User talk:69.228.145.50

Freewayguy, you are indefinitely blocked from editing Wikipedia because of your long history of adding incorrect and improperly sourced information to articles, as well as due to various threats made near the end of your tenure. We've been generally lenient at the Ref Desk, but your recent edits to extraterrestrial skies ([1], [2]) have led me to block this IP. Further evasion of your block will be met in kind. — Lomn 04:07, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My apology. I didn't know the informations I add was wrong. It's all the desk gave me those information. Desk's purpose is to help people find information, the answers they gave me should be right. I didn't know the information they gave me is "wrong". I'm too afraid to ask, I don't want to get BITEN. And what you mena by the last sentence. You shock me by the post on my talkpage. What you mena by Further evasion of your block will be met in kind.--69.228.145.50 (talk) 04:20, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Foremost, you have been blocked from editing Wikipedia, as per above. "Met in kind" should read that further editing of Wikipedia articles will be met with further blocks per our blocking policy. In large part, that block stems from your repeated refusal to acknowledge WP:Verifiability -- the Reference Desk, for all its merits, is not inherently a reliable source, and "stuff I heard somewhere" is not sufficient for adding information to the encyclopedia -- particularly given your track record of adding misleading or misinterpreted information. As for BITE, that's not really relevant here. You're a long-term user who's had many chances, and has for now exhausted them. — Lomn 12:59, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is there still a chance I would be able to ask for an unblock and be able to start a new account with a clean slate? Should I wait a year? For this I don't know what happen for me to lose my control. It's basically just my talkpage was protect all because of I-210 (talk · contribs) was harassing my namespace with black tags causing my talkpage to be protect and I don't know what to do All the names was I-210's sock not mine. I just as well not contribute as normal basis, only for special occassions. If I had ask for help, then this would be another story.--69.228.145.50 (talk) 20:30, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:I-10/I-210 edited two of your user pages 6 months after you were blocked. That is not a compelling explanation for your outbursts, nor does it solve your problems with constructive editing laid out at Wikipedia:Editor review/Freewayguy 3. To be honest, if you were to edit constructively, no one would notice block evasion. However, practical matters show that your editing today is the same as it was when you were blocked, and so an unblock is unlikely. — Lomn 21:15, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just not good enough to contribute as a daily basis. I would just as well, contribute as special occasions only. Is there any way i can convince to have an unblock. A good idea is to discuss my changes on my talkpage if I'm not certain if is right or not. This I would know if I should include it on article or not.--69.228.145.50 (talk) 17:39, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As I just noted above, though, your present editing is subject to the same problems that were explained months ago. Your command of English prose is poor and you've shown no progress on understanding our sourcing policy. As such, I don't see an unblock as beneficial to the encyclopedia at this time. — Lomn 17:56, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What's wrong with my changes to blue giants is the sources I cite is not valid. Some is just a study game, some sources i cite is just an image. Citations suppose to demonstrate and be dramain to the imformations given. Numerous of article is bad too, adding sources have to be sources is on-topic with article. We normally only get sources from academic papers and google books. Enchant and enchance learning is only a book for grade level kids. Microsoft Windows, zoom astronomy is not a valid source. What is a valid source is Lectures from physicists. When I see Uranus and Neptune article they said cyan/bright blue in color and look at the little footnote numbers because the source they cite was perfect. Blue supergiant is only a little better than blue giant. They 5 sources I add the blue supergiant wasn't constructive and wasn't valid besides the two source cite is by academic paper. Also, early i deelte the Mars green-planet going and as I hadn't notice the source from Formation and evolution of the solar system was perfectly cite. yes, Mars may not turn blue again, it might be Moon again, the air could just blow away, but then I have to find a valid source that says so if I want to add it to article, otherwise just leave it the way it was. If I think Uranus ad Neptune is too dim to cast any light, then find a valid source from academic papers which says so, or leave it the way it was.--69.228.145.50 (talk) 22:47, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This example along with alot of African first lady speaks a volume. Providing birthdates is all task on Wiki that has to be done, just as long as it's done "right" then it benefits Wiki.--69.228.145.50 (talk) 22:52, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reblocked, 1 week

You have been reblocked for a week per the violation of your ban here. — Lomn 17:10, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And Lomn, I-210 was 75.47 IPs 75.47 is the ones who stalks me all the time. [3] and on my accounts talkpage, NE3, Scott5115, Rschen7755 is all I-210's socks. They start harassing me a day after my blcok causing my page to be protect. 75.47 also harass AL2TB bossing him around.--69.228.145.50 (talk) 21:14, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Freewayguy is all I-210, not mine. 66.x.y.z is also I-210.--69.228.145.50 (talk) 21:20, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually all the informations on the articles comes from [4] is what they said the sky is dark orange. On article they said Jupiter's sky start with blue is the writer who wrtoe this. Titan's sky would be dark since the sun s so far away if Titan does not have haze layer then the sky would be black. The light is just still enough to see things in full color but dimly that's it. All the inofrmations on the artilce is original source only the writer who starts with those informations can clean it up. Who said Saturn's sky is start to be blue?--69.228.145.50 (talk) 22:02, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your sockpuppet accusations are patently ridiculous, and the block stands. You are not permitted to edit Wikipedia articles. Expect the next block to be in the one month range, as it's unreasonable to expect other contributors to continue cleaning up after you. — Lomn 18:29, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

February 2018

Hello, I'm Pablomartinez. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Orbicularis oculi muscle— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. PabloMartinez (talk) 01:58, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.