User talk:Invent2HelpAll

AfD nomination of Cooperative Earth Time

I have nominated Cooperative Earth Time, an article you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cooperative Earth Time. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. DCEdwards ¹⁹⁶⁶ 17:37, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

January 2013

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Greenwich Mean Time. While objective prose about beliefs, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. Jc3s5h (talk) 12:05, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You appear to be barking up the wrong tree. The policy that applies to External Linking is ...wait for it... W:External Links. Key quotes:

Links to be considered

4. Sites that fail to meet criteria for reliable sources yet still contain information about the subject of the article from knowledgeable sources.

Links normally to be avoided

5. Links to individual web pages that primarily exist to sell products or services, or to web pages with objectionable amounts of advertising. For example, the mobile phone article does not link to web pages that mostly promote or advertise cell-phone products or services.

- I am not selling anything. There is no website being promoted from that page.

- I am not promoting myself. My name does not appear anywhere on the linked page. You'd have to dig to find my name.

- The linked page fits exactly with the "Links to be considered" criteria.

The reason you had provided in the link deletion edit was "Revert self-promotion by website owner."

- Again, I am not promoting myself for anything. I am not a website owner. I don't own a single website. And I certainly don't own wikipedia.org (the place that linked page is hosted).

Based on all these reasons, I am going to re-add the link. And for anyone who may want to see this link removed, please keep in mind that there are many other people out there beside yourself who may find this linked article to be interesting to the info they are seeking, and some may find it to be very useful.--Invent2HelpAll (talk) 04:57, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I admit I cannot prove the introduction of the link was self-promotional. But there is WP:User pages#Userspace and mainspace which states "encyclopedia articles should never link to any userspace pages." Not to mention that Cooperative Earth Time has never been mentioned in what Wikipedia would consider to be a reliable source, so is unworthy of mention at all in the encyclopedia. Jc3s5h (talk) 14:39, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see that quote to be in need of clarification. One simple way to read that is that Userspace page links are not appropriate for the body of Wikipedia articles. Clearly there is provision for articles to link to External Sites at the bottom of the page. And if Userspace is taken to be external to the encyclopedia, then that would seem to be a perfectly appropriate place for having such a link.

For another logic test, think of how strange it is to know that the exact same content from a Userpage could be hosted at a different url, and then it becomes "legal" to include as an external link. Then consider how that url could simply be a mirror site of that Userspace, and it becomes technically legal. Knowing this, then it becomes evident that the WP prohibiting links to Userspace does not apply to the External Links section of an article. Either that, or it is a silly rule that is easily avoided by simply by rehosting the exact same content.--Invent2HelpAll (talk) 08:43, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Corridor picture

Hi. I felt I had to revert your Mars corridor picture because it doesn't add anything. I see that other editors have reverted too. It's an excellent idea in general but this particular picture doesn't work - the perspective removes all sense of distance. From looking at the picture you struggle to work out what's being shown - is Mars ten times further away or fifty or a hundred? BTW inserting a picture into so many articles is a mistake - once or twice is the norm. Sorry! andy (talk) 12:55, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here are the reverts: LIST, INSPIRATION, STAY, DIRECT, COLONIZATION, HOHMANN, MANNED.

You are the one who did all of that, except for the last one. Anyone who looks closely can see for themselves that there were actually more "other editors" who actually supported the addition by massaging the photo caption, etc (GliderMaven, Ypnypn). And that's not counting editors who gave tacit approval by changing other parts of these articles while leaving the photo untouched.

As for the notion that any action I've done here was a "mistake", perhaps the real mistake is that there is a huge fracturing of one single topic (human mission to Mars) broken into many articles. That, and the fact that none of these articles presents any sense of just how far it is to Mars. Not even in words (that I saw) let alone an image.

On the topic of mistakes, it is logically inconsistent to assert:

"Reverted good faith edits by Invent2HelpAll: User is bombing Mars articles with this picture..."

A user is either acting in good faith, or they are bombing (causing willful destruction to) articles. Both cannot be true.

And your argument itself falls short too. You've done all these deletions with the justification that it requires struggle for the reader to gain the exact scale being communicated. Well when the photo is gone, and not replaced by any other means of communicating distance, then the reader is left with nothing. They leave the article with the same level of ignorance regarding mission distance than before they came to the article. That is a failure of us as Wikipedia editors to provide the best info we have available.

I would be very glad to have this image removed ...the moment someone finds a better one.--Invent2HelpAll (talk) 04:10, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I will suggest that we terminate the discussion here on my User Talk page, and for all of those who would like to comment, we can consolidate the discussion at the place where you initially started, andy, HERE: Talk:List of manned Mars mission plans in the 20th century.--Invent2HelpAll (talk) 04:18, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violation at Wikimedia Commons

I've nominated your photo (the one discussed above) for speedy deletion as a copyright violation. See the notice here. Privately obtaining permission from the photographer is not sufficient to grant Wikimedia Commons (or Wikipedia) permission to use the photo. The photographer must grant permission directly to WC in the form of a license acceptable to WC. See Commons:OTRS for details on how to go about doing that. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 14:49, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked sock

Invent2HelpAll is a blocked WP:SOCK of User:ChrisfromHouston JoeSperrazza (talk) 17:22, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]