Abuse of Tools 

I was involved in a discussion regarding the Public Domain status of the widely disseminated CRU documents. I introduced a citation from the Times Higher Education, a reliable, neutral and secondary source recording it as such. 

Others were engaged in the discussion.

The Discussion regarded a quote referenced for possible inclusion from the author of the articles subject matter.

The discussion was on-topic and relevant - your incredible abuse of your position to censor the discussion, archive and lock the page to prevent me from participating was astounding. Your directly involved, why would you ever do such a transparently manipulative move in direct furtherance of your editorial position? Seriously, have you at last no shame? If one can't even discuss even the predicate basis for consideration, what is left? Why even the pretense of discussion, why not remove the talk page itself? All you've done is constructed a Potemkin village - the facade fools on the surface, but no free discourse exists within the empty shell.99.141.241.135