Sju hav

... there doesn't seem to be much support for giving you a second chance, so I guess I should never have suggested that. It's obviously not a good situation neither for you nor Wikipedia, so I think you should do an effort to see if there are other sites to which you can contribute in the way you think are right without being banned. I am not on Wikipedia to bother you and will leave this discussion now, but I will revert and report you for sockpuppetry also in the future, especially if your edits have undue focus on controversies or in other ways violate Wikipedia's BLP policies. And as you can see, administrators will sometimes lock pages to protect articles from negative/controversial material made by sockpuppets or other problematic new users/IPs. Best wishes, [[User:Iselilja]] ([[User talk:Iselilja|talk]]) 15:42, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

:I'll take a closer look at the above later. I am not saying that you are an agenda pusher, however, ''some'' of your edits, can be labelled as agenda pushing—arguably. (OK, on wikipedia we are not supposed to use the word "agenda pusher" about persons who remove an entire section about a parliamentary hearing, written by ''several non-sock puppets''.) Best wishes, you said. Yeah, I bet! Nice touch, though (wink-wink). --[[User:Sju hav|Sju hav]] ([[User talk:Sju hav#top|talk]]) 12:32, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

 

==A former soldier of special forces [[FSK]]—[[:Dag Eliassen]]==