User talk:Terra Novus
To the Wikipedia community (Mann Jess, Ohiostandard, etc)
It was wrong for me to
Thank you,
Terra Novus (aka Gniniv)
| Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end. Start a new talk topic. |
| This is Terra Novus's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
| Archives: | |
|
September 2010, October 2010, November 2010, December 2010, January 2011 |
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. | |
 |
|---|
| 25 April 2024 |
- And yet, here we are again. To . I think it was C.S. Lewis who said that he'd rather play cards with someone who didn't cheat at cards than with someone who was just morally earnest about not cheating at cards. Likewise, I'd rather you kept your promise to recuse yourself from editing controversial articles than, every time it's pointed out to you that you've violated it, just saying you shouldn't have done it. How many "slips", as you call them, does this latest edit bring the total to? The number is high enough that, for me, I'm finding it next to impossible to go on assuming that you intend to keep this promise, especially with this latest edit coming so soon after we just completed (as I thought) the above discussion, and in just the same exact topic area.
- You need to revert your edit, and to keep your promise, going forward, without it being necessary for other editors to keep constant watch to make sure that you do. Your ban from controversial topics is, as you've rightly observed, self-imposed, at present. Please don't waste any more of your fellow editors' time by requiring us to go through a whole new round of sturm und drang at ANI to make it formal. I'm sure your fellow editors are very, very tired by now of seeing your actions bring you there, and I doubt you much care for the experience, either. I'm not going to take this latest "slip" to ANI, but even one more breach of your promise, large or small, and you'll leave me no alternative. Reply if you like, but I don't see any point in repeating the civil "oops, I did it again" language you've used so many times in the past. Just as you wish, of course, but any more of that kind of response isn't going to make the least impression on me: I've heard it far too many times before. – OhioStandard (talk) 09:39, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
- I see you haven't been online. Another editor evidently noticed your "straw man" edit, and reverted it. – OhioStandard (talk) 20:13, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
- I have two notices on my talk page, one in normal mode and one that comes up in edit mode, that indicate my preference that a discussion be kept on the page where it began, to preserve the continuity of the thread. I'd appreciate it if you'd adhere to that, and would stop posting replies to this thread on my talk page. Once again, I've copied the message you posted to my talk page here, below. – OhioStandard (talk) 07:59, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
- There's nothing remotely ambiguous or hard to understand about the offer you made to avoid sanctions previously, and I'll not go round and round with you while you pretend there is. I quote:
- The only words I'm interested in hearing from you are, "I agree to abide by the promise I made." Nothing else: no additions, no qualifications, modifications, or hedges, no arguing, no more temporizing, and no more debate. Say that, keep to it, and we're done. Say anything else and we'll be back at ANI to see whether admins will formalize and enforce the offer and promise you made to avoid a block or ban last time. – OhioStandard (talk) 08:37, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
- The affect of the informal agreement you made re what you edit will have to be just as if it had been formally expanded; it just won't be recorded in the logs, is all. That, and reaffirming your agreement here saves both you and the community the strife of another round at ANI, and circumvents the possibility that instead of just formalizing and recording what you previously agreed to, the community might elect to block or ban you entirely. I'll have nothing more to say about this, but be advised that I will not issue another warning before posting to ANI if I see you disregard what you've promised. – OhioStandard (talk) 09:40, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Research survey invitation
Greetings Terra Novus-
My name is Randall Livingstone, and I am a doctoral student at the University of Oregon, studying digital media and online community. I am posting to invite you to participate in my research study exploring the work of Wikipedia editors who are members of WikiProject: Countering Systemic Bias. The online survey should take 20 to 25 minutes to complete and can be found here:
https://oregon.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_cSHzuwaQovaZ6ss
Your responses will help online communication researchers like me to better understand the collaborations, challenges, and purposeful work of Wikipedia editors like you. In addition, at the end of the survey you will have the opportunity to express your interest in a follow-up online interview with the researcher.
This research project has been reviewed and approved by the Wikimedia Research Committee as well as the Office for Protection of Human Subjects at the University of Oregon. For a detailed description of the project, please visit its Meta page. This survey is voluntary, and your confidentiality will be protected. You will have the choice of using your Wikipedia User Name during the research or creating a unique pseudonym. You may skip any question you choose, and you may withdraw at any time. By completing the survey, you are providing consent to participate in the research.
If you have any questions about the study, please contact me via my Talk Page (UOJComm) or via email. My faculty advisor is Dr. Ryan Light. If you have any questions regarding your rights as a research participant, please contact the Office for Protection of Human Subjects at the University of Oregon.
Thank you very much.
Sincerely,
Randall Livingstone School of Journalism & Communication University of Oregon UOJComm (talk) 18:55, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
Completely new abortion proposal and mediation
In light of the seemingly endless disputes over their respective titles, a neutral mediator has crafted a proposal to rename the two major abortion articles (
The hope is that, if a consensus can be reached on the article titles, the energy that has been spent debating the titles of the articles
To avoid accusations that this posting violates
Orphaned non-free image File:1996 Clinton China.jpg
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:58, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
Non-free rationale for File:Mikoyan-LMFS-1.png
Thanks for uploading or contributing to
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:23, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Economics in One Lesson.jpg
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 05:41, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
Good will
Hi, TN! Very gracious of you to have posted the above. Please don't give it another thought. Maybe someday I'll write an essay around the thesis that writing for Wikipedia is so inherently and unavoidably exasperating, as to be unjustifiably dangerous to one's emotional balance, equanimity, morals, self-esteem, blood pressure, digestion, and probably complexion, as well.
It's like composing a book, page by page, and then finding, when you've come back after leaving it alone for a day or two, that someone has come in and changed it all around to make a huge mess of it... Do you remember the faerie tale about the cobbler who laid out his work each night, to prepare for the next morning's work? He found, when he arose, that someone ( elves, was it? ) had picked up his work where he left off, and made really great shoes overnight?
Wikipedia is like that, except instead of discreet, pleasant, and highly talented elves who produce great work, each of us "wakes up to" the work of self-complacent, literacy-challenged twelve-year olds who trash our fine work, replacing it with inane, incoherent, bombastic prose, apparently while drunk.
I think the only way to stay even mildly in-balance is probably to work only on articles in which one has no emotional stake. Unfortunately, that tends to be boring, of course; our interest naturally follow our emotions. And it's soooo easy to go from "an emotional connection to the topic" to "my self-esteem is tied up in being right about this, and other people are just dishonest or deluded anyway". Been there, done that, as people say. We all have.
I exaggerate, but only slightly. Perhaps worse, though, re one's proper self-regard, this place has its own subtle and sinister gravity that sucks one into behaving competitively over the most inconsequential matters, and often clean against the judgment of ones "better self". Perhaps the opportunity to resist that pull, and so build the skill, the resistance "muscles", is Wikipedia's greatest value or benefit, when viewed wholly subjectively. Resisting that pull is probably good practice for marriage, where not resisting petty competition has far more damaging consequences for all concerned!
Anyway, cheers, mate: I truly hope you'll keep us current with space vehicles, anyway, if you can find the time. Who else can do that half so well as you, I'd like to know? Very warm regards, – OhioStandard (talk) 18:17, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:United Aircraft Corporation Logo.jpg
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the
Orphaned non-free image File:Korean Stealth Fighter.jpg
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:23, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:Images J-20.jpg)
Thanks for uploading
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "
Orphaned non-free media (File:REL logo.jpg)
Thanks for uploading
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "
Hi - an article you contributed to has been nominated for deletion. Feel free to comment. Thanks, Maschen (talk) 08:43, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Beriev 2500.jpg
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. The Bushranger One ping only 00:00, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Korean Stealth Fighter.jpg
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the
Orphaned non-free image File:Road to Serfdom.jpg
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the
ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current