Talk:Ramzi Yousef

message: I see this all over Wikipedia, and it's frustrating:  The same document referenced over and over without proper ref name tags.    Thus, the references section is clogged with the exact same references repeatedly.  Please, if you're going to reference the same thing more than once, give the initial reference a name as follows:  Here's my reference details.  Then, when you ref it  again, you just have to type:  . Scarletsmith (talk) 19:34, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: You don't need the quote marks when it is just one word, as illustrated above. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 04:11, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Adding References

message: After going to the Rutgers Unievrsity alumni website and searching, I could see no reference to Ramzi being an alumnus of the university. Therefore, I have removed this article from that Category. -- Jalabi99 22:36, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed article from Rutgers University alumni

message: Anyone here knows where I can find Ramzi Yousef's statement prior to his sentencing? It would also provide a good reference to the article.Maziotis (talk) 12:50, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ramzi Yousef's statement 

message: The entire section labeled "lavish times looks as though it was written by a non-native English speaker. In fact I will go so far as to say that it is very poorly written. I believe that it should be stricken from the page until it can be re-written properly with correct grammar and syntax. I am doubtful about  removing an entire section, but this section makes the rest of the article look bad.
Radiooperator (talk) 11:29, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I remove the entire section. The text is unreferenced and the edit history looks suspicious. Unable to verify the information from online research. --Vsion (talk) 12:47, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lavish Times? 

message: This article is full of grafitti and inconsistancies.  It is a prime candidate for an overhaul.  Statements by Bin Laden made about 9/11 in 1997 just don't add up.208.254.130.235 (talk) 17:08, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've taken some steps to clean up the section on the Philippine Airlines bombing.  That should be a start, at least. Scarletsmith (talk) 03:01, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Full of Grafitti 

message: "He was the mastermind behind the September 11, 2001 attacks and Yousef's uncle." I'm a non-native English speaker either, but yet I feel "mastermind" sounds too positive. Does anyone have anything against he pulled the strings behind the...? At least it applies more to what he did to 6 people in 1993 and to 5,000 eight years later. -andy 92.229.125.250 (talk) 11:30, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  No, mastermind does not have strong positive connotations, even though its constituent parts, master and mind, generally do. The verb "to mastermind" can be used here as well. If anything, it has negative connotations since it is quite frequently used in connection with criminal masterminds.81.178.147.64 (talk) 21:17, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Mastermind"?! 

message: This article is extremely problematic. Please look at this statement:
'The 1,500 lb (680 kg) urea nitrate-hydrogen gas enhanced device[11] was intended to knock the North Tower (Tower One) into the South Tower (Tower Two), bringing both towers down and killing thousands of people.[12][13] It failed to do so, but did kill six people and injured 1,042.'
"killing thousands of people" is an assumption as a result of "bringing both towers down". The next statement contradicts itself, by claiming that it "failed to do so". Are we to describe possible scenarios? Also refer to the other statement that he was the "mastermind". This is again an assumption. Who was writing the article in such a way? The wording should be redone, with a more neutral, objective collection of facts, rather than simulate partaking in a specific insinuating context. Quite honestly, this article needs to be reworked heavily, and those emotionally laden statements reworded - it sounds like right-wing propaganda. Cant the article be more neutral and focus on the facts, rather than on "(would have) killing thousands of people"? 80.108.103.172 (talk) 16:00, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  These are pretty straightforward facts. I hate right-wing propaganda as much as the next guy, but this article can't be regarded as such by any stretch of the imagination. Quite honestly, the above comment is sick.81.178.147.64 (talk) 21:21, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Objectiveness 

message: "He wears contact lenses."
This phrase is found in the section "Early life" and it's kind of just stuck in the middle of it. Basically, I think the sentence is "useless information." It is totally unrelated to early life or anything else in the particular section. 
I thought about changing this or moving it somewhere else, but I can't think of anything reasonable. Does anyone have a good idea?
--- Supernova0 (talk) 02:38, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Delete sounds fine to me.--Epeefleche (talk) 04:02, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, folks, it's more relevant than you think, because he hid his explosive liquid in a bottle of cleaning liquid for contact lenses. Think before you act.81.178.147.64 (talk) 21:23, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Random information

message: Why was this removed:
According to interviews with ADX Florence staff, upon Yousef's arrival at the facility he prayed almost every hour and refused to leave his cell for recreation as he did not wish to undergo the strip search required at the ultra-high security prison. However, Yousef now leaves his cell, has started eating pork and says he has converted to Christianity. The prison staff does not believe Yousef's conversion is sincere.
This was removed without reason. The source is from a former Supermax Warden in a CBS interview. It is a WP:RS. BNG89Sounded (talk) 04:45, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Converted to Christianity and eating pork 

message: They put them together in one cell? Really? What were they thinking?81.178.147.64 (talk) 21:34, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Razmi and McVeigh 

message: http://www.cnn.com/2013/02/17/us/terrorist-prison/index.html  HammerFilmFan (talk) 20:05, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  now he's trying to sue for "better conditions" 

message: Has any terrorist group ever tried to break him out of prison?  I read something about this a few years ago that some group was thinking about it.  I'd like to see them try! -OberRanks (talk) 18:12, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Break-out 

message: Why is there no mention of evidence that Ramsi Yousef may have plotted to bomb TWA Flight 800? The fact that all references to this have been removed from both this article and the Flight 800 article suggests that somebody is trying to censor this information. Redhanker (talk) 15:39, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  TWA Flight 800 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Ramzi Yousef. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add  after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20071227065444/http://judiciary.senate.gov/oldsite/childers.htm  to http://judiciary.senate.gov/oldsite/childers.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:39, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified