User:Robertinventor/Unblock appeal supplemental: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
User:Robertinventor/Unblock appeal supplemental (edit)
Revision as of 12:28, 21 April 2019
, 5 years agono edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 362:
skip to [[#Contributed material that other Wikipedia editors corrected|Contributed material that other Wikipedia editors corrected]]
'''CHARGE''': I was accused of disruptive behaviour for adding an article on the topic of the possible association of Morgellons with the spirochetes that cause chronic Lyme disease and of problems of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fringe_theories WP:FRINGE] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources_(medicine)WP:MEDRS]
'''TRUE SITUATION''': The merged away article[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Moregellons_Lyme_hypothesis&oldid=661359802
I was never sanctioned or taken to WP:ANI over it, and it has nothing to do with the dispute that lead to my indef block. My last comment on the main Morgellons talk page was in [https://xtools.wmflabs.org/topedits/en.wikipedia.org/Robertinventor/1/Morgellons September 2016].
Line 395:
skip to [[#Off wiki discussion of possible use of lunar platinum in the construction industry (like copper)|Off wiki discussion of possible use of lunar platinum in the construction industry (like copper)]]
'''CHARGE''': I was accused of adding material to Wikipedia that was mistaken, and of including a quote in a footnote[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FIncidents&diff=prev&oldid=855691579]
'''TRUE SITUATION''': I did make one mistake, but Wikipedia editors are advised in [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Be_bold WP:BOLD]: ''"Think about it this way: if you don't find one of your edits being reverted now and then, perhaps you're not being bold enough"''. The
Click on '''Details''' to find out more.
Line 406:
I agree that my edit of the Perigean spring tide article was mistaken. If I'd noticed the revert and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Perigean_spring_tide#Confusing_first_paragraph the reason given] I'd have commented on the talk page agreeing with the editor who fixed it and thanking them for their edit.
On the black holes evaporation timescale, then the material I contributed in the [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hawking_radiation&diff=prev&oldid=852418447 diff] mentioned in the sanction debate is still in the Hawking Radiation article. Similar material in this [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Black_hole&type=revision&diff=852418871&oldid=852173684 diff] is also still included in the Black Holes article. The editor who claimed I
Nearly all Wikipedia editors have made mistakes. Indeed in [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Be_bold WP:BOLD] it says
Line 417:
skip to [[#All one extended incident, resulting from the topic ban appeal|All one extended incident, resulting from the topic ban appeal]]
'''CHARGE''': I was accused of an off wiki conversation about possible future use of platinum in the construction industry that disqualifies me as an editor of Wikipedia
'''TRUE SITUATION''': It was nothing to do with Wikipedia. I barely remember this discussion, some years back. Potential lunar platinum ores of exceptional purity are a central theme of Dennis Wingo's [http://www.thespacereview.com/article/205/1 Moonrush], also covered in Crawford's [https://theconversation.com/why-we-should-mine-the-moon-34285 lunar resources review article]. I combined that with ideas for low cost export from the Moon to speculate about what would happen if was similar in price to copper, which is used in the construction industry.
| |||
