User talk:Terra Novus

To the Wikipedia community (Mann Jess, Ohiostandard, etc)

It was wrong for me to tendentiously edit, dodge Wikipedia sanctions, and not uphold my promises to change my editing pattern. Please forgive me.

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.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

edit count | edit summary usage

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.

File:Df-21d-on-the-highway.jpg

Keep comments from getting to explosive.

And yet, here we are again. To Criticism of the Israeli government, you added a "see also" wikilink to our article about the logical fallacy named straw man. 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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

I not understand how the straw man edit was related to the issue about the One state solution. Is there a problem with me editing in this whole topic? I think our misunderstanding is rooted in the fact that you thought I am banned from editing the whole Israel-Palestinian topic. I will do my best to shy away from specific articles that do seem to be in a contentious editing pattern, but I think that you were assuming I would move away from the whole topic altogether. I am happy to do so, if you communicate in a way that convinces me that I am somehow not editing constructively on this topic. I have ceased from editing the One state solution per your request, and I welcome any comments you might have in regards to this issue.--  Novus  Orator  02:52, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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:

"I totally agree to editing non-controversial subjects, and will do my best to stick to that area ... I will generally try to avoid Climate change articles, and any subject in which editors are known to (or say that they have) widely differing opinions."

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)[reply]

Okay...I will abide by promise I made. As to the ban, its already in place for other topic areas, and I certainly do not want to see it expanded. Cheers!--  Novus  Orator  08:50, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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 (pro-life/anti-abortion movement, and pro-choice/abortion rights movement) to completely new names. The idea, which is located here, is currently open for opinions. As you have been a contributor in the past to at least one of the articles, your thoughts on the matter would be appreciated.

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 here and here can be better spent giving both articles some much needed improvement to their content. Please take some time to read the proposal and weigh in on the matter. Even if your opinion is simple indifference, that opinion would be valuable to have posted.

To avoid accusations that this posting violates WP:CANVASS, this posting is being made to every non-anon editor who has edited either page since 1 July 2010, irrespective of possible previous participation at the mediation page. HuskyHuskie (talk) 20:08, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:1996 Clinton China.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:1996 Clinton China.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Mikoyan-LMFS-1.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Mikoyan-LMFS-1.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

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)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Economics in One Lesson.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Economics in One Lesson.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:United Aircraft Corporation Logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:United Aircraft Corporation Logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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. Stefan2 (talk) 14:06, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Korean Stealth Fighter.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Korean Stealth Fighter.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Images J-20.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Images J-20.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 "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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:00, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:REL logo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:REL logo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 "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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:02, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2nd nomination for deletion: Heim theory

Hi - an article you contributed to has been nominated for deletion. Feel free to comment. Thanks, Maschen (talk) 08:43, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Beriev 2500.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Beriev 2500.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Korean Stealth Fighter.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Korean Stealth Fighter.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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. Stefan2 (talk) 13:05, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Road to Serfdom.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Road to Serfdom.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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. Stefan2 (talk) 00:59, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:23, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Portal:Jupiter

Portal:Jupiter, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Jupiter and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Portal:Jupiter during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Mark Schierbecker (talk) 07:03, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]