User talk:Freewayguy

You have been blocked indefinitely

We've warned you over and over again at Wikipedia:Editor review/Freewayguy 3, here, and just above. I see no reason why we have to put up with your careless edits. Of course, you are welcome to appeal this block, but I ask any administrator reviewing the block to contact me first before unblocking. Freewayguy was blocked for repeated incivility, repeated poor quality of edits, and in general causing more harm to the encyclopedia than he was doing good for it. --Rschen7754 (T C) 00:05, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Freewayguy (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I didn't make too many errors, Scott gave me the site to find DOT contractions. I hadn't made any slurs so far, so shorten my block. Georgia they even said GDOT on Wiki page in bold. It' tough to memorize allnames. This page can help me find right names. I don't mena to make mistake, I did click link, then alternate name is boldface. No purpuso for infinite block I'm sorry I don't have enough experince, I wish I do, I wish I'm a better contributor, but the language structur and organization ideas is too tough for me. Everybody changes stuff on Wiki, I thought contractions will be good. Like Georgia Department of Transportation on title said GDOT

Decline reason:

I have looked carefully at your editing history and the numerous examples of being asked to change your editing style. Quite frankly I do not find any reason to doubt the blocking admin's action and so sorry but we must think of the encyclopedia, its community and the results of your actions in total. Therefore I must decline your request for unblocking. — --VS talk 02:57, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Freewayguy (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

What about if I want to come back and contribute again? I still want to use my old account. Can somebody answer this. It's tough to know what to do if user is infinite block. They seem to be in black hole, mans I can never contribute encyclop ever again. Help me. I don't know what to do now?

Decline reason:

The level of incorrect, badly spelled, or misleading edits this account has made to articles makes it hard to believe that these errors are accidental. The level of problems has gone into the realm of disruption. We appreciate good-faith efforts to improve the encyclopedia, and we also understand that all people make mistakes; but the "mistakes" made by this account are so numerous, one can easily doubt that these have been accidental. — Jayron32.talk.contribs 04:35, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Freewayguy (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Do I have to open an new account

Decline reason:

It's not a good idea to do that. I have to agree after looking at your history that the "mistakes" don't look accidental. You have made enough unblock requests at this time. — Ѕandahl ♥ 04:47, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Thank you, I'm sorry and I'm willing to improve

Thank you Lomn for unprotecting my talkpage. I will try my best now, to be careful with my edits. I will take my time, and make few edits a day, if I can, and I will not be like 3 month ago making crappy edits like making up state DOT. I can calculate. The ones I make edits 50 a day, each ones takes 3 minutes for somebody to fix them. I do the math, this takes 150 minutes for somebody to clean up. For 150 minutes, I now understand people would rather do something fun-like visiting Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco rather than sitting down cleaning up after my crummy edits. i'm sorry for my crummy work over Blue giant and blue supergiant by adding 7 sources to show improvements to articles, to fill in the work when I don't even understand what is the source about. I'm sorry Rschen for making numerous of personal attacks across wikis-just socks of I-210 (talk · contribs) harass me by their socks. I will also be careful with junction lists, use sandbox to practice if I'm naive. I undersntad when I mess up a junction lists, takes at least 5 to 10 minutes for editors to repair by hand times 5 articles i do to los Angeles-Orange County will take 30 to 60 minutes. i knowthat's a waste of time for people. I will also try to speak at a proper English, so peopel will understand. Before saving, I will preview it 3 times, to check ludicrous spelling msitakes, and try to avoid them. I will not make up terms like "Greenloop", "pink tag", the words nobody uses. Normal peopel will call it "Business loop' and "deletion tag"

  • From now on, i will only make few edits, and questions about Los Angeles-Orange County Freeways I will ask it at most on WP:RD only, nowhere else, not even on people's talkpage, and only questions having trouble finding data, not to open a forum arguement. I hope you appreciate me when I try to improve my English, and you hope it sound alot better. I won't sudden drastically chage my signatures pointlessly, displaying a blackflag, scaring people when they can ID is me without even looking at my sigs.

Basically, Freewayguy, you have lost our trust. Per WP:TOV we have taken your death threats seriously, as we have no way of knowing whether you are serious or not. By making the death threats, you have damaged your reputation - because of the death threats alone, there is a possibility that you may not be able to come back. Please read this story: [2] - you came extremely close to us calling your police department and your school and also to having your internet access cut off.

What to do now? Now that you have made these threats, it may be a few years before you can return - if at all. --Rschen7754 (T C) 08:38, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Las Tunas Drive

The article Las Tunas Drive has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not notable

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 00:24, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Culver Boulevard listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Culver Boulevard. Since you had some involvement with the Culver Boulevard redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Galobtter (pingó mió) 05:49, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Artesia Boulevard

Notice

The article Artesia Boulevard has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

article has been unsourced for a very long time and does not explain how this road is notable

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]