User:Robertinventor/Unblock appeal: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 28:
If I only answer correct charges, that's my complete appeal. The rest are mistaken. I don't know what I am expected to answer as the closing admin just wrote: ''"Closing with a consensus towards an indef block, plus my own admin judgment in that direction"''[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&oldid=855723651#User:Robertinventor,_again]. Though there was a consensus to block me, there was no consensus about what I was sanctioned for.
 
I will answer what may be the top three charges briefly. Please note the dates. Only the Buddhism topic ban appeal and my attempt to defend the Mars astrobiology article from deletion were new. The article itself was contributed a year and a half previously.
 
* '''''Contributing an article in March 2017 that contradicts statements in Life on Mars[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_on_Mars#Cumulative_effects] that the Mars surface is known to be sterile [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AArticles_for_deletion%2FModern_Mars_habitability&diff=prev&oldid=855472459], and defending it from deletion.''''' Please don't use Wikipedia as your only source. For another perspective watch this short (less than two minutes) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qk-Ycp5llEI official NASA video] and listen to what their planetary protection officer says about Mars organisms. It's the third video on the main overview page for the NASA Office of Planetary Protection[https://planetaryprotection.nasa.gov/overview]. I defended it from deletion in an attempt to prevent removal from Wikipedia of NASA's views on extant Martian life.
Line 41:
{{quote|Recent discoveries on Mars, including recurring slope lineae, ground ice, and active gully formation, have been interpreted as indications for the transient presence of water. The potential for liquid water on Mars has profound implications for the habitability of the modern Mars environment. This session solicits papers that examine the evidence for habitable environments on Mars, present results about life in analogs to these environments, discuss hypotheses to explain the active processes, evaluate issues for planetary protection, and explore the implications for future explorations of Mars.}}
 
</ref>. I added it in March 2017, a year and a half before the sanction debate after publicizing my intention first[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Life_on_Mars&diff=next&oldid=763652967]. It was not a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Content_forking#Point_of_view_(POV)_forks WP:POVFORK] when I created it. It expanded on the main article[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Life_on_Mars&oldid=798021656], which also presented the POV of NASA as the mainstream view, and remained like that for three quarters of a year after it was created [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Life_on_Mars&diff=prev&oldid=809949468].
{{cob}}
* '''''Adding a page about my own software in 2008 as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox_or_means_of_promotion WP:PROMO].''''' I added this after a review in Sound on Sound, often used as a reliable source in Wikipedia[https://www.google.com/search?q=site:en.wikipedia.org+%22sound+on+sound%22]. When I found the guidelines on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest WP:COI] in 2011, I added a declaration of interest to my talk page[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Robertinventor#Declaration_of_interest] and the article talk page. There was no commercial intent there.
Line 51:
 
{{cot|Additional charges}}
Although there were many charges, please note the dates. Only the Buddhism topic ban appeal and my attempt to defend the Mars astrobiology article from deletion were new.
 
* '''''Publishing part of a user space draft under a non free content license in 2017''''' Some editors were unaware that Wikipedia's license specifically permits dual licensing[https://creativecommons.org/faq/#can-i-enter-into-separate-or-supplemental-agreements-with-users-of-my-work]. As author, I can release my content under CC by SA for Wikipedia, as an act of generosity on my part, and use the same content under a non free license elsewhere. This is what I did with some sections of my book released in 2017[http://robertinventor.com/booklets/If_humans_touch_Mars.htm]
 
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.

Navigation menu