User talk:TheVeryHappyKoala

Hey folks,

My apologies for messing up the external links section. I've followed Wikipedia's instructions on how to revert to a previous version, but haven't been able to undo the changes that I made. Weird thing is that even when I review previous versions of the article, the external links section looks messed up. Could anybody help me sort this out and more importantly let me know how I caused this (as I don't want to repeat my mistake!)?

Jupiter simulation
Hello. On my talk page, you said: "I noticed that you've removed the link that I added to a visualization of the Jovian system and Juno's orbit around Jupiter, arguing that the source is unrealiable. What exactly do you mean by unreliable? I would be happy to provide you with the data and algorithms (it's all open source) that I used to create that visualisation so that you can get an idea of how I put it together. I do believe it adds value to the article, and that it ought to be included in the external links section. If you could motivate why you reverted the change that I made in more clear terms, that would be much appreciated, especially as, as a new WikiPedia contributor, I want to know if there is some way I could have indicated that it is a reliable source, for instance by providing a link to the repository on GitHub in the note you make when you publish changes to an article. Having said that, have a good day!"
 * The URL you provided indicates it is your own work and so I questioned the edit and its overall value per WP:SCIRS. When adding something you've reworked from open source, I suggest you introduce the concept and edit first on the article talk page to allow other editors input, scrutiny, and revision. Thanks. --Zefr (talk) 16:18, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

=
=============================================================================================================================

Thanks for getting back to me, Zefr. Yes, I obtained the state vectors from JPL's Horizons system, and I used the excellent WebGL library three.js for the 3D animations and the equally excellent user interface library React to develop the user interface, but I developed the physics engine, components for the user face and code that handles the state of the application myself, so I feel what I have created is definitely of added value, especially since what I have created is accessible to anyone with a web browser, which I feel is important not only here on WikiPedia, but in general: not everybody can afford to purchase a copy of Universe Sandbox, unfortunately.

Having said that, rules are rules, and I love and cherish WikiPedia, so in the future I'll make sure to run everything through other editors before clicking the publish button, and my apologies to yourself or anybody else that I might have rubbed the wrong way by not checking in with somebody before clicking the publish button. I'm a software developer, and we always follow a protocol where if somebody wants to make a change to a code base they submit a pull request, which then needs to be approved, so what you're saying kind of makes sense :D.

Thanks for your feedback and good day.
 * Thanks for responding. You certainly are qualified and talented to contribute to an article like Juno and Jupiter. Maybe in the case of educational animations, it's not so important to have a secondary source, WP:SECONDARY. But the Juno article and many others in astronomy are closely patrolled by highly qualified, skeptical editors (not including me) who would need to know your skills best demonstrated first on the talk page. Friendly notes: a) you can use this format, (see code), to notify an editor that you want a response to further discussion on your talk page or theirs, and don't have to post both on your talk page and the editor's; b) sign and timestamp your comments by using 4 tildes or the signature icon in the top left of the edit box. All the best of experiences to you in your editing. --Zefr (talk) 01:02, 18 January 2019 (UTC)