Content deleted Content added
→Your email: new section |
No edit summary |
||
Line 116:
I find your recent message off-putting. The "[[computational thinking]]" article's quality is indeed quite low. However, convoluting it further with "yet another characterization" (which you apparently only added for being your own research, be it peer-reviewed or not) does not help the quality at all. Your edits have revolved solely around promoting yourself, your software, and your research; they did not aim to build a more comprehensive and neutral encyclopedia. You never attempted to fix the "computational thinking" article as a whole, nor have you engaged in any kind of discussion to do so. Your warring over said content is clearly not productive either. Accusing me of "hostility towards researchers" for challenging your various guideline violations is preposterous. [[User:IceWelder|<span style="font-variant: small-caps;">IceWelder</span>]] [[[User talk:IceWelder|<span style="color: #424242;">✉</span>]]] 10:35, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
Respectfully, I disagree and find your actions off-putting. If you subscribe to [[Wikipedia:Relationships_with_academic_editors]] you would not just delete content but engage authors in a discussion. You're suggesting to get help from Wikipedia editors knowledgable in the topic. If you are knowledgable in the topic please help me. If you are not, how would you know if my contribution adds to the overall quality or not? I have edited the article many times as a whole only to see my contributions getting fragmented again by others. This is a tedious process that has not added up to quality article. It takes at least two to engage in warring. Maybe you could look at the model outlined in the characterization. You should notice that this is a 1:1 alignment to the seminal Wing paper.Feel free to make this connection more explicit if you want. Thank you for your support. [[User talk:Dragentsheets]], 23 April 2021 (UTC)
== Unblock Request ==
{{unblock-spamun|block_based_programmer|I am not receiving any compensation for my contributions. I work for non-profit educational organizations; I was blocked 1) because of my user name is resembling a product name. I am happy to change the name. 2) because making contributions that some took for a perceived COI. I am happy to follow Wikipedia guidelines and to back up future contributions with additional 3rd party reference materials. I plan to make future contributions to the fields of programming for kids and computational thinking}}
| |||