User talk:Burziq10

Your use of multiple Wikipedia accounts
GB fan 20:51, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

March 2013
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on David Archuleta. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. GB fan 23:30, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:46, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for edit warring, as you did at David Archuleta. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. — Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 05:46, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Please note that the sockpuppet investigation (SPI) mentioned above is still open. This one-week block will be replaced by an indefinite block if the SPI concludes that this is a sockpuppet of the indefinitely blocked user Davion100. If you are not Davion100 under a different guise, you are strongly advised to go to the SPI page for that other account and make your case ASAP. — Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 05:51, 15 March 2013 (UTC)