User:Robertinventor/Unblock appeal8: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Browse history interactively
Content added Content deleted
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 3: 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.
<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 a good faith attempt to present views of others, not myself. E.g. ''"one giant dinner plate for Earth organisms"'' quotes NASA's planetary protection officer[http://deletionpedia.org/en/Modern_Mars_habitability#cite_ref-32], and the eutectics section describes work of Toner et al[http://deletionpedia.org/en/Modern_Mars_habitability#cite_ref-TonerCatling2014_29-1], which I forgot to cite in the previous sections. Rather than cite myself here, I remove cites[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=820822757].
I am a good faith editor, always have been, and want to find a way to return to Wikipedia editing.
⚫
The deleted article was a good faith attempt to present views of others, not myself. E.g. ''"one giant dinner plate for Earth organisms"'' quotes NASA's planetary protection officer[http://deletionpedia.org/en/Modern_Mars_habitability#cite_ref-32], and the eutectics section describes work of Toner et al[http://deletionpedia.org/en/Modern_Mars_habitability#cite_ref-TonerCatling2014_29-1], which I forgot to cite in the previous sections. Rather than cite myself here, I remove cites[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=820822757].


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. I will be avoiding all the topic areas in which may content was previously deleted.
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. I will be avoiding all the topic areas in which may content was previously deleted.
Line 10: Line 9:
About half the articles I made were deleted, which is clearly an issue. However these are articles when I worked on material '''''By myself''''' for a long time, with only help from wikignomes.
About half the articles I made were deleted, which is clearly an issue. However these are articles when I worked on material '''''By myself''''' for a long time, with only help from wikignomes.


How can I show that at least some of my major content was okay? As an indef blocked editor I can't work on any of them and submit them for "Good article" status.
How can I prove that at least some of my content was okay? As an indef blocked editor I can't work on anything and submit it for "Good article" status. However there is some evidence may be useful.


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 article is one of its editors, contributing 5.7% of its content under the names of BatteryIncluded and Rowan Forest. If there were any major issues with the cites I added, she would have removed them by now.
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 use this just to show that I can do some good content. If unblocked, I will not even do minor edits because of connection with deleted material[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetary_protection#Mars_special_regions][https://encyclopediaofastrobiology.org/wiki/Planetary_protection#Mars_special_regions], but edit my copy[https://encyclopediaofastrobiology.org/wiki/Planetary_protection#Mars_special_regions].
I use this just to show that I can do some good content. If unblocked, I will not even do minor edits because of connection with deleted material[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetary_protection#Mars_special_regions][https://encyclopediaofastrobiology.org/wiki/Planetary_protection#Mars_special_regions], but edit my copy[https://encyclopediaofastrobiology.org/wiki/Planetary_protection#Mars_special_regions].
Line 24: Line 23:
I hope this is enough evidence to see that I am an editor who is an asset to Wikipedia.
I hope this is enough evidence to see that I am an editor who is an asset to Wikipedia.


My plan is to do minor edits and corrections for six months. After that, to do any major content with collaborators from the start. I already do this 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]. After completing it together we'd submit it for review as a Good Article, similarly to WikiNews.
So, how can I return without causing problems? I plan to do minor edits and corrections for six months. After that, to 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 instance the Chicxulub article says that the impactor could have been up to 81 km in diameter, citing a never peer reviewed non published preprint. Reliable sources say a range from 10 -15 km (81 may be a typo for 18). I wish to fix errors like that[https://encyclopediaofastrobiology.org/wiki/User:Robertinventor/Wikipedia_minor_fixes_examples].
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.
Thank you for your time in considering this appeal.
Retrieved from "https://encyclopediaofastrobiology.org/wiki/User:Robertinventor/Unblock_appeal8"
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.
More information