User:Robertinventor/Unblock appeal: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
(87 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 5:
<nowiki></nowiki>{{unblock|reason=
Apologies for taking up so much time before, have learned my lesson and would love to get back to contributing, no hard feelings.
My main reason for asking for the unblock is to fix errors in Wikipedia, patrol proposals for deletion and continue my work in the topic area of microtonal music.
Most of the issues raised were in a situation where I or another author added substantial new content, spent a long time over it, and another editor suddenly deleted it or nominated it for deletion, with no prior discussion or involvement in the editing.
My plan if unblocked is to do most of my substantial editing in my own wikis. If I do anything like that here, I will endeavour to find support of co-editors with diverse views first. I also recommend this to friends. This will also help with gray area issues of encyclopedic tone, notability, reliable sources and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view WP:NPOV].
{{cot|Details}}
* I will use the sandbox to reduce word count - see the note to myself at the head of the talk page.
Line 23:
* I will be careful not to do multiple responses to a single post by someone else.
{{cob}}
(
----
As for the rest, I don't have much to go on with the closing statement: ''"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].
* '''''
{{cot|Details}}This is further supporting evidence that I was expressing NASA's views to the best of my ability, not my own:
NASA's planetary protection officer is also the author of the quote in that diff about Mars being a giant dinner plate for Earth organisms<ref name=Conley>{{cite news|last1=Chang|first1=Kenneth|title=Mars Is Pretty Clean. Her Job at NASA Is to Keep It That Way.|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/06/science/mars-catharine-conley-nasa-planetary-protection-officer.html|agency=New York Times|date=October 5, 2015}} ▼
▲{{quote|"The salts known as perchlorates that lower the freezing temperature of water at the R.S.L.s, keeping it liquid, can be consumed by some Earth microbes. “The environment on Mars potentially is basically one giant dinner plate for Earth organisms,” Dr. Conley said."}} </ref>, not me. The title of the deleted article came from an astrobiology conference sub session<ref name=modernmarshabitability>[https://www.hou.usra.edu/meetings/abscicon2017/program-abstracts/topics/index.shtml#solarSystem Session Topics] - ArbSciCon 2017:
*Theme: Solar System Sites
*Session: Mars
Line 41 ⟶ 39:
</ref>. I added it a year and a half before the sanction debate. I publicized my intention to make this article on the talk page of Life on Mars on February 4, 2017[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 section in Life on Mars, which expressed NASA's POV as the mainstream view for three quarters of a year from
February 12, 2017[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Life_on_Mars&diff=prev&oldid=765524114] through to November 12, 2017[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Life_on_Mars&diff=prev&oldid=809949468]. Life on Mars is the main article on this topic in Wikipedia, so anyone with an interest in the topic would have had it on their watch list.
▲Cassie Conley, NASA's planetary protection officer, is also the author of the quote
{{quote|"The salts known as perchlorates that lower the freezing temperature of water at the R.S.L.s, keeping it liquid, can be consumed by some Earth microbes. “The environment on Mars potentially is basically one giant dinner plate for Earth organisms,” Dr. Conley said."}} </ref>, not me. The quote was taken out of context in the deletion debate. My article explained that by "potentially", she means, if surface brines are present[http://deletionpedia.org/en/Modern_Mars_habitability#cite_ref-32]
The deleted article[http://deletionpedia.org/en/Modern_Mars_habitability] had numerous cites. It summarized what the cites said to the best of my ability, not my own views.
{{cob}}
* '''''
{{cot|Details}} I had multiple reasons for considering it notable. As well as that review, it is referenced in a notable book on microtonality with 554 cites in Google scholar[https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=18360403027930205731&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en]. It is also referenced in 17 other cites in Google Scholar[https://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=%22Tune+Smithy%22]. Google scholar is an accepted way to investigate notability[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Search_engine_test#Specific_uses_of_search_engines_in_Wikipedia]. Many years before the sanction debate it was modified substantially by other editors, with no suggestions to delete it. You are not required to delete an article when you discover rules on COI, just declare your connection.
{{cob}}
* '''''
I will collapse the remaining charges as this is already slightly over the recommended word limit. There was no consensus in the debate about what I was indef blocked for, so I have no idea which of these I need to answer, if any.
{{cot|Additional charges}}
Please note the dates - though many charges were made they were based on my editing history going back for a decade and not a result of new activity on my part.
* '''''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]
* '''''Using Wikipedia to promote my blog and give it credibility'''''[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FIncidents&diff=prev&oldid=855490367] It was the other way around. When the content I wrote was deleted in 2013, I started a new blog and told my readers that it was rejected from Wikipedia[https://www.science20.com/robert_inventor/blog/mars_sample_receiving_facility_and_sample_containment-116050]. That could hardy be further from using Wikipedia to give my blog credibility! I never linked to my blog from Wikipedia articles.
* '''''Adding material on a topic in fringe medicine in 2015'''''[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FIncidents&diff=prev&oldid=855532245] Such articles are permitted, and they not required to follow [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources_(medicine) WP:MEDRS], see for example [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronic_Lyme_disease Chronic Lyme disease]. The article[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Moregellons_Lyme_hypothesis&oldid=661359802] followed the guidelines in [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fringe_theories WP:FRINGE]. My last comment on this topic was in September 2016 [https://xtools.wmflabs.org/topedits/en.wikipedia.org/Robertinventor/1/Morgellons].
* '''''
* '''''
* '''''
For more details and my responses to several other charges see [https://encyclopediaofastrobiology.org/wiki/User:Robertinventor/Unblock_appeal_supplemental supplemental]
{{cob}}
I
If you unblock me I will return to my work on fixing errors[https://doomsdaydebunked.miraheze.org/wiki/User:Robertinventor/Wikipedia_mistakes_or_omissions], and occasionally patrolling proposals for deletion[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Robertinventor#Patroling_proposals_for_deletion]. That includes four cases where another editor said to implement my proposed fix, but I couldn't because I'd been blocked [https://doomsdaydebunked.miraheze.org/wiki/User:Robertinventor/Wikipedia_mistakes_or_omissions#Other_editor_said_to_go_ahead_and_do_it_.28but_only_noticed_after_block.29].
Line 72 ⟶ 73:
I also wish to return to many things in the "to do" list for my Microtonal Project proposal[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals/Microtonal_Music,_Tuning,_Temperaments_and_Scales#Examples_of_things_we_could_do], which has twelve support votes[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals/Microtonal_Music,_Tuning,_Temperaments_and_Scales#Support].
(
''If you reject this appeal for its length, please give some indication of what I am indef blocked for, so that I can do a shorter appeal in the future. Thanks!''
|