username csssclll *IP address is 172.216.248.174
*
I am sorry to inform you that you have been blocked under WP:3RRhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:3RRfor 24 hours. From [1]http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Arabic_numerals&action=history, it is clear that you have crossed 3 reverts between edits from 16:21 and 17:36 (UTC). While I understand that you are new to Wikipedia, I would urge you to spend time in getting accustomed to the way Wikipedia works. Also, misuse of edit summaries and personal attacks on other editors are definitely not welcome. Please think over your actions so that you can contribute better once the block expires. Thanks and regards, --Gurubrahmahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Gurubrahma18:04, 11 December 2005 (UTC) Given your username Gurubrahmahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Gurubrahmaand the content of your user page I do not consider you an unbiased person on this issue and I wish that you had left it to another, neutral administrator to act on this matter, especially so that other editors of that page whom I assume requested your intervention share your allegiance and were in persistent violation of wikipedia policies that "content must be based on verifiable sources"; Wikipedia:Neutral point of viewhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view, Wikipedia:No original researchhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research, Wikipedia: Cite sourceshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Cite_sources, Wikipedia:Verifiabilityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability, and Wikipedia:Reliable sourceshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources, and have failed to abide by those wikipedia policies despite my repeated requests in the talk pages, hence justifying my description of their demonstrable, deliberate false content as lies, and my characterisation of their conduct as lying. My so-called "personal attacks" on them simply characterised their conduct and does not meet wikipedia's Blocking policyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Blocking_policy's definition of "Personal attacks which place users in danger" provision that should be "rarely used" as a justification for blocking, as for "excessive reverts" the blocking policy clearly states that "In the cases where multiple parties violate the rule, sysops should treat all sides equally"; have you done so? I see that you haven't as one of them has just now branded content that was painstakingly cited on a point-by-point basis to verifiable and reliable sources a "hoax" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Indian_and_Arabic_numerals. I will be reporting this to multiple, neutral wikipedia administrators and WikiEN-l mailing list and asking for a review of the situation. (csssclll 18:40, 11 December 2005 (UTC)) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:History_of_Indian_and_Arabic_numerals#Vert...