Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 21:14, 9 May 2013

This is SuzanneOlsson's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8Auto-archiving period: 20 days

Article moved to User:SuzanneOlsson/Draft article

You've got mail!

Noticeboard discussion

ABOUT DESCENDANT CLAIMS

I feel it imperative that readers understand desposyni claims made at the time I entered Kashmir.It was a time when Taliban and fundamentalists were making a strong presence in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Kashmir. Many valuable sites were being destroyed, including Bamyan Buddha and Kabul Museum, many Hindu and Buddhist temples and many Christian sites. All now gone. The former caretaker of Roza Bal tomb, Bashrat Shaheen, was trying to regain control of Roza Bal tomb. He and his family had been threatened. It was hoped by me stepping in as I did, I could draw attention away from him, bolster his claims from a western perspective, and hopefully draw world attention to the tomb in efforts to save it. Author Laurence Gardner, a friend, was aware of the goals and the need for this approach, and was extremely helpful to me at the time. He created the 'genealogy chart' that I showed to Kashmir Directors and authorities. I never truly believed that Magdalene and Jesus were married, nor was I a supporter of all his theories. However so many popular books claimed otherwise that it seemed more advantage to go along with that theory if it helped the situation at Roza Bal tomb. Indeed it did, for the tomb was sealed shut against the outside world, including Taliban fundamentalists. However, it did not happen soon enough to save the life of Bashrat Shaheen. who died at this time under strange circumstances ruled a "suicide" by authorities. I have lost two wonderful helpful people involved in this research at Roza Bal, Laurence Gardner and Bashrat Shaheen. Only they were privvy to this info at the time. This is the first time I have made this info public. As soon as I was out of Kashmir and free to publish my own research, I refuted these claims about desposyni through Magdalene and I have continued efforts for DNA studies to this day. I feel the Shaheen family certainly has the best claims for descendant from Yuz Asaf. I hope one day the DNA will prove their claims. Asd for me, I dont care either weay..I feel retrieving the DNA is the most important goal for history and for our future. I hope the facts I have presented here can be included in this article some day. I will not touch it for fear of being accused of COI. But as worded it is incomplete. I am deeply grateful to those strangers who have created this page. You have done an overall excellent job. Thank You. SuzanneOlsson (talk) 18:53, 5 May 2013 (UTC)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk) 18:53, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

WP:TPG

Per WP:TPG comments from other users should not be deleted, as you did here and here as well. History2007 (talk) 19:34, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

The originators of comments retain the right to make corrections, or edit for more accurate info as and when they realize them. You can always compare them. I may change my post 3-4 times to correct myself and clarify my thoughts.. SuzanneOlsson (talk)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk)

No. You still need to read WP:TPG. You shloud not modify or delete comments from other users at all - unless fixing minor page formatting. Never delete other user comments. Never. History2007 (talk) 23:10, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

I did NOT delete other users messages! What are you looking at???? SuzanneOlsson (talk)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk)

We must have different optometrists. I see here and here that you deleted two messages, one from me, another from Dr Ali. Or shall I go back to the optometrist tomorrow? History2007 (talk) 23:54, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

No. I did not make those edits. I cannot explain what happened or why you think I did, but I did not...no reason why I should have. Those posts were made by Dr. Ali.I have compared the two posts in each comments and dont even see any difference!SuzanneOlsson (talk)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk)

Did you leave your computer on and walk away? A child around? Anyway, the deletions were made. No question there. But I will see my optometrist tomorrow anyway... History2007 (talk) 01:07, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

WP:ANI discussion

Please be aware of this discussion on WP:ANI given that it refers to your activities. History2007 (talk) 19:40, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Up to your old stuff again History? My. My. You must be grinning from ear to ear after you submitted that rant. Do I really bother you THAT much? Isn't this a bit over the top and obsessive-compulsive for you? And why did you write at all, and with a slant to leave out information and mislead other Wiki editors? SuzanneOlsson (talk)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk)

Oh. I see. This is your "revenge" for some deletion you blamed on me..You went straight from that accusation to the suggestion to ban me (again) .why did you even bother coming back here- just long enough to start trouble again I see. No one else is/was having these problems except you. and I still have no idea what you are talking about. There is no reason why I would change or delete Dr. Ali or you. Ina all my years here, and all the accusations you have lodged against me, deletions and changes has never been among them. I believe we had these issues between us on previous occasions. Boy, you really dont like me!SuzanneOlsson (talk)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk)

I will repeat this post here for benefit of anyone following these discussions: When I was in Kashmir seeking the DNA, it took many months of planning and meeting with many officials and University professors who would lead the scientific recovery of the DNA. The final permission had to come from Chief Minister Farooq Abdullah, who, at the time I believe, still controlled Roza bal through his WAQF (Trust). . It was nothing we approached lightly or carelessly. This was shortly after 9-11 in America and very very troubled times for the entire region. Great thought and careful planning went into every phase. It was only due to the indiscretion of one local chowkidar who thought he was left out of backsheesh that the negative versions started being fed to the newspapers by him and him alone. He can also be seen in various documentary films bashing me, bashing Ahmadaddis..and generally ranting for fundamentalism to prevail. That was the time the letter was written to try and regain the tomb from his influence...however he had a lot of local relatives, young males who would then back him up and threaten anyone who approached the tomb. This is the same man who was selling off tomb artifacts to Pakistani agents. Holger Kersten bought a piece of carved wood relic from this same man..who began regarding Roza Bal as his own personal ATM machine. .had there been no intervention, the entire tomb would be destroyed by now. There's a big difference in the way these events are portrayed by History2007, through ignorance, and what really happened.SuzanneOlsson (talk)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk)

I might add that at this time, CM Farooq Abdullah lost control of Roza Bal tomb to another group- it is now run by a Board of Directors, who control a WAQF so large that it exceeds the annual income for all of Kashmir. Even this group has invited me back to continue the DNA Project. For health reasons and for financial reasons, I am unable to return at this time. SuzanneOlsson (talk)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk)

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Misplaced Pages. When you add content to talk pages and Misplaced Pages pages that have open discussion, please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, 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 necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 03:09, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Unacceptable comments

I strongly suggest you retract your personal attacks here and here. You may be frustrated but the comments you made on History2007's talk page are unacceptable. If you do not redact them you will be blocked for making personal attacks.--Jezebel'sPonyo 19:50, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

I changed it. Thanks for noticing. SuzanneOlsson (talk) 20:08, 9 May 2013 (UTC)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk) 20:08, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. --Jezebel'sPonyo 20:31, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

THANK YOU

Thank you to those who created a new bio page for me. However, I pointed out several times that the article you repeatedly quote from the Times of India about 59th descent is is incomplete and largely untrue. It was submitted by someone near Roza Bal who has contributed many untrue statements to the press and the media. Suggesting that I 'planted material' in the tomb, et cetera are lies generated by one person who gave the interview. In other of his interviews, he repeats this pattern to and about other people as well. I made several suggestions for corrections here, but these were ignored. I cannot allow the page to exist in this form. I have contacted the Times of India to ask for a correction or a retraction. Unless and until such time, I would prefer to have no page rather than inaccurate source material that presents me in such a negative way. I believe that admonition appears right at the top of every Bio page. It says "Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous or harmful." Claiming I 'planted things in the tomb' is libelous and harmful to me..in addition to other comments made by Mr. Amin. Further, that information was NOT submitted to Times of India by a Board of Directors as the article claims. They had no knowledge that Mr. Amin was making these claims or these interviews. Thank you for understanding. If you have any questions, please just ask me. SuzanneOlsson (talk) 20:33, 9 May 2013 (UTC)SuzanneOlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk) 20:33, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

It's sourced, and in what is considered a reliable source. You may disagree with it, or think it's wrong but due to your COI you're NOT allowed to delete content like that. It may be worthwhile to put the whole page up at WP:AFD because I don't think your notable enough for inclusion, but regardless of that, you need to STAY VERY clear of that page, and not edit it. — raekyt 20:37, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

According to Misplaced Pages policy at the top iof the page, it says "Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous or harmful." I am telling you this information is not accurate. Leave it alone unless you can prove otherwise.. Thank you. SuzanneOlsson (talk) 20:41, 9 May 2013 (UTC)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk) 20:41, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

That's referring to unsourced information. It's sourced to a reliable source, thus valid for inclusion. I know you seem to avoid reading WP:RS and other policy pages, but really you should. You're going to get blocked if you keep it up. — raekyt 20:43, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Am I to presume that you are calling me a liar when I say this information is not true? Because that is what you are suggesting . SuzanneOlsson (talk) 20:45, 9 May 2013 (UTC)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk) 20:45, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Do you not understand WP:RS? You're word, your WP:OR, is irrelevant when it comes to what a reliable source says. — raekyt 20:48, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

I would rather the entire p

That's not how we operate here at wikipedia, we operate under WP:CONSENSUS, and the avenue for deleteing the content is WP:AFD. — raekyt 20:51, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

May 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 Suzanne M. Olsson, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

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. Because this page is about you, you should NOT wholesale delete it's content like that. Reliable sources are valid for inclusion, regardless of your opinion of their content. — raekyt 20:30, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

And by what rights do you deem yourself worthy to determine the truth or validity of these edits? SuzanneOlsson (talk) 20:56, 9 May 2013 (UTC)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk) 20:56, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Years of experience interpreting policy.... if you disagree that these are reliable sources, as others not just me have pointed out to you, take it to WP:RSN. — raekyt 21:00, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Suzanne M. Olsson. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Misplaced Pages's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
2. 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 a version 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 you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. — raekyt 20:40, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Misplaced Pages, as you did at Suzanne M. Olsson, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. — raekyt 20:49, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Suzanne M. Olsson

The article Suzanne M. Olsson has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Does not meet WP:GNG

While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — raekyt 20:58, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

There I put it up for a WP:PROD, if it's unopposed for 7 days it gets deleted, if someone opposes, next step is WP:AFD. That is the proper avenue for deleting a page, consensus. — raekyt 20:59, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

I request immediate deletion of this page because of false information and potentially libelous information allowed to remain. SuzanneOlsson (talk) 21:04, 9 May 2013 (UTC)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk) 21:04, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

That's unlikely to happen. — raekyt 21:06, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Why Raeky? You yourself are making all these posts about speedy deletion of my page.. and you yourself are resisting all efforts to correct the contentious material...Surely speedy deletion would be best, and what you yourself suggested above.. SuzanneOlsson (talk) 21:10, 9 May 2013 (UTC)Suzanne OlssonSuzanneOlsson (talk) 21:10, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately WP:SPEEDY#G7 isn't an option anymore, although you created the page there's been significant contributions to it by other editors since, so WP:PROD is your next best chance of getting it deleted, or straight to WP:AFD.. — raekyt 21:13, 9 May 2013 (UTC)