"

 Hi David, thanks for your answer. However, I could not find any place on this page where I have ""distorted, selected, or combined evidence to suit my own view"". I am a scientist in the field of metrology and if you make such a serious accusation you should back it up. I am pretty sure that everything I wrote (in the article) was based on sources. If you think I wrote something without sources, show me exactly where. And then, when you are at it, please show me a source where the term ""Kendrick mass"" is properly defined. I know that it is used frequently, but I did not find a definition so far. This lack of definition is the reason why I was against the renaming my article to Kendrick mass and this became the basis of this dispute. Thanks for your help. 
Metrology is the science of measurements and it includes the ""grammar"" of quantitative communication. It therefore is very universal. It will be very difficult to find an article that is not ""metrology-related"". This is why I think your ban is much to broad. You will probably not find a single page on wikipedia that is not ""metrology-related"", depending on how narrowly you define this term. To give you an analogy: this ban is like banning someone on ""english-related"" articles. Would this include all pages that contain english text? Could you please define what you mean with ""metrology-related""? 
Thanks for explaining me the procedure of becoming unbanned. I will work on it as soon as I understand where exactly I misbehaved.   "