User:Robertinventor/Unblock appeal

From Astrobiology Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This is a draft for an appeal for my indef block in Wikipedia

Unblock request

This blocked user is asking that his block be reviewed:

Robertinventor (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

My main reason for asking for the unblock is to fix errors in Wikipedia. I notice two or three a week[1]. Most of my past work has been of this nature, plus occasionally patrolling proposals for deletion[2].

Most of the issues were due to the situation where

  • I or someone else as sole author spend a long time adding content to Wikipedia, following the guidelines to the best of our ability.
  • Another editor suddenly, in a bold edit, removes the content or nominates it for deletion, without priof discussion or editor involvement.

The problems arise when I try to get this content restored or defend it from deletion.

It is rare that I add new articles. My article creation list has only one other in the two years before the sanction debate; the rest are redirects [3].

To prevent this in the future I will endeavour to find support of co-editors with diverse views before starting on substantial content. I also recommend this to friends. This will also help with gray area issues of encyclopedic tone, notability, reliable sources and WP:NPOV.

All issues of verbosity were due to talk page responses after these bold deletions. The comments were not off topic. This is not likely to happen again if I take these precautions. I will continue to work on reducing my word count in talk page conversations.

That is my complete appeal if I only answer correct charges. However sadly there were many mistaken points, and no consensus about what I was indef blocked for. The closing admin just wrote: "Closing with a consensus towards an indef block, plus my own admin judgment in that direction."[4]

I will answer the top five charges briefly

  • Adding my own views to Wikipedia, contradicting statements by the main editor of Life on Mars that Mars is known to be sterile diff. Before deciding if the deleted article[5] expressed my views or those of NASA, please watch this one and a half minute video[6]. It is third on the overview page of the NASA Office of Planetary Protection[7]. 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[1], not me. The title of the deleted article came from an astrobiology conference sub session[2].

Notes:

  • In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
  • Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

I added it in March 2017 after publicizing my intention first[8]. It was not a WP:POVFORK, but expanded on the main article when created ([9], remained like that for ten months [10]).

  • Adding a page about my own software as WP:PROMO. I added this in 2008 after a review in Sound on Sound, often used as a reliable source in Wikipedia[11]. My software is also referenced in a notable book on microtonality with 554 cites in Google scholar[12]. It is also referenced in 17 other cites in Google Scholar[13]. Google scholar is an accepted way to investigate notability[14]. When I found the guidelines on WP:COI in 2011, I added a declaration of interest to my talk page[15] and the article talk page. Many years before the sanction debate it was modified substantially by other editors, with no suggestions to delete it.
  • Selling Wikipedia content on kindle It was only a few sentences from a deleted section[16]. Editors in the debate were unaware that Wikipedia's license permits commercial use[17]. I released the booklet in 2015 under the correct license and attributed Wikipedia with a link back following their guidelines[18]
  • Adding non free content to Wikipeda Editors were unaware that Wikipedia's license specifically permits dual licensing[19]. 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[[20]
  • Using Wikipedia to promote my blog It was the other way around. I started my blog in 2013 to host material deleted from Wikipedia. I explain this to readers of my blog[21]. I never linked to my blog from Wikipedia articles.

To answer remaining charges would take this well over the recommended 500 word limit, and it is already slightly over. I have however provided responses in my astrobiology wiki[22]. They also are mistaken.

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.

I will not edit in the Mars astrobiology area unless a major change occurs to permit NASA's views to be presented here. I will not appeal the Buddhism topic ban again. The previous appeal was an attempt to get unblocked to edit in a topic as far removed from Dorje108's deleted content as it is possible to be. I see no future in trying again. Instead I will edit my new Encyclopedia of Astrobiology[23], and Dorje108's new Encyclopedia of Buddhism[24], both based on material deleted from Wikipedia.

As I see it, you have lost a content creator in those topic areas. My main wish is to fix the many minor and sometimes major errors I find when searching for material in Wikipedia. I also wish to return to many things in the "to do" list for my Microtonal Project proposal[25], which has twelve support votes[26].}}

  1. ↑ Chang, Kenneth (October 5, 2015). "Mars Is Pretty Clean. Her Job at NASA Is to Keep It That Way". New York Times. 

    "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."

  2. ↑ Session Topics - ArbSciCon 2017:
    • Theme: Solar System Sites
    • Session: Mars
    • Subsession: Habitability
    • Topic: Modern Mars Habitability
    • Summary:

    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.

Retrieved from "https://encyclopediaofastrobiology.org/wiki/User:Robertinventor/Unblock_appeal?oldid=9462"
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.
More information