This is untrue.  I have not been blocked for the reasons mentioned but rather for entirely different reasons, since the reasons mentioned are not actually true.  It is impossible to "exhibit a battleground attitude" because of many reasons, including the fact that one cannot "exhibit" something unless one is a display engineer at a museum, and it would therefore be impossible to "exhibit" anything let alone a "battleground attitude," the fact that there is no such thing as a "battleground attitude," the fact that there is no such thing as an "attitude" in regards to how a human being acts, and the fact that the word "exhibit" is used in an incorrect manner here done solely for the purpose of antagonizing the user (antagonizing me).  Usage of words like "exhibit" and "attitude", and refusing to follow the section title requirements on my page, show an obvious malfeasance intent by the above person, and therefore the block cannot be valid because within the first sentence he has already seriously demonstrated his lack of appropriate intent by specifically and purposefully being antagonizing.  

The second claim is physically possible, but is blatantly false.  I have specifically attempted to PREVENT other users from refusing to communicate in a appropriate manner, as he was repeatedly replying to the same conversation in several different locations, for which I reported him but yet the people at the ALLEGED "help desk" refused to tell me where to report him, and even deleted several of my replies and then archived it fraudulently.  Having OTHER USERS delete my comments, participate in blatant fradulent..ism, post the same thing on multiple talk pages at once for the purpose of harassing me, etc., is hardly "myself making it difficult to communicate," when in fact as was just demonstrated I did the LITERAL EXACT OPPOSITE of this by LITERALLY ATTEMPTING TO PREVENT OTHER USERS FROM MAKING IT DIFFICULT TO COMMUNICATE.  ((In addition, if I wish for other users to NOT communicate with me, I also have THAT right, it is in fact specifically written into law in every state in the country and will get you arrested if you fail to do so.  Although I personally disagree with this law and it is an immoral law which deems to prevent for example ex-spouses from communicating with each other when necessary, the part of the law that refers to STRANGERS such as on Wikipedia or anywhere on the Internet, it is a PERSONAL CHOICE whether you wish other strangers on the site to communicate with you or not and/or post contact information etc.  That is why every message board in existence has an option to "disable the private messaging system".))

There were no personal attacks done by me anywhere, so this part is a baseless and fraudulent claim.

"Refusal to abide by the site's guidelines" is impossible since 1) "guidelines" and "rules" are two different thing 2) Wikipedia does not have any rules and 3) All policies of any kind are subject to debate and protest at any time according to the numerous Wikipedia articles which specifically say this.

You have also demonstrated more incorrect intent by saying that something was "done in multiple venues," even though no venues of any kind exist because this is a website rather then a collection of several different building which show concerts or other entertainment events and/or conventions and/or etc.  So that is also impossible.