User talk:68.194.209.63

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Gorean

Dude, the purpose of the article "Gorean" is not for you to promote your weekly role-playing webchat. External links should only be added to sites which contain substantial Gorean-relevant content (other than same lists of positions and serves which are already out there on hundreds of other websites!) -- preferably sites which have been noted in reliable media, or have a prominent role within the overall Gorean community. AnonMoos 16:13, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to the Gorean page. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you.

Anonmoos we have a weekly book discussion that is not nonsense it is a good resource for people to learn about Gor. The pages here for 'gor' and 'gorean' are simply awful. I was planning on helping to update the pages with relevant information. DreamingKajira - has a link and is a chat site. There conected web page aren't even as good as ours. So if they can have a link why can't we???

Sorry if I was being harsh, but you didn't seem to be getting the message that a Wikipedia external link is not a means to try to grow your site, it's a way to recognize your site after you've already built it up into something worthy of recognition. I don't feel like defending any particular link that's already on the page (except for a select few) -- there seems to be a periodic cycle of people adding individual external links, then every now and then a zealous person coming along and drastically pruning external links. I don't usually get directly involved in this cycle -- except sometimes when a conspicuously weak link is added. Almost all the informational content on your site refers to the rules of your site's chatroom, and promoting a weekly webchat is not a good reason to add an external link to the Gor or Gorean articles -- and the way you added your site to the top of the list of links appears to betray a somewhat unendearing self-promotional streak. AnonMoos 19:42, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
AnonMoos, Recognition?? Gorean Shores has been around for almost ten years. It consistently ranks in the top 5 of the Gorean Forum Top 100 web sites. There is a ton of information regarding Gor at our web site not just our rules. So if I place it on the bottom of the list you won't edit out? Who are you and what position do you hold here at Wikipedia, if any? As I said Wikipedea page for Gor and Gorean are weak to say the least. We have a community of people of that could make it better. WHy does Dreamkajira get a link? Also Naia's Compendium of Gorean Sites is also a chat site. Why do they get a link? You're not being consistent.
My e mail is xertog@hotmail.com I think be a better way for us to talk then this.


I actually don't spend a lot of effort trying to enforce consistent criteria for the inclusion of external links -- there are only two or three links that I've added to the Gor-related articles, and only about four or five links whose presence I strongly care about. Otherwise, there seems to be a natural cycle, whereby some people come along and add more and more links, and then occasionally other people come along and radically prune the links (leaving behind only the most "notable" links, in accordance with their interpretations of WP:EL). I usually don't remove links that people add, and I usually don't re-add links that people remove. However, I do sometimes in fact remove an occasional link where there doesn't seem to be much "there there", or whose addition is annoyingly self-promoting. My main objections to your link were:

1) You were linking in order to grow your book-chat by means of Wikipedia links, but Wikipedia external links are not the way to publicize things which are fledgling and just starting up -- they are a way of recognizing things which have been already rather fully developed.

2) Other than the book-chat, the content of your site is almost purely involuted and navel gazing, with most information accessible through http://www.gorean-shores.com/gorhome/homepage.html referring to how things should be done in the chatrooms on your site. This means that your site is utterly irrelevant to the Gor page, and only somewhat partially and tangentially relevant to the Gorean page...

I have no official position or privileged status, but currently I'm the main person who is active both on Wikipedia and the current official Gor site, Gorchronicles.com.

I don't really feel like initiating e-mail with you (and in any case, I often only check my e-mail every 2-3 days, so an e-mail conversation might be rather slow), but there are several ways for you to contact me off-line -- I already PM-ed your account at Gorchronicles.com, you could use the "E-mail a user" function at Wikipedia, etc. AnonMoos 20:54, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Gorean Shores is not an up start web site. GS has beenn around for about ten years and we ranks in the top 5 of the Gorean 100 web sites. The book discussion is a several months old and is slowly growing. You obviously did not take a look a good look at the web site. I plan to add the following links directly to educational pages on the Gorean Shores web pages. They will include a link about the Caste System - http://www.gorean-shores.com/gorhome/caste.html. Ships of Gor - http://www.gorean-shores.com/gorhome/ships.html Weapons of Gor - http://www.gorean-shores.com/gorhome/weapons.html , Dances http://www.gorean-shores.com/gorhome/dance.html and slave position - http://www.gorean-shores.com/gorhome/positions.html
These are all informational pages. Unless you are the vengeful person you accuse me of being you won't delete these links. -- Xertog
The weekly book-chat (which is what you were specifically promoting in linking your site) does not yet seem to be a prominent institution in the Gorean community. Other than that, your site may be good for what it is, but if it's pretty much purely a role-playing chatroom, then what it is is irrelevant to Wikipedia article "Gor", and only somewhat tangentially relevant to Wikipedia article "Gorean". I can't really be "vengeful" towards you, since I don't know you from Adam, and I don't remember ever hearing of your site until you started linking it from Wikipedia articles. (However, I did find your behavior in linking it from both articles, and at the top of the lists, to be somewhat annoyingly self-promoting.)
Some of the URLs you listed above are not currently linked from http://www.gorean-shores.com/gorhome/homepage.html , so I did not include them as part of my brief evaluation of your site. The pages which are linked from http://www.gorean-shores.com/gorhome/homepage.html seem to be manuals for your site's chatroom (the majority of links), or to duplicate information which is widely available elsewhere on many sites, for the main purpose of serving as background material for your site's chatroom... AnonMoos 22:55, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Those links are all from the GS web pages. If you didn't see them there you didn't look very good. Those pages are just as good if not better then any of the other pages that are currently linked. I will link only the educational pages and I won't place them on top. I believe you are familiar with Lemuel at Gor Chronicles. He can verify that GS is well established and has been around for about 10 years. - Xertog

If I didn't find the pages directly linked from http://www.gorean-shores.com/gorhome/homepage.html to be of great value, then I was unlikely to follow further links to sub-pages of those pages...
Tell you what -- if you can show that there is some substantive valid significant content on your site which is unique to your site, or developed in connection with your site (i.e. NOT just the standard lists of positions and serves and collections of quotes from the books which are already on dozens of sites out there), and which is not mainly connected with the chatroom on your site, then I will withdraw my objection to linking your site to either the Gor or Gorean articles (whichever seems most appropriate) -- but not both, and not at the top of the list, and without promoting the weekly bookchat. 21:18, 11 August 2007 (UTC)