|
<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.
TheAll problemsthe aroseverbosity came about when I tried to get itmaterial like this restored or defended it from deletion.
I rarely try to add substantial new content nowadays. The last time was two years previously; the rest of my recent article creations are redirects [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?limit=50&title=Special%3AContributions&contribs=user&target=Robertinventor&namespace=0&tagfilter=&newOnly=1&start=2015-08-01&end=2017-08-31].
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].
ThisI shouldshouldn't alsohave helpproblems with the issues of verbosity. They were all due to my attempts to defend material from deletion or try to get it restored. The comments were not off topic. This is not likely to happen again if I take thesedo precautionsthis. I will also continue to work on reducing my word count in talk page conversations.
{{cot|Details}}
* I will use the sandbox to reduce word count - see the note to myself at the head of the talk page.
* I will be careful not to do multiple responses to a single post by someone else.
{{cob}}
(226200 words)
----
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]. ThoughHowever thereI wasthink athat consensusI toprobably blockcan't me,be thereunblocked waswithout nosaying consensussomething inabout the debateMars aboutdeletion whatdebate, I was charged with. I will choose what seem to beand the top three charges asof best[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox_or_means_of_promotion I canWP:PROMO], butand pleasecommercial bearuse inof mind I do not wish to edit in these areas any more. I will answer these on the basis that the charges against me wereWikipedia mistakencontent.
* '''''ContributingI anaccept the community decision to delete my article'''''. However I can't support the reason given in Marchthe 2017AfD thatto contradictsdelete statementsit, that articles in LifeWikipedia onhave Marsto say that the Mars surface of Mars is known to be sterile [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AArticles_for_deletion%2FModern_Mars_habitability&diff=prev&oldid=855472459],. andThe defendingview that it fromcould deletion.''''potentially host Mars organisms is NASA's [https://en.wikipedia.org/wwiki/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FIncidents&diff=prev&oldid=855483230:Neutral_point_of_view WP:POV]. ForTo anothercheck perspective on why I defended it from deletionthis, please 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]. IPlease defended it so vigorously not because it expressedrespect my ownoppose viewsvote but becausein the actiondebate deletedas NASA'ssincere. viewsHowever, onI thewill possibilitesnot ofattempt Marsto organisms fromedit Wikipedia. Ito thinkinclude NASA's views on this matter areif significant,unblocked. notable, and should be presented in Wikipedia somewhere.
{{cot|Details}}This is further supporting evidence that I was expressing NASA's views to the best of my ability, not my own:
{{cot|Details}}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
*Summary:
{{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 a year and a half before the sanction debate. I publicized my intention firstto 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 mainsection article[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Life_on_Mars&oldid=798021656],in whichLife aton theMars, timewhich presentedexpressed theNASA's POV of NASA as the mainstream view. The main article remained like that for three quarters of a year [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Life_on_Mars&diff=prev&oldid=809949468],from and anyone with an interest in the topic would have had it on their watch list. It had numerous cites and I summarized what they said to the best of my ability, not my own views.[http://deletionpedia.org/en/Modern_Mars_habitability]
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.
▲{{cot|Details}}Cassie Conley, NASA's planetary protection officer , is also the author of the quote in that diff about Marsit being potentially 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 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}}
* '''''Adding aThe page about my own software, which I added in 2008, was asnot [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox_or_means_of_promotion WP:PROMO].''''' I added thisit 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.
{{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}}
* '''''SellingThe Wikipedia license permits me to sell Wikipedia content on kindle in 2015''''' It was only a few sentences from a deleted section[https://tools.wmflabs.org/copyvios/?lang=en&project=wikipedia&title=Water+on+Mars&oldid=556727781&use_engine=0&use_links=0&turnitin=0&action=compare&url=http%3A%2F%2Frobertinventor.com%2Fbooklets%2Fpresentdaymarshabitats.html]. Some editors in the debate were unaware that Wikipedia's license permits commercial use[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Text_of_Creative_Commons_Attribution-ShareAlike_3.0_Unported_LicenseCreative]. I released the booklet in 2015 under the correct license and attributed Wikipedia with a link back following their guidelines[http://robertinventor.com/booklets/presentdaymarshabitats.html]. Some editors in the debate were unaware that Wikipedia's license[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Text_of_Creative_Commons_Attribution-ShareAlike_3.0_Unported_LicenseCreative] permits this.
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.
Although I was suddenly charged with many things in one appeal, they were old charges. I had never been taken to ANI about them before and most of them were about content I added at least a year previously.
Only the topic ban appeal was new.
If I answer the remaining charges, it will take this well over the recommended 500 word limit, and it is already slightly over, so I will collapse them.
{{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].
* '''''ThatIt is true that I was taken to ANI five times for the Buddhism sanctions'''''[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FIncidents&diff=prev&oldid=855532245]. None of those were topic ban breaches.However, Threethree of these were failed attempts to ban me[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FIncidents&diff=prev&oldid=775557776][https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive869#Disruptive_talkpage_behaviour][https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive869#Disruptive_talkpage_behaviour]. I had one limited topic ban, an extended topic ban, then a failed topic ban appeal, and that's it. After what happened after the last appeal, I have no intention to appeal again.
* '''''ContributedI materialdid tomake Wikipediaone thatmistake waswhich mistakenanother editor corrected[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Perigean_spring_tide#Confusing_first_paragraph], and includedI did include a quote in a footnote'''''[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FIncidents&diff=prev&oldid=855691579] - I did make one mistake[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Perigean_spring_tide#Confusing_first_paragraph] butHowever thismistakes isare permitted under [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Be_bold WP:BOLD]. The quote in the footnote[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hawking_radiation&diff=prev&oldid=852418447] is permitted as an aid to readers, and is still there in the latest version of the article. The editor who claimed I acted improperly hasn't edited the article to 'fix' this [https://xtools.wmflabs.org/topedits/en.wikipedia.org/Yakushima/0/Hawking_radiation].
* '''''OffI did take part in an off wiki discussion of the possibility of low cost lunar platinum in the construction industry like copper'''''[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FIncidents&diff=prev&oldid=855691579] - thehowever there are no requirements here about what is permitted in off wiki discussions. The potential for high grade platinum ore from the Moon is mainstream in lunar colonization studies[http://www.thespacereview.com/article/205/1][https://theconversation.com/why-we-should-mine-the-moon-34285][http://www.thespacereview.com/article/555/1]. My idea that it could become as cheap as copper was just a fun speculative thought based on ideas for greatly reducing lunar export costs[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonization_of_the_Moon#Launch_costs]. It is a half remembered conversation years ago in a forum or comments area and nothing to do with Wikipedia editing.
For more details and my responses to several other charges see [https://encyclopediaofastrobiology.org/wiki/User:Robertinventor/Unblock_appeal_supplemental supplemental]
{{cob}}
I havewill nonot wishbe to edit in the Mars astrobiology area again, orcontributing to attempt a second Buddhismthose topic banareas appeal,any unless there are major changes to permit the deleted contentmore. Instead I will edit Dorje108's new Encyclopedia of Buddhism[https://encyclopediaofbuddhism.org], and my new Encyclopedia of Astrobiology[https://encyclopediaofastrobiology.org], both based on material deleted from Wikipedia. AsIt Iwould seetake it,a youtruly havemajor lostchange twoin contenthow creatorsWikipedia (myselfis and Dorje108)edited in thoseeither topicof those areas. before I could return to them - and I am not going to make any attempt to instigate such a change myself here.
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].
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].
(718675 words not including collapsed sections)
''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!''
|