User:Robertinventor/Unblock appeal: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(42 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 25:
(200 words)
----
As for the rest of the charges, 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]. FromHowever theI discussionthink itself however,that I thinkprobably Ican't dobe haveunblocked towithout answersaying thesesomething threeabout the Mars deletion debate, and the charges of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox_or_means_of_promotion WP:PROMO], and commercial use of Wikipedia content.
 
* '''''I agree that it wasaccept the community decision to supportdelete my article'''''. statementsHowever inI Lifecan't onsupport Mars[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_on_Mars#Cumulative_effects]the thatreason thegiven Marsin surfacethe is knownAfD to bedelete sterileit, andthat toarticles deletein myWikipedia articlehave forto contradictingsay that the restsurface of WikipediaMars is known to be sterile[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AArticles_for_deletion%2FModern_Mars_habitability&diff=prev&oldid=855472459].''''' PleaseThe don'tview requirethat meit tocould supportpotentially thishost deletionMars myself,organisms becauseis this deleted theNASA's [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view WP:POV] of NASA from Wikipedia, not my own POV. To check this for yourself, please watch this short (less than two minutes) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qk-Ycp5llEI official NASA video] about planetary protection for Mars organisms. It's the, third video on the main overview page for the NASA Office of Planetary Protection[https://planetaryprotection.nasa.gov/overview]. andPlease respect my representsoppose vote in the officialdebate viewas ofsincere. However, I will not attempt to edit Wikipedia to include NASA's views on this matter if unblocked.
{{cot|Details}}This is further supporting evidence that I was expressing NASA's views to the best of my ability, not my own:
 
{{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:
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 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.
 
If I answerwill collapse the remaining charges, itas willthis takeis thisalready wellslightly over the recommended 500 word limit, and it is already slightly over, so I will collapse them. 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. 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.
 
{{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]
Line 70 ⟶ 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].
 
(699675 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!''