User talk:Thomas B: Difference between revisions
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
==Ban== |
==Ban== |
||
For reasons |
For reasons [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Arbitration_enforcement&diff=prev&oldid=207015435 described by Jehochman] pertaining to [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Controlled_demolition_hypothesis_for_the_collapse_of_the_World_Trade_Center&diff=206862587&oldid=206844934 this] recent edit of yours, I am invoking the arbitration committee's decision [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/September_11_conspiracy_theories#Discretionary_sanctions here]. I am banning you from the September 11 attack article and talk page, and the articles and talk pages of all related articles. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] ([[User talk:Raul654|talk]]) 04:35, 21 April 2008 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 04:38, 21 April 2008
User_talk:Thomas_Basboll/Archive
Your note
Done. SlimVirgin talk|edits 07:26, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Robertson's "reflections"
In an interview with Robertson he stated that quote and was asked about the other engineers not knowing of the study. NIST said they could not examine the study because Robertson told them he lost it. I'll see if I can find the interview. I may have posted the link before in talk as this was discussed last year when I tried to have Skillings white paper given more weight than Robertsons study but as i have a crappy dialup I can't check back too far without my comp timing out. Wayne (talk) 18:04, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Arbitration enforcement
See [1] Jehochman Talk 02:24, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Ban
For reasons described by Jehochman pertaining to this recent edit of yours, I am invoking the arbitration committee's decision here. I am banning you from the September 11 attack article and talk page, and the articles and talk pages of all related articles. Raul654 (talk) 04:35, 21 April 2008 (UTC)