User:Robertinventor/Unblock appeal8: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| (7 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 3:
<nowiki></nowiki>{{unblock|reason=Firstly, apologies for taking up so much of everyone’s time in the past. With guidance from friends, I have been able to learn valuable lessons on Wiki editing. I would now like to re-engage, mainly as a wikignome, with no hard feelings on my side.
I hope nobody doubts that I am a good faith editor. The deleted article was
As per [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Why_was_the_page_I_created_deleted%3F#If_all_else_fails,_try_another_wiki WP:OTHERWIKIS] the deleted content is in other wikis or blogs. I accept the consensus decision to delete it here and will avoid those topics.
The deleted articles were ones I worked on '''''By myself''''' for a long time, with only help from wikignomes. That seems to be the main issue.
As an indef blocked editor I can't submit anything for "Good article" status to show my competence as a wikignome. However I can give some evidence. The [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetary_protection Planetary protection] article is 68.8% mine (checked with WhoColor[https://f-squared.org/whovisual/]). More than half the cites were added by me. The editor who was most strongly in favour of deleting my Modern Mars Habitability article
I am the main editor of Hexany[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Hexany], and the result of its AfD was Keep[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Hexany] showing there is something of value there. I contributed minor edits to another article[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:David_Meade_(author)] which was later passed as a Good article[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=David_Meade_(author)&diff=prev&oldid=830640681] which retains all the cites I added. My minor edit of Black Hole[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Black_hole&diff=prev&oldid=852417737] was of an article with (1,859 watchers[https://xtools.wmflabs.org/articleinfo/en.wikipedia.org/Black_hole] and it is a Good article[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Black_hole&oldid=382081986]) where it was immediately reviewed by WolfmanSF[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Black_hole&type=revision&diff=852426575&oldid=852418871]. It is still there[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole#cite_ref-Frautschi1982_139-0]. In the year before the block, I fixed over 90 articles[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&offset=20180731235959&limit=500&contribs=user&target=Robertinventor&namespace=0&tagfilter=&start=&end=2018-07-31], with only 2 reverts[https://encyclopediaofastrobiology.org/wiki/User:Robertinventor/Wikipedia_minor_fixes_examples#Articles_to_fix]. Nobody has ever raised issues with my wikignoming before the indef block.
▲The [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetary_protection Planetary protection] article is 68.8% mine (checked with WhoColor[https://f-squared.org/whovisual/]). More than half the cites were added by me. The editor who was most strongly in favour of deleting my Modern Mars Habitability article is an editor, contributing 5.7% of its content under the names of BatteryIncluded and Rowan Forest. She has retained almost all my cites and content, so surely that is evidence most of it is okay?
I hope this shows that I can be an asset to Wikipedia. My plan to avoid issues is to do minor edits and corrections for six months, and then work with collaborators from the start, as I do on Wikinews[https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Talk:NASA%27s_InSight_Lander_makes_it_to_Mars][https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Talk:Mysterious_dimming_of_Tabby%27s_star_likely_due_to_space_dust,_not_alien_superstructures,_say_scientists][https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Talk:Simple_animals_could_live_in_Martian_brines:_Wikinews_interviews_planetary_scientist_Vlada_Stamenkovi%C4%87#Review_of_revision_4457552_%5BPassed%5D][https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Talk:Sun%27s_mood_swings_not_so_strange_after_all,_say_scientists]. Then we'd submit it for review as a Good Article, similarly to WikiNews. ▼
If you think I should only do wikignoming, that is actually the main reason I wish to be unblocked. For examples see: [https://encyclopediaofastrobiology.org/wiki/User:Robertinventor/Wikipedia_minor_fixes_examples].▼
▲My plan to avoid issues is to do minor edits and corrections for six months, and then work with collaborators from the start, as I do on Wikinews[https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Talk:NASA%27s_InSight_Lander_makes_it_to_Mars][https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Talk:Mysterious_dimming_of_Tabby%27s_star_likely_due_to_space_dust,_not_alien_superstructures,_say_scientists][https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Talk:Simple_animals_could_live_in_Martian_brines:_Wikinews_interviews_planetary_scientist_Vlada_Stamenkovi%C4%87#Review_of_revision_4457552_%5BPassed%5D][https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Talk:Sun%27s_mood_swings_not_so_strange_after_all,_say_scientists]. Then we'd submit it for review as a Good Article, similarly to WikiNews.
▲If you think I should only do wikignoming, that is the main reason I wish to be unblocked. For examples see: [https://encyclopediaofastrobiology.org/wiki/User:Robertinventor/Wikipedia_minor_fixes_examples].
Thank you for your time in considering this appeal.
| |||