[WikiEN-l] blocked by a biased administrator

[Mike]

username csssclll
*IP address is 172.216.248.174


*

I am sorry to inform you that you have been blocked under
WP:3RR<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:3RR>for 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,
--Gurubrahma<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Gurubrahma>18:04, 11
December 2005 (UTC)
Given your username
Gurubrahma<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Gurubrahma>and 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
view<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view>,
Wikipedia:No original
research<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research>,
Wikipedia: Cite sources<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Cite_sources>,
Wikipedia:Verifiability<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability>,
and Wikipedia:Reliable
sources<http://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
policy<http://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#Vertaloni.2C_examples_of_errors_in_your_version