User talk:R.Tabor

Welcome

Hello, R.Tabor, and welcome to Wikipedia! I am Deepu Joseph. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk or ask me on my talk page.
Sign your posts on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~).
Provide an Edit summary
Take a look at Consensus of standards. It is always wise to read the talk page of an existing article before making major changes on it. Even then, I typically ask if anyone minds that I make a change. Very often they do! ;-)
Create a User page

Again, welcome! And if you have any questions, please do not hesitate to ask - Just click here to leave me a message.
thunderboltz^{a.k.a.Deepu_Joseph |TALK}

Image tagging for Image:Casket Roza Bal.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Casket Roza Bal.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We requires this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 16:05, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Suzanne Olsson

Please stop advertising Olsson's name and works all over the place (including adding links to her site and to web shops selling her book) without adressing the concerns that I named in my edit comments. Regards, High on a tree (talk) 05:33, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

REPLY TO HIGH ON A TREE:

RESPONSE TO HIGH ON A TREE

You are now being prejudicail and I want it to stop. I have asked someone else from Wikipedia to intervene and discuss the edits with me. Meanwhile, leave my edits alone. I feel as though you are deliberately stalking me around Wikipedia. I follow these topics and update them regularly: Yuz Asaf, Roza Bal, Tomb of Jesus, empty tomb, crucifixion, Jesus. I will continue to do so in future. Some of the references on these pages that you have allowed to remain are pure nonsense and junk. You are certainly not being fair and impartial.— R. Tabor

Re: Your message

Hello! Take a look at this help page to get an idea about how images are linked in MediaWiki. Did you successfully upload the image onto Wikipedia? If yes, then displaying it on a page is easy. All you need is the following piece of code:
[[Image:IMAGE_NAME_HERE|thumb|DESCRIPTION HERE]].
I've linked a small image here. Click on edit and see the code for yourself how it was done. Hope this helps. --thunderboltz ^(TALK) 11:42, 5 January 2008 (UTC) PS: It's Deepu, and not Deepa. ;P[reply]

Anti-Suzanne Olsson link spamming

I wish to add a few words here. I have spent past several hours checking various sites at Wikipedia. I noticed that someone keeps inserting the name of Suzanne Olsson with links back to a web site called 'The Refiner's Fire' where Olsson is then attacked. Is there a way to block this person from inserting links at Wikipedia that obviously have a questionable intent? I have been removing them (including from this page) as I find them, which is a random hit and miss endeavor. Please advise. Thanks. R. Tabor. May 13, 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by R.Tabor (talk • contribs) 02:35, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Post a description of the problem at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. That being said, there is nothing wrong with posting links to the website of a source that is critical of a subject. The issue is whether or not the source is reliable, which they don't seem to be in this case. Therefore, I've restored the mention of Suzanne Olsson in the Claimants section of the Jesus bloodline article and added a "citation needed" tag. --Loremaster (talk) 02:43, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suzanne Olssen descendant of Jesus Christ

Is there something wrong with describing Suzanne Olssen as the descendant of Jesus Christ? She had a genealogy "demonstrating it" on her website long enough before someone began questioning it, and she took it down. Her colleague Fida Hassnain described her as the "descendant of Jesus" reviewing her book on Amazon.com, and Olssen herself has described herself as the descendant of Jesus Christ on internet discussion lists, with favourable comments from her colleagues. Is she now beginning to deny that she claimed such a thing? Wfgh66 (talk) 04:41, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Has Suzanne Olsson now stopped claiming to be directly descended from Jesus Christ? Does she now take exception to being described as the descendant of Jesus Christ? Wfgh66 (talk) 13:18, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To Paul Smith-aka Wfgh66

To Paul Smith, who is doing all this creative editing to Olsson's pages. Why does this woman interest you so much? This is her page at Wikipedia. Leave it alone and leave the woman in peace and stop stalking her. It is not for you to decide what, if, or how much she wishes to have said here. To then link your words to a site like "The Refiner's Fire' and a very hostile article is malevolent.In fact, you wrote a similar article, did you not? It was meant to ridicule publicly, was it not? The claims are based on a tomb in India, recovery of DNA from that tomb, and ongoing research there with other family members who have family geneologies in kashmir connecting them all together. Olsson has every right to distance herself from the turmoil and ridicule created by others, including yourself Paul. Peace.

Nobody has their "own page" in Wikipedia. That would be self-promotion, which is prohibited on Wikipedia. And you failed to answer my question: Has Suzanne Olsson now STOPPED claiming to be descended from Jesus Christ? Wfgh66 (talk) 17:56, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Paul, you did not answer MY questions: Didn't you write hostile article about Suzanne Olsson? Don't you intend to publicly ridicule her at every chance you get? These so-called 'edits' are simply a weapon you use to get attention for yourself and have nothing to do with research of others? And one more question, how does someone like yourself stay so mean spirited for so long? Do you drink battery acid every morning at breakfast just to keep your mean-spiritedness up?

Edit Warring Suzanne Olsson

R Tabor, you keep deleting passages relating to Suzanne Olsson claiming to be descended from Jesus Christ. Why are you doing this? I have provided a citation, Olsson's open letter to Kathleen McGowan where she mentions she is a descendant of Jesus Christ. Has Suzanne Olsson now stopped making this claim? Thank you.Wfgh66 (talk) 18:25, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Paul, already you have lied again...There is an open letter to McGowan but nowhere does it state a claim by Suzanne Olsson as you stated.You are not editing. You are attacking.

Quoting Suzanne Olsson:

http://www.theseekerbooks.com/articles/ToMcG.html

I have a genealogy in my family that goes as far back as a generation or two after Jesus. It is irrefutable and unwaiving. It has nothing to do with Laurence Gardner's books or Dan Brown, or Michael Baigent's claims. Wfgh66 (talk) 18:32, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Paul, where does it say Olsson claims to be a descendent of Jesus? BTW, I have reported you to Wikipedia and requested page protection. You have been at these personal attacks for several years. Not only my concerns for Olsson, but others are complaining about you now. You have already been evicted from numerous forums for hostilities and personal attacks, you bring your vitrol to Wikipedia.

Please read the above quote again. Has Suzanne Olsson now stopped claiming to be descended from Jesus Christ. She was presenting herself as such on the Mania.com discussion list and described as such by fellow colleague and author Fida Hassnain on Amazon.com. What is the current situation? Thank you. Wfgh66 (talk) 18:46, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please read this post carefully. The current situation is that you are reported to Wikipedia for all previously mentioned violations as an editor.

I have provided a reliable citation to corroborate an entry to the Suzanne Olsson article. You are engaging in edit warring and vandalism and refusing to discuss Suzanne Olsson's current position about herself. Wfgh66 (talk) 18:55, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suzanne Olsson

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. --Onorem ♠Dil 19:19, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

May 2008

Hi, the recent edit you made to Suzanne Olsson has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. Hobartimus (talk) 19:24, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The recent edit you made to Suzanne Olsson constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to vandalize pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thanks. Shinpah1 (talk) 19:26, 14 May 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Blocked for edit warring

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.

Nakon 22:37, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please remove this block after reading the discussions about these edits. I have maintained this page for past 2-3 years and never encountered a problem. Editor Paul Smith just started in April and headed straight for people he also attacks outside Wikipedia. He has removed all positive links and comments from the page and inserted only negative and unverifiable claims. Please remove the block and do not allow him to continue with this negative and damaging (to Wikipedia) agenda. You are not taking into consideration the long view. Obviously my reverts are not hostile or vandalsim. His are! Thank You.

I'm not here to judge who's right and who's wrong in this situation as I think most of us don't know who is because we simply don't know. However, I think some of your behavior here needs to be addressed. If what you say is true, instead of waging a one-man campaign which has been not exactly nice at times and clearly edit warring, I think it would be more beneficial to use the established methods of content dispute that can be found at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. That being said, I believe this block is fair as you have clearly violated this policy and need to take a step back and cool down and look at other methods, rather than just getting frustrated at others and edit warring and taking a very one-sided approach that is not inline with Wikipedia:Consensus. Thanks! Sasquatch t|c 00:24, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A guide to applying WikiLove towards another editor.

Read also

--Dave1185 (talk) 05:41, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]