User talk:Wanad

Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Wanad for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page.

Hemidemisemiquaver 05:24, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for experimenting with the page Bureaucracy on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Angelbo ^{Talk / Contribs} 00:50, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Samulili 17:59, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism on Bureaucracy

You have reverted the article on Bureaucracy 7 times. Please not that on Wikipedia we are required to maintain a Neutral point of view. Whatever your feelings on Bureaucracy, it's policy here to write articles in a certain way, which you are not doing. Also, please remember to remain civil. Clearly consensus is that your contribution is not welcome, so please stop putting it back.

This is my right to revert what I see ill propaganda. If you think you point of view is neutral it is only you opinion. I consider you point of view as not objective - I suppose egocentric way to excuse you social activity and feel as better individual than other members of society the same time. If you are in civil service you should know the society pay you to serve nation and it is not allowed to use you position against society goods. If you are so well informed about the rules of editing article you can change the shape but do not continue you personal propaganda. Of course I am always against bureaucracy and always for responsible civil servants. I do not care what you consider uncivil in my writing. For me you are arrogant who do not consider simple truth about mining of a world of "bureaucracy". Yes, arrogant because you do not want think logically and using arguments. The fact that a bunch of individuals or a one with sockpuppets says "your contribution is not welcome" is not an argument but offence. Keep you "logic" for yourself.--Wanad 14:39, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bureaucracy

You have been blocked from editing for a short time in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule . Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Alison ☺ 19:56, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: you have been edit-warring on that article for quite some time and have done little else with your account. Please note the following from policy; "Editors may still be blocked even if they have not made more than three reverts in any given 24 hour period, if their behavior is clearly disruptive. ". You are free to resume editing in 24 hours but please respect the opinions of others, read WP:POV and WP:3RR to understand what is wrong here - Alison ☺ 19:56, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

It has been established that you engaged in sockpuppetry by evidence presented here:
Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Wanad, and you are therefore blocked for period of 72 hours.
You're welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires.

And where is the page to point out the acuser mistakes?--Wanad 02:08, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]