Salam brother. Of course, by Allah, the Shahadah is the most significant symbol for us. However, in this secular encyclopaedia, it is not about what WE feel represents us, but rather what universally represents us symbolically - and few people recognise the Shahadah. The crescent is more symbolic and universal, but then it's not really Islamic. As for the Mosque, I think that is definetely not a good option, as it could be a mandhir! So, to clarify, I would like it to be the Shahadah, but I agree that the crescent has a stronger case for being used, but either way, I disagree with the mosque. Just thought I might tell you my opinion, and although I support your request all the way, I still think it is not the best option. That is why I am neutral.
I noticed you've put a lot of effort into improving this article.Yesterday I made some changes to your edits, but I don't want to disrupt your work.My changes were mostly removing internal wikilinks to articles that are not relevant to Colombo.I thought I would point out that if you link ordinary words, like I just did, it isn't helpful to the reader because if they follow the link they will not find anything related to the subject, so it's normal practice to only link to an article that provides extra information about something specific to the main article.These concepts are discussed more fully under WP:MoS, which is highly recommended reading.Happy editing!Slowmover14:56, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. I also restored the disambiguation link to the "Columbo" television series, because it is a commonly misspelled word.Similarly, "Columbia" and "Colombia" are often confused, so people searching for one of these often end up at the wrong article.Slowmover14:56, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
hi mystic, I saw you left a message at my talk page. I actually dont understand what you wanted me to do. where's the actual discussion? I'd like to have my say there. Suleyman Habeeb19:14, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You have recently been observed canvassing for votes regarding Template:Islam.Please note that this may be construed by many administrators as internal spamming, something severely frowned upon by most administrators on Wikipedia.This behavior in fact on one occasion contributed towards a Arbitration Committee ruling of disruptive behavior that resulted in blocking.Please do not game the system and respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by ceasing to further canvass for votes, and instead allow the process to instead reflect the opinions of editors that were actively involved in the matter at hand. Thanks. Netscott22:14, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry I didnt get what you are saying!!! Can you give a diff of an instance that I have asked anyone to vote for my image? I have only asked people to make there comment. Please understand the wikipedia community does not just comprise of you and me. There are thousands of users who would be interested in matters that they are not aware of, I was only asking them to have there say. There is no need for you to threaten me. And I kindly request you to stop stalking me. «₪Mÿš†íc₪» (T)08:44, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And also remember I am not the one who started that "stupid" vote count, I am aware that vote counting is discouraged in wikipedia, I have expressed my displeasure in the template talk page about this. And you are responsible for starting a count. «₪Mÿš†íc₪» (T)08:46, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Your utilization of the word "stalking" when referring to me would be a violation that falls under Wikipedia "no personal attack" policy. I suggest you refrain from utlizing such personal attackish terminology when describing my behavior relative to your attempt at vote stacking. There is no need for one to "stalk" you to see the evidence of your attempt to "game the system" in terms of having the shahada image you added to Wikipedia included on that template when users like User:Suleyman_Habeeb who has never been involved in discussions about it suddenly appear from nowhere to "vote" ("kindly indicate your preference"="vote") about it. You did the same thing in asking User:JuanMuslim to flat out "vote". As I indicated on my latest commentary in the "Consensus? Nonsense" section, my list was never meant as a poll but was made to refute your asinine claim of "consensus" for including the shahada image. If you're talking about "stupid" this false claim surely qualifies. Netscott12:16, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Asking someone to tell there preference is sure not canvassing!! I kindly request you to withdraw your allegations that I was canvassing. Canvassing means the act of persuading ; communicatioon intended to induce belief.
I didn't persuade anyone to vote in favour of me, all the editors whom I have approached, could've very well voted against it if they saw any reason for it. And I would like to ask what were YOU doing when you asked this from Azate, if I was canvassing this sure too qualifies as canvassing. I have apologized for my previous claim of consensus then, as I was new to wikipedia, I didn't have clear picture about the policy. Anyway I am not in the mudslinging business. «₪Mÿš†íc₪» (T)13:19, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Vote Stacking proof
Actually your "gaming of the system" was in fact quite a bit worse than I had realized but now that I have reviewed your edits I can see that you've been essentially canvassing all along.
You intitially started out mass mailing a group of users neutrally asking about the new image you wanted to add to the Template. [3]
But when that didn't work you proceeded to persuade and induce belief that the group you spammed should support the image you added by internal spamming the following message across dozens of user talk pages:
Hi there, The Islam template is used in all Islam related articles and it carries an image of the mosque, if you take a close look at the other religion templates they all carry an icon that actually symbolizes the particular religion. The question is what symbolizes Islam? As a muslim you would agree that we cannot Idolize any symbol as sacred as it would be Shirk. So the next question is what kind of icon would correctly represent Islam and Muslims? It is undoubtedly the Shahada, because without it we wouldn't be muslims. So I have suggested to change the template image from a masjid to a Masjid with the Shahada in it. In order to have the image in the template I need build some consense, could you kindly visit the talk page (Template_talk:Islam) and make your suggestion, lets have the template change so it will correctly represent Islam. (You do not have to support it if you dont like it). thanks in advance. «₪Mÿš†íc₪» (T)
And you accuse me of "gaming the system" when I invited one person to join the debate (actually discuss "what represents Islam")?
Let if go already! Netscott20:09, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Very good research indeed. I admit that it may be (is) spamming, but was not canvassing!!! And trully I didn't know that posting the same message to several users is not allowed in wikipedia, until you posted that warning earlier. I appologize for my mistake. But I didn't do any canvassing. For instance in this particular case, the user had expressed his consent in favor of the new image but hadn't indicated it (in your Consensus? Nonesense section). Since you people were counting votes I asked him/her to put his signature there. And I again like to tell you some of these users actually voted against it. So that is evidence that I didn't persuade them to vote for it. My only intention was to have more people in the discussion, so that it would be the most correct representation of Islam. «₪Mÿš†íc₪» (T)20:31, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The language in your spam message isn't neutral but rather is meant to induce support for the adoption of the shahada image. In your message you are virtually questioning the faith of Muslims who might not want to support the shahada image. Why don't you just drop this issue? Since you did "game the system" the true consensus as it would have been about the whole issue is now very doubtful. You are a very productive and highly positive contributing editor on Wikipedia (I noticed your other highly beneficial edits in my research). This Shahada issue is starting to severely taint your persona relative to demonstrating good faith and is becoming a vitriolic point of contention that sooner should go away. Netscott20:45, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
My problem is with my English language I suppose. People often misunderstand me as disrespectful, as is the case with some other editors I know who were interpreted as rude sometimes even by me. So I am not supprised that you didnt see neutrality in my message. I thank you for your compliments. As you would've noticed I had already given up on the image, until you started another "consensus again" section. So I thought (naturally
) I have another chance..If you noticed I didn't even respond when Cunado accused me of sock puppeting.. And my current focus is on the Colombo article, and I am looking for someone to correct grammar mistakes in it. thats all I have to say. «₪Mÿš†íc₪» (T)20:57, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Mystìc, I'm sorry to have seen that you were blocked as it was not my intention for that to happen! That said I believe I understood why User:Sceptre did so which was to have you understand in no uncertain terms that spamming is bad. I see you were unblocked so it seems that User:Sceptre saw that the message that spamming was bad was clearly understood by yourself and unblocked you. Again, I apologize to see that you were blocked! Netscott21:56, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'll leave what to do up to you.The smaller version is a bit hard to see details, so I like the larger version too.How about switching them?
Rfrisbietalk04:30, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
great work thanks a lot, there are some other templates thats got the same expression error could you look into it. (I hope I am not asking for too much)
The above and related templates are fixed.They all needed "default" values to eliminate the error messages on the template pages. Rfrisbietalk13:07, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Greetings Mystìc, I noticed that you've submitted this category for deletion as though it was an article. Categories have a seperate deletion process. Please see this page and alter your AfD to a CfD. Thanks. Netscott09:17, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome. I'll probably be voting for deletion of that category myself... it stikes me as being less that neutral relative to Muhammad as in my opinion it's too "demonizing". Netscott09:30, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Brother I understand what you are saying they are wrong to ask to vote or induce people to vote.. "That is Gaming the System", (See above how I learnt my lesson) Whoever does it its wrong maybe you can tell them to stop doing it.. probably they dont know.. «₪Mÿš†íc₪» (T)20:21, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The difference is that I sent the message only to people I know and have collaborated with on Wikipedia, who I knew would be interested in the vote. I did not randomly select people for spamming. Nor did I post a request to vote on a blatantly POV wikiproject page requesting votes. As it happens many of the people I contacted voted to rename the category, and after discussion I came around to their point of view, not the other way around. That's not gaming the system. That IS the system. Briangotts(Talk)(Contrib)20:27, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
On the contrary suppose people who you asked, voted in support of you? Wouldn't that be gaming the system? See brother, my idea is not to threaten you or anything.. I dont want you to do the same mistake I have done (ofcourse in my case it was totally unintentional as I didn't know the rules I assume the same with you). And I am only being nice to you. «₪Mÿš†íc₪» (T)20:42, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I did not take your post as a threat, just ironic in light of what other folks are doing in this vote. I think, though, that you either misunderstand the Wikipedia policies in question, or else you fail to see the difference between indiscriminate spamming and contacting a few (less than 10) people you know will want to be informed about this or that vote. Briangotts(Talk)(Contrib)20:48, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In my limited experience with wikipedia I have learnt that if people are interested in something they will definitely participate in it.. There is no need for anyone to inform others.. If the topic in question is of any importance to them they would have it in their watch list wouldn't they? I dont think I have misunderstood the policy.. Where does the policy say less than 10 is okay and more than 10 not okay (I am willing to learn if you could teach) .. «₪Mÿš†íc₪» (T)20:55, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't mean to imply that 10 was a magic limit. I put that in to show that I had contacted only a small number of people. But if I had contacted 100 (out of the tens of thousands of editors out there) it would have been no different- as long as I was targeting people I knew and worked with, andknew they would be interested. With all the bajillions of articles it is very easy for something to slip by someone when it is quite important to them - it has happened to me on votes, rfas, and the like on more than one occasion. For all that, I am still not aware of any policy that bars the conduct in which I engaged, and I fail to see such conduct banned in any of the materials you referred me to.
Nor, on a slightly different topic, do I have any clue as to how saying "such and such a person was killed at Muhammad's order" can be "original research" (your justification for the vote) when the source for the statement is a myriad of Islamic sources whose purpose was to extoll Muhammad's virtues. Briangotts(Talk)(Contrib)21:03, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Could you provide a single source that says Mohammed (pbuh) ordered someone to kill (assasinate) another? And one source that says so and so killed because prophet asked them to do so and not out of their own will? If you cannot its your own assumption and conclusion that makes it Original Research.
Thanks for uploading Image:Nabwi.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. grenグレン03:15, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
When you opened your account, did you consider using the username User:Mystіc, with the Ukrainian letter і. It looks more like the English Mystic than Mystìc. I just noticed that now ;-) --Tēlex11:52, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for mentioning that Telex, There is already a user by the name Mystic who is not active. So I didn't want my name to look exactly like his just in case he/she starts editing. Anyway I would like to know the ASCII code for the Ukranian i, the current ì code is 0236. «₪Mÿš†íc₪» (T)14:05, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:Quba.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images.If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days.If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Please do not make personal attacks on other people. Wikipedia has a policy against personal attacks. In some cases, users who engage in personal attacks may be blocked from editing by admins or banned by the arbitration committee. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Please resolve disputes appropriately. Thank you. - This is inappropriate: [4]Please comment on Pecher's edits, not on Pecher himself. Tom HarrisonTalk17:21, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:Quba_Night.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images.If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days.If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
As said many times in the Template:Islam talk page.. this image is an old caligraphy design found in many mosques.. If I am not mistaken it found even at Haram Sheriff (needs to be verified), I have taken the image modified the color (gradient effect) with Photoshop CS2. As this caligraphy can be found in many ancient mosques, no issue with copyright. «₪Mÿš†íc₪» (T)18:02, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please offer your opinion, vote, or whatever about your choice for the image to be used with the Islamic Barnstar Award at the Barnstar proposals page. Although there is consensus for the concept of an Islamic Barnstar Award, some editors would like to change the image for the award. I was just thinking you should be aware of this discussion because you have contributed to Islamic-related articles, received the Islamic Barnstar Award, or have contributed to the Islam-related Wikiprojects, etc.--JuanMuslim1m03:01, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Are u kidding? I didn't know that this rule applies for removing ORIGINAL RESEARCH!! why dont you kindly read the wikipedia policy b4 blindly accusing me of vandalism «₪Mÿš†íc₪» (T)07:28, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Talking of deleting things, why is the 'Math of Quran' article deleted? i'm not saying you shouldn't have, i'm too new to accuse people of things (i still haven't properly understood some things on the policy but mainly cause i am too lazy to read them properly), i am just curious. i found it really interesting.--Madi18617:13, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed that you contributed the above image which you made yourself. I don't know what program you used to make it but is it possible for you to contribute a SVG vector image of this map? There are numerous advantages with vector graphics for this sort of data, Vector graphics may give you an idea. One of the key advantages in this case is that the map can be enlarged to any size and still look good. It's also easier to edit for example to translate the image to other languages or to recolour or change the borders if this is ever necessary. If your program is unable to output SVG but is able to output vector graphics of any other kinds, e.g. EPF, PS, WMF, EMF etc then you're welcome to e-mail me the vector output and I should be able to convert it to SVG.
If your program is incapable of output vector graphics or you worked completely in raster, would it be possible for you to submit a higher resolution version of this map? Currently, the text is a bit blurry and it's not very suitable if we want to highlight a certain area. If you do, I strongly recommend you use PNG instead of JPG. PNG which is a loseless compression format is much better for this sort of content then JPG which is lossy. JPG is primarily designed for photos. You'd probably find the PNG is in fact smaller but even if it isn't it's still wise to avoid JPG for such content.
BTW, the specific reason I'm asking is because your image might be useful to illustrate where Colombo is for example in the ITN on the mainpage. Cheers
Nil Einne07:50, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi thank you for your interest in the article. I dont think I have the original image that I worked on. I used Photoshop for my work, please go ahead and edit the image as required. I dont know any tool that could be used to create SVG from jpgs. --«₪Mÿš†íc₪» (T)13:11, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Campaign box deletion
It is such a baseless fact that cannot be proved at all. This makes it utterly meaninglessand useless and thus a complete waste of server space.Kaushini04:16, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please Unblock My Account
I am no sockpuppet of anyone this is false allegation and there is no base for the block, this block might require the intervention and the attention of an ArbCom. «₪Mÿš†íc₪» (T)06:54, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This blocked user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request.
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).
I am not a sockpuppet as described by the blocking admin. I had been user in wikipedia for sometime and my main contributions were to Islam related articles and the Colombo article. I dont see the admin has given any evidence or reason for blocking me. I have not done only two or three edits after nominatingthis template for deletion, you can see my user page (which is now distorted with the sockpuppet template :-( ) for awards for contributing to Islam related articles. 07:08, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
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.
Hello Mystìc (or Lahiru?), I'm sorry to find this account locked up as it is but I've reviewed a bit of what has been going on relative to this account and the Snsudharsan case and I have to say that the evidence looks rather damning. Even your signature and Lahiru's signature are virtually identical. (→Netscott)03:30, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If this is indeed true (as I believe it to be with two checkuser admins confirming the case) then you should decide which account you want to use and agree to no more disruptive sockpuppetry and just utilize the one account (which would allow for this account to be unblocked). (→Netscott)03:35, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Your arbitration comments
Please do not reply to other statements in their section.Such comments will be moved or reviewed.Please only edit your own statement. Thanks. Thatcher13115:33, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I fully understand how you feel now. Wikipedians are judging you by solely looking at your IP ,not by looking at your contributions here..You have done a tremendous work here, and Its very disappointing to see the end of it. As a free person you are entitled to do what ever you want, but let me tell you, if you choose to leave this for good, its going to be an immense lost to Wikepedia. Wikipedia going to miss your contributions.Theres no doubt about that.
I cant help but to think that,we all (Sri Lankans)are fighting for a lost cause here. No matter what we say,any Evidence we give and how logical are we,all of it seems to end in deaf ears.And here is the finest example,
[7].
Sometimes i wonder,is wikipedia going on the wrong side ??
--Iwazaki06:32, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Tamils & Smileys
Hi Mystìc,
I suppose this isn't the best time, but you should probably be aware of this. On another note, it would be a loss for WP if you left under these circumstances. I hope that you'll reconsider. TewfikTalk04:39, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Mystìc. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:CMCLogo.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Mystìc/scratchpad. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk21:54, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Mystìc, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Zahira Logo.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Mystìc/scratchpad2. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not re-add the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Please note that it is possible that the image on your page is included vie a template or usebox. In that case, please find a free image for the template or userbox. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk08:33, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. When you uploaded Image:TalkArchive.jpg, you did not specify complete source and copyright information. Another user subsequently tagged it with {{GFDL-presumed}} and, for some time, it has existed on Wikipedia under the assumption that you created the image and you agreed to license it under the GFDL. This assumption, however well-meaning, is not legally sufficient and the tag is being phased out. Images using it are being deleted.
This image has been tagged for deletion and will be deleted in one week if adequate copyright information is not provided.
If you, personally, are the author of this content, meaning that you took the photograph yourself or you created the chart yourself (and it does not use any clipart that you did not create), please retag the image with a free image copyright tag that correctly describes your licensing intentions, usually {{GFDL-self}} or {{PD-self}}. Please also make sure if you have not already done so that you write a good description of what the image depicts, when you took the photo, and other important details. This will allow Wikipedia to continue using the image.
If you did not create the image or if it is derived from the copyrighted works of others, please keep in mind that most images on the internet are copyrighted and are not suitable for use on Wikipedia. Wikipedia respects the copyrights of others and does not use images unless we know that they have been freely licensed. Any creative work is automatically copyrighted, even if it lacks a copyright notice. Unless the copyright holder has specifically disclaimed their rights to the image and released it under the GFDL or another compatible license, we cannot use it. If you did not create the image, and cannot make the image compliant with Wikipedia:Non-free content, simply do nothing and it will be deleted in a week. All other non-free images must follow these rules.
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).
see this Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents/Sri Lanka-LTTE blocks - reviewed
Decline reason:
Err, hasn't your other account already been unblocked? Having read the thread indicated I see that the sockpuppeting allegations surrounding you were a significant issue for some users. Is there not a risk that unblocking this account will lead to further dissension or is it your intention to resurrect this account and stop using netmonger??? I'm reluctant to dip my uneducated toes into this unblock request and will drop FaysselF a note asking them to pass by and look at this. I'm declining this simply to clear the request from CAT:U as really this can only be dealt with by an admin very experienced in this situation. There is no penalty in this unblock and you are welcome to re-request unblock if this does not get reviewed by a more knowledgeable admin in a timely way. Please help by indicating your intentions with regard to you other account — SpartazHumbug!21:30, 1 November 2007 (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.
The August 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:28, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As a member of WikiProject Films, you are invited to take part in the project's first questionnaire. It is intended to gauge your participation and views on the project. At the conclusion of the questionnaire, the project's coordinators will use the gathered feedback to find new ways to improve the project and reach out to potential members. The results of the questionnaire will be published in next month's newsletter. If you know of any editors who have edited film articles in the past, please invite them to take part in the questionnaire. Please stop by and take a few minutes to answer the questions so that we can continue to improve our project. Happy editing! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:29, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
-2007-05-15T21:54:00.000Z-Image:CMCLogo.jpg){kind=link}
-2007-05-19T08:33:00.000Z-Image:Zahira_Logo.jpg){kind=link}
