User talk:Mbz1/a7

January 2010
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring at Israeli West Bank barrier. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text  below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

WP:3RR doesn't have an exception for your interpretation of WP:NPOV. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 05:18, 25 January 2010 (UTC) This block was extremely unfair posted by an involved administrator, who heavily edited this very article himself. The block was lifted soon after it was posted. I have to give credit to User:Nableezy for helping me out, and I am grateful to him for doing so, most of all because the user is on the different side. Nableezy asked Malik to lift the block because the article got protected. Administrators, do not block the editors, if you protected the article, and never act as admins, if you are involved up to your nose like in this case.--Mbz1 (talk) 00:54, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Blocked for 24 hours for disruptive editing
Without asserting blame for events happening prior to this week, earlier this week I and others imposed the 24 hr interaction ban to try and calm the larger conflict down. Since then, the level of personal attacks and disruptive actions by all but one of the parties involved dropped off nearly completely.

For whatever reason, you have continued them.

I advised you a couple of days ago to take a short break, hoping that you would calm down and find a way to continue the content debates without disruptive actions and personal attacks. Your response has been to redouble those attacks. Reviewing ANI currently, there is significant administrator support for a proposal blocking you for a week and putting you on user interaction probation for three months.

I am not taking up that proposed community sanction now. But reviewing your actions since my request for you to take a break, it's clear that you are poking sticks into situations to escalate conflict, with multiple parties, in multiple venues. That's disruptive to the community. We expect editors to handle conflicts in an adult manner - with respect for other participants, and dealing with disagreements at a friendly, or at least not insultingly combative, level.

I am blocking you from editing for 24 hrs to prevent further provocations and disruptive behavior.

When the block is up - I strongly urge you to either disengage from this subject or to participate in a constructive manner with due respect for other Wikipedians' participation. Even in contentious areas, we expect people to handle content conflicts with dignity and respect. If you cannot do that, you either need to stay away from contentious areas, or reconsider whether you are able to participate in Wikipedia on an ongoing basis.

That decision is up to you. If you chose to behave in a constructive manner then nobody will remember this a year from now. I hope that you chose that path.

Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 17:50, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

for. Please stop. You are welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

The block was unfair. No differences for the block rationale were provided. Conclusion: Admins do not write long block messages. Make them short, clear and the most important specific. Provide the exact differences for the block rational, and provide them in such a way that anybody would be able to see those at any time, even a few years later. Sandstein does it right. Learn from him.--Mbz1 (talk) 02:43, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Block analysis

April 2010
To enforce an arbitration decision, you have been blocked for a period of 24 hours from editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, please read our guide to appealing arbitration enforcement blocks and follow the instructions there to appeal your block.  Sandstein  13:27, 5 April 2010 (UTC)  Notice to administrators: In a 2010 decision, the Committee held that "Administrators are prohibited from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as WP:AN or WP:ANI). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the proper page. Any administrator that overturns an enforcement action outside of these circumstances shall be subject to appropriate sanctions, up to and including desysopping, at the discretion of the Committee."

This is in reaction to your violation of the topic ban noted above by your edit, as per the reports on my talk page.  Sandstein  13:28, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

This block is one of my favorite :-) I was blocked for this edit for violating my topic ban on I/P conflict in... Rothschild family article. What in the word Rothschild family has to do with I/P conflict? There's not a single, not even a half word in that article about the conflict or about Arabs for that matter.
 * Block analysis.

Conclusion: Administrators, if you are really to block contributors for such edits, I believe topic bans conditions should be specified much more clearly than they are specified now. For example, it should be said somewhere: "Do not edit anything that has a word from your topic ban description. For example, if you are topic banned on I/P conflict, do not edit any article that has word "Israel" in it. Blocks should not deepened on what admin is active at the moment and what mood he/she is in. Contributors, if you are topic-banned, for example, on I/P conflict do not edit anything that has a word "Israel" in it even, it has nothing to do with the conflict itself. You might get unfairly blocked for so called topic ban violation.--Mbz1 (talk) 21:06, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

AE block
To enforce an arbitration decision, you have been blocked for a period of 48 hours from editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, please read our guide to appealing arbitration enforcement blocks and follow the instructions there to appeal your block.  Sandstein  16:07, 8 April 2010 (UTC)  Notice to administrators: In a 2010 decision, the Committee held that "Administrators are prohibited from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as WP:AN or WP:ANI). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the proper page. Any administrator that overturns an enforcement action outside of these circumstances shall be subject to appropriate sanctions, up to and including desysopping, at the discretion of the Committee."

This is in reaction to your topic ban violation at.  Sandstein  16:09, 8 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Block analysis

I was blocked over this edit. As you could see it had absolutely nothing to do with I/P conflict and was only concerning wikipedia user page policies. It was made at AE appeal issued by a user, who was unhappy that a hate propaganda image he displayed at his user page was removed. Did I violate my topic ban by citing wikipedia policies in my own section without mentioning any specifics about removed hate propaganda image. I do not think so, and other topic banned users were not sanctioned in the similar situations.

Conclusion: Admins, what I like about being blocked by Sandstein is that he always provides the differences for the block rationale in block log and in block message. It is a very good practice, and every blocking admin should do the same thing. Contributors, once again, even you believe your edit is not a violation of your topic ban, it is better to be safe than sorry.--Mbz1 (talk) 01:32, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

June 2010
To enforce an arbitration decision, you have been blocked for a period of 72 hours from editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, please read our guide to appealing arbitration enforcement blocks and follow the instructions there to appeal your block.  Sandstein  12:53, 6 June 2010 (UTC)  Notice to administrators: In a 2010 decision, the Committee held that "Administrators are prohibited from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as WP:AN or WP:ANI). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the proper page. Any administrator that overturns an enforcement action outside of these circumstances shall be subject to appropriate sanctions, up to and including desysopping, at the discretion of the Committee."

This concerns your third violation of your Israeli/Arab conflict topic ban, at and. Continued ban violations will lead to longer blocks and/or an extension of the ban.  Sandstein  12:54, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

It was my last block for so called topic ban violation for two non disruptive edits on user's talk pages. Was it fair? Well I have seen other topic banned users made multiple comments on an user's talk pages and did not even get warned. As I said about my block for Rothschild family's edit, blocks should not deepened on what admin is active at the moment and what mood he/she is in. The conditions of topic banns should be specified much clearer than they are now.--Mbz1 (talk) 02:20, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * block analysis

Blocked
 You have been blocked for violation of the three-revert rule on Art student scam. To contest this block, please reply here on your talk page by adding the text along with the reason you believe the block is unjustified, or email the blocking administrator. For alternative methods to appeal, see Appealing a block. --  tariq abjotu  21:20, 27 July 2010 (UTC) It was a fair block. I've learned my lesson and never edit war again.--Mbz1 (talk) 02:21, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Block analysis

24 hour block
Following discussion on WP:AE you are blocked for 24 hours due to infringing an interaction ban. PhilKnight (talk) 18:04, 25 October 2010 (UTC) April 2010 (UTC) This block was unfair.I did not violate any condition of my ban--Mbz1 (talk) 02:25, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Block analysis

Brief block / disruption
All of User:Factsontheground, User:Gilisa, and User:Mbz1 are blocked briefly (12 hours) for disruption for recent behavior in thier editor conflicts.

I am going to be proposing a permanent interaction ban and possibly other topic bans on ANI immediately after posting these notices.

Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 21:45, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Georgewilliamherbert: you seriously need to be kicked off this site. Clickpop (talk) 08:45, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Agree. --Mbz1 (talk) 00:27, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Extremely unfair block with no differences for a block rationale provided. I was blocked over few comments on AN/I. In a worst case scenario ban on AN/I might have been in order. I full site block - no a way.--Mbz1 (talk) 02:27, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Block analysis

February 2010
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for violating WP:BLP at as explained at my talk page. Please stop. You are welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text below.  Sandstein  00:02, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I am proud of this block. I am fighting for the right cause! The block only proves one more time my point that Wikipedia is non-censored only from one side. To call European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights its working definition for antisemitism and  Simon Wiesenthal Center and original research seems kind of strange. Oh yes, and I do not think I could ever stop to call the things with their real names.--Mbz1 (talk) 00:10, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * And how dare you to say that I am "mainly here to fight an ideological battle and not to improve Wikipedia" only because I called an anti-Semite "an anti-Semite" and wrote his name in small! It is he, who was brought here to fight an ideological battle not me. --Mbz1 (talk) 00:50, 23 February 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)


 * See the ANI thread linked above along with 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)

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:  [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikihounding#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)


 * 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)
 * 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)
 * 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)

2010 (UTC)
 * 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


 * 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)

About so called "hollow AE request": Less than a month later User:Supreme Deliciousness was blocked for 24 hours and topic-banned for 2 months. So, my AE was not "hollow" after all.--Mbz1 (talk) 04:36, 27 January 2011 (UTC)


 * 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)
 * 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)

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) 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 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)

After a complaint that should not have been filed in the first place about me was filed on AN/I, and User:Prodego warned me they should have archived this complaint on AN/I and mark it as resolved. It was not done, that promoted a few trolls and my personal hounds to pick it up a some time after I was warned. At that time I felt threatened because the trolls brought up my communications with another users that had nothing to do with initial AN/I thread, and none of which required any administrative assistance whatsoever. The three users were canvased notified about the thread. Two of those three were decent enough to ignore the canvasing notifications. The blocking administrator was canvased. At that point I was sooo surprised how an elephant was getting created out of a fly that I filed an SPI request. It should not have been filed of course, but it was not filed to harass anybody. I filed it with the only purpose to protect myself. I was refused in Assumption of the assumption of good faith. At that point I got blocked for a week. I should not have been blocked even for a minute. A single(even wrong SPI) and a single a few words post on AN/I with no PA in a thread started by someone else (not me) should not have resulted in the block ever. If User:Prodego marked AN/I about me (that should not have been filed in the first place) as resolved and archived it nothing like this would have happened.
 * My analysis of the block. I hope it might help some users and administrators.

Conclusion: Administrators, if you acted on AN/I report, mark it as resolved and archive it. Do not feed up the trolls and wikihounds, who hardly wrote an article, but are spending lots of time on administrative noticeboards. The contributors, never take a bait.--Mbz1 (talk) 20:57, 13 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Update:The block and following bans was by my request examined by administrator AGK, who found my comment to be "of value", and "Daedalus' complaint about my comment" to be "without merit". administrator AGK conclusion was: "I disagree with the block and with the continuation of the ANI etc. restrictions".
 * Update I was unfairly blocked by a canvassed administrator Gwen Gale. In accordance with this "Admins ought to be uncanvassable. Any admin who gets an improper request on their talk page should not take the proposed action. If they do, a question may be raised as to their fitness to be an admin.." I was absolutely right, when I said Gwen Gale should not be an administrator. --Mbz1 (talk) 15:21, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

FPC
Thanks I just fixed the caption. Hope it passes. Beautiful image, BTW! - Milk's  Favorite  Cookie  01:49, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * You really do have some great images! What would you consider your best? I came upon this which looked nice. - Milk's  Favorite  Cookie  02:09, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Wow. I had to laugh. Did you know it was your image when you asked for a photo? You really really deserve this:


 * Also, you've been to Antarctica?!- Milk's  Favorite  Cookie  02:40, 6 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Wow. I consider you an awesome photographer. You must love to travel! Next time, (hopefully you can do this), you travel to South America, you really ought get an image of a Goliath Birdeater. Although, it is EXTREMELY scary, I've always wanted to know someone who has taken a photo of it. Obviously, if you hate spiders as much as I do, don't even bother. - Milk's  Favorite  Cookie  03:04, 6 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Really?! I've never seen a shark (in real life). Although you were in a cage, were you scared by any chance? Also, how cold did Antarctica feel? - Milk's  Favorite  Cookie  03:10, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Where did you go looking at sharks? - <font face="High Thhfhfhfower Text" size="3px" color="#4D0100">Milk's  <font face="High Tower fhfhfhText" size="3px" color="#4D0100">Favorite  <font face="High Towfhfhfher Text" size="3px" color="#4D0100">Cookie  00:36, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Which would you consider most interesting? And, any images? - <font face="High Thhfhfhfower Text" size="3px" color="#4D0100">Milk's  <font face="High Tower fhfhfhText" size="3px" color="#4D0100">Favorite  <font face="High Towfhfhfher Text" size="3px" color="#4D0100">Cookie  03:23, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * How close did the sharks come to the cage when you went diving? - <font face="High Thhfhfhfower Text" size="3px" color="#4D0100">Milk's  <font face="High Tower fhfhfhText" size="3px" color="#4D0100">Favorite  <font face="High Towfhfhfher Text" size="3px" color="#4D0100">Cookie  22:32, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Have you been to every state in the US? - <font face="High Thhfhfhfower Text" size="3px" color="#4D0100">Milk's  <font face="High Tower fhfhfhText" size="3px" color="#4D0100">Favorite  <font face="High Towfhfhfher Text" size="3px" color="#4D0100">Cookie  01:51, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * 42, 43. I really want to go to Alaska, and Hawaii though. Have you ever been to Alaska? - <font face="High Thhfhfhfower Text" size="3px" color="#4D0100">Milk's  <font face="High Tower fhfhfhText" size="3px" color="#4D0100">Favorite  <font face="High Towfhfhfher Text" size="3px" color="#4D0100">Cookie  02:19, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

How daft of me!
I should have awarded you with this right away.

Thank you very much!--Mbz1 (talk) 21:22, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 * 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  <font color="#0000CD">Talk 22:25, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Flora and Maria
–Grondemar 23:12, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Your Valued Picture

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

DYK for Fata Morgana (mirage)

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


 * 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)

DYK for Jewish pirates
Materialscientist (talk) 08:03, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Bernese Fassnacht (Carnival)
Materialscientist (talk) 16:02, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Majorcan cartographic school
The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Legends of the Coco de Mer
The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

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

DYK for Carrier Pigeon (ship)
Bradjamesbrown (talk) 06:04, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Historically significant lunar eclipses
The DYK project (nominate) 18:03, 27 May 2010 (UTC)


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

DYK for Peacock flounder
<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 12:02, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Underwater camouflage and mimicry
<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 18:01, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

DYK for RMS Mulheim
<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 06:02, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Australite
<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 06:02, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Max Frauenthal
Materialscientist (talk) 00:02, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

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:

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)

DYK for Herrengasse 23 (Bern)
<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 00:02, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Jacob Barnet affair
Mifter (talk) 12:04, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Sol Hachuel
<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 00:02, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Lac de Monteynard Avignonet
Shubinator (talk) 00:25, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Frederick Mayer (the spy)
<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 12:03, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Schloss Reichenbach
<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 00:03, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for La Peregrina pearl
<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 06:02, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for The Holocaust's Arab Heroes
<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 00:02, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Tub'a Abu Kariba As'ad
The DYK project (nominate) 06:03, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Paul the Octopus
Materialscientist (talk) 12:02, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Sefer ha-Temunah
The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for The Mountain of Israeli-Palestinian Friendship
<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 12:02, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Yoni Jesner and Ahmed Khatib
The DYK project (nominate) 12:02, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

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

DYK for Ali Bushnaq, Dudu Yifrah and Micha Yaniv
<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 00:02, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

DYK for The Grand Design (book)
-- Cirt (talk) 06:03, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Great Comet of 1264
<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 00:03, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Great Comet of 1556
<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 00:03, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Yolande Harmer
<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 18:02, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Jewish pope Andreas
The DYK project (nominate) 06:03, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Sara Copia Sullam
<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 06:03, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Earth's shadow
<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 18:02, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
 * 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)
 * Yes, I did. Thank you for your great help.--Mbz1 (talk) 14:30, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
 * 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)
 * 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)
 * 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)
 * Thank you, Susan!--Mbz1 (talk) 01:54, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
 * 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)
 * Oh, Susan, I am an absolutely unique editor on Wikipedia Face-smile.svg I am trying to be the first in everything I am doing:


 * The images I upload are one of the best Face-smile.svg,
 * The articles I start are the most-viewed Face-smile.svg...
 * My block log is one of the longest on Wikipedia Face-crying.svg but I hope that my blocking administrators will see this thread,realize how good I am, and will block me never again Face-smile.svg


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

DYK for Broderick – Terry duel
-- Cirt (talk) 12:02, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for 2004 Iraq churches attacks
Materialscientist (talk) 18:02, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for King Philip shipwreck
Materialscientist (talk) 18:02, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Ravens of the Tower of London
The DYK project (nominate) 12:04, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Parc naturel régional d'Armorique
--Dravecky (talk) 19:47, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Featured picture candidates/Green sea turtle
This was the very first image of mine that got promoted to FP. Now it is FP on quite a few wikipedias.--Mbz1 (talk) 03:40, 14 January 2011 (UTC)