User:Pcarbonn/Cold fusion dispute

Timeline of the cold fusion dispute
As Edmund Burke said : "Those who don't know history are destined to repeat it." Here is a timeline of the cold fusion dispute. To explore the history of an article, I recommend TimeTraveller:


 * Dec 13, 2001 : the article is created
 * April 26, 2004 : my first contribution to the topic
 * Aug 16, 2004 : this version is promoted to Featured Article status, and goes on the front page of wikipedia
 * Dec 2005 : Jed Rothwell, of lenr-canr.org obtains a contribution defending the reality of cold fusion from Edmund Storms, a cold fusion researcher.
 * Jan 3 2006 : first reversal to 2004 FA version after poll
 * 7 April 2006 : SCZenz finds that half the DOE did find the evidence of excess heat convincing, a statement that I found extremely important
 * April 2006 : Jed Rothwell withdraws from wikipedia after defending vehemently the reality of cold fusion, despite my effort to calm him down.
 * April - Dec 2006 : a lot of discussions: what did the DOE really say ? Should we quote the main conclusion only, or also the conclusion of the Charge Elements ?  Why do the conclusions of Charge Element 1 and 2 seem so different ? Can we quote their evaluation of the evidence of excess heat ?
 * Oct 2006 : The skeptics reject the mediation proposed by Ron Marshall. The ArbComm rejects the case introduced by the same
 * 2007 : the article is pretty stable, and represents the full 2004 DOE review
 * Oct-Nov 2007 : I update the theory section : that's too much, say the skeptics
 * 6 Dec 2007 : reversal to FA version by JzG.
 * 14 Dec 2007 : Total despair... Luckily, Itsmejudith encourages me to continue : thanks !!
 * Dec 2007 : I introduce a second case to the Arbitration Committee, which rejects it . Ron Marshall quits Wikipedia.
 * Jan-April 2008 : Skeptics finally accept mediation. Seicer accepts to mediate. THe leading skeptics is blocked several times for incivility.
 * May 2008 : I write my account of the mediation in New Energy Times
 * May 2008 : Dank55 helps bring it to Good Article status
 * July 2008 : a RfC concludes that cold fusion is not pseudoscience.
 * July 2008 : ScienceApologist asks that I be banned from the cold fusion page because of my article in New Energy Times. It is rejected.
 * July 2008 : JzG reverts the page again. This time it is rejected by the community.
 * September 2008: Dr. Shanahan wants his work to be promoted in our article. I resist, on the basis that scientists should not contribute content about their own work.
 * October 2008 : ScienceApologist again wants me banned, this time alleging that I have financial interest in cold fusion. It is rejected. IwRnHaA adds favorable peer reviews in the lead section.  That's too much for the skeptics.  ScienceApologist says this is a sock puppet account.  It is accepted.  ScienceApologist then wants to delete this history of the cold fusion page.  It is rejected.
 * December 2008 : The Wikipedia Arbitration Committee has decided to review the situation with the cold fusion article. It reached the conclusion that I should be banned from the cold fusion article for one year. I found this decision unjust, and a great danger for wikipedia. Simultaneously, there was an election to confirm / replace arbitrators. Comments from voters have convinced Jimbo Wales that the community was unhappy with the past Arbitration Committee.  I have introduced an appeal to Jimbo Wales, the founder of Wikipedia, asking him to cancel one of the key arguments to ban me.  Simultaneously, the Arbitration Committee has been requested to review the behavior of ScienceApologist.