Impact on Wikipedia!

I'm seeing a clear impact on Wikipedia of my discussion of Frank Tatay's Device dating from 2005 - 2006. The device is now featured in a prominent window on Wikipedia's "perpetual motion" page.

Yay! By this estimate it takes a minimum of 13 years to make an impact on Wikipedia.

By this estimate there may be mention of perpetual motion by 26 years from now, which will be 2044, when I'm 62 y.o.

PERPETUAL MOTION MEDIA AT WIKIMEDIA COMMONS

Including my most proven device the Modular Trough Leverage Device, as well as the Escher Machine principle...

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Perpetual_motion_machines

Slow Progress

 quoting a Wikipedia editor at the Reliable Sources Noticeboard:

The kgbanswers link is useless - it merely mentions your name without further explanation, though I can see no reason to think that it would be considered even remotely a reliable source anyway. The Dalia Martin page says nothing about you, while the inventors.about.com page merely links your website. If these are the best sources you can find, there is no possibility whatsoever of an article on you meeting our notability guidelines - we require significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. And it makes no difference if the article is a stub - the notability requirements are the same. AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:46, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

This is actually sweet-talk, by Wikipedia standards. So I actually feel better. Notice, he doesn't say I can't write an article about myself.

My Escher Machine shows up in Wikipedia multimedia

Here is the link: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&search=escher%20machine&fulltext=Search&profile=images


Earlier, I had submitted the file to Wikimedia Commons:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?search=escher+machine&title=Special%3ASearch&go=Go&uselang=en

Maybe someday an article will even be written about me. Possible.

As I see it, I deserve press for more than one reason. Not that I'm famous yet, but I deserve fame.

I don't have any videos with a million views yet, but one of them is over 2000 now (on Academic Room), and I have another that's over 1000 (on YouTube).

Perhaps considering the importance of my work popularity should follow from official coverage, rather than trendiness. But then again, the two things are so often the same.

Wikimedia Commons

is developing an article on Hyper-Cubist Drawings.

See the link here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Categories_for_discussion/2014/07/Category:Hyper-Cubist_drawings

This gives me hope that the movement is gaining traction.

My dad commented recently, saying some friends / colleagues of his were noticing my art book which he bought from Amazon, and said that it looked gallery-quality.

So this is more good news in that direction.

Hopefully someone will start an article on the primary Wikipedia eventually.

My ART BOOK can be purchased HERE. It can also be found by searching Amazon for "hyper-cubism".

New standing

Currently 4th in Wikipedia media search for "cubism". Good! Then why no article?