User talk:KoshVorlon

• VorlonHomeWorld
• BabCom (Talk )
• The Book of Vorlon
• JumpGate
• My Userboxen
• Atlas of the Planets
• My Barnstars
• Awards I've recieved
• The Grey Council (Chat )

This editor is a WikiGnome. GFL - GNOME FOR LIFE C H A P T E R 11 "This spot blank for now " . Reply from the Cap'n Hello, KoshVorlon. You have new messages at Captain Screebo's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Talkback Hello, KoshVorlon. You have new messages at Skamecrazy123's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. From your user page Considering that my edit spoke of the fact that Tullian has publicly debated other with regards to his views, and the links I referenced go DIRECTLY to those debates, there should not be an issue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BaptistBolt (talk • contribs) 18:51, 13 May 2013 (UTC) Chelsea/Bradley Manning There exists a very tenuous cease-fire in the issue of this article. I suggest that making an undiscussed reversion of every reference to her gender identity is not going to be viewed as a constructive editing move. I have reverted it. Please join the conversation on the Talk page. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 18:56, 1 September 2013 (UTC) Trindon Holliday Did you just click on the wrong button? You gave me a user warning for an edit on Trindon Holliday that was a revert of an IP adding unsourced material to the article... Thomas.W talk to me 12:12, 2 September 2013 (UTC) removed your comment at ANI Come on, KV, that's exactly the kind of thing you need to think twice about before posting. Anyone remotely familiar with TTT's editing and TE's editing would see they aren't the same person. TTT is currently blocked, and can't defend himself against baseless accusations. Accusations like that require some modicum of evidence. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:31, 11 September 2013 (UTC) Floquenbeam, that removal wasn't needed. I made a suggestion that ThinkEnemies is a sock of TonyTheTiger with a listing of their interactions , gained from a tool used on Wikipedia, in fact, one of the few anyone can use. Since I can't CU anyone, I can't prove anything but I can suggest, and only that. Also, bear in mind I'm not the only, nor am I the first person to suggest that they hear a duck qwacking loudly. In spite of that, no I won't revert you, nor will I ask you to revert yourself (heck , you wouldn't anyway, would you  :) ?) In the future, don't remove stuff like that, it's not outing, nor attack, only a suggestion that there may be a connection  KoshVorlon. We are all Kosh ...  16:36, 11 September 2013 (UTC) You're not interpreting that tool correctly. For example: [1] --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:55, 11 September 2013 (UTC) Yes, I see what you're saying, my edits and his edits can be shown to overlap as well, but I'm also talking about behavior, and the fact that hardly anyone plays the racism card also their edits are tighter together. Also, both users have socked quite a bit in past and both show ownership tendancies. I still disagree with removing it off ANI. (Don't worry, I won't revert you :) )  KoshVorlon. We are all Kosh ...  17:11, 11 September 2013 (UTC) Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page. IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation. Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. Views/Day Quality Title Content Headings Images Links Sources Tagged with… 45 Easter Vigil (talk) Add sources 3 Doping Panda (talk) Add sources 54 Great Lent (talk) Add sources 106 Information sensitivity (talk) Add sources 34 Holy Week in the Philippines (talk) Add sources 27 Easter Week (talk) Add sources 18 Whittier High School (talk) Cleanup 18 Karera (talk) Cleanup 231 Same-sex marriage law in the United States by state (talk) Cleanup 9 Transport in the Arab League (talk) Expand 122 Byzantine Rite (talk) Expand 86 Beirut–Rafic Hariri International Airport (talk) Expand 118 Israel, Palestine, and the United Nations (talk) Unencyclopaedic 68 Mystery Science Theater 3000 video releases (talk) Unencyclopaedic 157 Palestinian Christians (talk) Unencyclopaedic 19 Oxy-fuel (talk) Merge 26 Enlargement of the Arab League (talk) Merge 13 Entrance (liturgical) (talk) Merge 13 Matt McGinn (talk) Wikify 2,589 ARMA 2 (talk) Wikify 1,393 Where no man has gone before (talk) Wikify 43 Zora dubrovačka (TV series) (talk) Orphan 1 Gadasarai (talk) Orphan 1 The X-Files: Revelations (talk) Orphan 5 Geoffrey Ostergaard (talk) Stub 3 News & Review (talk) Stub 43 Jack Beal (talk) Stub 20 The Ugly Duckling and Me! (talk) Stub 15 Joan L. Krajewski (talk) Stub 6 Astyoche (talk) Stub Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are: Views/Day Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days. Quality Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class. The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions: Content Is more content needed? Headings Does this article have an appropriate section structure? Images Is the number of illustrative images about right? Links Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles? Sources For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article? SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping! If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:38, 18 September 2013 (UTC) RfC I closed it due to it being severely broken, Take the advice given there and come back with a new proposal if you like. Werieth (talk) 16:46, 29 September 2013 (UTC) Manning Vote Might I suggest you refactor your comment on the RM? The article is under sanctions and the language you used might get you into some trouble. Perhaps if you address precedent and policy, that might help.Two kinds of pork (talk) 12:18, 1 October 2013 (UTC) Hey Kosh! Your !vote there is breaking the list numbering. Could you start it with a "#" (outside of any bold marks) and separate paragraphs with "<p>"? -- ToE 12:37, 1 October 2013 (UTC) bd2412 already changed it (though with a "<br>" to separate the paragraphs with less vertical space, and leaving in the "*" at the start of your text). -- ToE 12:48, 1 October 2013 (UTC) I would like to echo the sentiment of Two kinds of pork. Maybe try to explain how you believe how biological sex or legal names are relevant to article names (for the latter, compare Bill Clinton)? I would also appreciate it if you could refactor the statement that Manning is a guy to that it is your opinion she is a guy to that it is your opinion she is a guy. Gender issues are rather complicated, and there is no scientific consensus about when someone has a new gender. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 14:13, 1 October 2013 (UTC) I will third that request, with my Official Admin(tm) hat on. The discussion guidelines made clear that comments about what gender you feel Manning is or is allowed to be are off-topic, and given the tension in this topic area, there's not a lot of wiggle room, because one comment can easily ignite another firestorm. If you are unable or unwilling to refactor your comment, I will do so for you by removing the inflammatory language (your vote itself will remain). A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 14:21, 1 October 2013 (UTC) Copied this from my talk to keep the discussion centralized. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 14:50, 1 October 2013 (UTC)There's nothing inflammatory about my vote. I gave my reasons for my vote,that's not disa-allowed for any vote. I've re-checked that page, and I see no restrictions on referencing Bradley Manning's gender either. You haven't voted, only commented, so I realize your comment is neutral, but honestly, I see no problem with my comments, as they reference both policy and common sense. I would hope you would refactor, as this would be a violation of WP:TPO. As you know, there are only a few reasons to refactor comments on a talk page, my comment doesn't fall into those exemptions.  KoshVorlon. We are all Kosh   14:41, 1 October 2013 (UTC) I'm sorry we haven't been able to make clear to you what was wrong with your comments in the context of the discussion. I've gone ahead and redacted the problematic parts of your statement (the active discretionary sanctions in this topic area give administrators wide latitude to make decisions of this type). If you'd like to discuss further why they were problematic, I can try to help you understand, but please do not restore the content I've removed. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 14:50, 1 October 2013 (UTC) Hi, adding my thoughts here. While you are welcome to your opinion of Manning's gender, it is not germane to the title discussion, and the guidelines we developed in advance of the discussion suggested that we keep such opinions to ourselves. That said, I would ask those writing here to consider dropping similar notes on the pages of those who share their opinion that Manning is a woman, as that is not a valid argument for a title change either.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 14:47, 1 October 2013 (UTC)