User:Robertinventor/Unblock appeal: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(24 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 delete my article'''''. forHowever sayingI thatcan't Marssupport isthe notreason knowngiven in the AfD to bedelete sterileit, andthat forarticles quoting:in "TheWikipedia environmenthave onto Marssay potentiallythat isthe basicallysurface oneof giantMars dinneris plateknown forto Earthbe organisms"sterile[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AArticles_for_deletion%2FModern_Mars_habitability&diff=prev&oldid=855472459].''''' ThisThe isview whatthat isit referredcould topotentially ashost [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:CHEESEMars WP:CHEESE]organisms inis the sanction debate. However, the deletedNASA's [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view WP:POV] is that of NASA. To check this for yourself, please watch this short (less than two minutes) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qk-Ycp5llEI official NASA video], the third one on the main overview page for the NASA Office of Planetary Protection[https://planetaryprotection.nasa.gov/overview]. ThePlease NASArespect spokeswomanmy inoppose thatvote video is alsoin the authordebate ofas thesincere. quoteHowever, aboutI awill giantnot dinnerattempt plateto foredit EarthWikipedia organisms<refto name=Conley>{{cite news|last1=Chang|first1=Kenneth|title=Mars Is Pretty Clean. Her Job atinclude NASA's Isviews toon Keepthis Itmatter Thatif Wayunblocked.|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. I can't support this community decision, and voted against it, but I will not edit this topic in the future unless someone else reverses it.
{{cot|Details}}This is further supporting evidence that I was expressing NASA's views to the best of my ability, not my own:
 
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 about it 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. IThe can'tquote supportwas thistaken communityout decision,of andcontext votedin againstthe it,deletion butdebate. IMy willarticle notexplained editthat thisby topic"potentially", inshe themeans, futureif unlesssurface someonebrines elseare reverses itpresent[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.
Line 49 ⟶ 51:
* '''''The Wikipedia license permits me to sell Wikipedia content on kindle''''' 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]. 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]
 
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].
 
(748675 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!''