule will usually be blocked for 24 hours for a first incident.
3. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording, and content that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Demiurge1000 (talk) 20:43, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Well one would have thought that, if the user was politely asked to stay off my talk page and do not template the regulars, the user would have understood and stay off, but that user apparently does not. That user likes to wikihound me and to put his long nose in the matter that is no concern of his.--Mbz1 (talk) 20:59, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:49, 1 February 2011 (UTC)