You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Talk:9/11 conspiracy theories. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute 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 which gains a consensus among editors. Thank you. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 08:58, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a short time in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for repeated abuse of editing privileges. 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 {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

{{unblock|My edits were precisely in keeping with Wiki policy; it is the ranting fanatic who keeps vandalizing the discussion page of the topic in question that needs to be perma-blocked. It is obvious Wikipedia is not interested in living up to it's own stated policies, but rather catering to conspiracy-theory fanatics.</nowiki>

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. However, we remind you not to attack other editors, as you did here: [1]. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.--Dcooper 15:06, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for undoing your own edit.--Dcooper 15:07, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edits like these [2] [3] are entirely inappropriate. Please do not reinstate them, or you could be blocked. AniMate 06:11, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think they are "inappropriate" in the least, and will make them as I see fit. Get lost. Carthago delenda est 19:54, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And, by the by, I don't have time to get back to the David Horowitz page today and revert your vandalism with the appropriate facts relevant to the entry, but as soon as I do you better bet I'm going to. Carthago delenda est 20:09, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]