User talk:XZise/Archives/2013/09

KEO page stuff

After what happened on the KEO page today, I now feel it was a complete waste ever to have contributed to this Wiki. Because of this, it is very, very unlikely I will ever log into my account here again. If you think my contributions would be valuable and have trouble getting my attention via my talk page, my gmail username is the same. Featherwinglove (talk) 15:54, 27 July 2013 (CDT)

Okay now you complaining at Dgelessus about I didn't read this here? Simply because I think you overreact. Nothing is lost as all versions of the KEO page are still in the version history. If you think your (only) contribution to this wiki is waste of time it is your opinion and when you want to leave this wiki you can do that. Now you actually replied to your talk page so e-mailing you wasn't even necessary. So I don't know how you figured I didn't read your comment here. As you only address Dgelessus I let you talk and won't touch the KEO page again (at least for the next time until you either abandon this Wiki or somebody else “vandalize” it). — xZise [talk] 03:59, 28 July 2013 (CDT)

Not didn't read this, I mean didn't understand this, nor much else I've written in your general direction. Learn English!!! Learn English!!! Learn English!!! Learn English!!! Learn English!!! Until then, don't complain when I'm asking Dgelessus for help with translation. "Overreact", thanks. You obviously have no idea how frustrating it is to find a non-English person who doesn't know rocket science administering an English rocket science wikipedia and replacing an expert's work with jibberish. Of course, I'm going to "overreact", thank you very much. Featherwinglove (talk) 14:36, 23 August 2013 (CDT)

-.-

Seriously, can we stop arguing about this now? --dgelessus ^{(talk · contribs)} 14:42, 23 August 2013 (CDT)

So, I take that to mean you're fine with this pathetic state of affairs. It'll be very difficult for any of us to discern just how much this cost your Wiki. Since I never made them (and because I might not be the only one so deterred), I can't tell you how many useful edits never happened because of this baloney. You're obviously fine with that. Don't feel lonely: the forums have no tolerance for experts either. Nobody respond on the talk pages please if you're talking to me, I only visit them once every month or so (check the dates). You can figure out my email above. Featherwinglove (talk) 14:31, 14 September 2013 (CDT)

Okay this is now my fifth revision. And I don't know what to say. You make it to a baloney as you bringing this topic every then and now up. I didn't answered because obviously I'm not capable of the English language so why should I waste time answering to you when you don't understand it? Or maybe you only want to hear an apology so here you have it: “I'm sorry to edit the KEO article, but in my opinion this article needs to be revised. The naming is odd and it contained unnecessary speculation. As all articles (except tutorials) don't belong to anybody I can't edit “your” article so I didn't edited yours.”. In fact somebody edited it lately so you should definitely check that out.

I also never heard Geosynchronous Equatorial Orbit as the explanation but instead it's either Geostationary Orbit or Geostationary orbit (you claim you are the expert). Why not simply Kerbosynchronous Orbit which is closer to the original. (Edit: This was incorrect, I apologise) Oh and about the LEO = Low Energy Orbit, see in “your” article: Somebody vandalised it out. As promised I refrained from editing (and “fixing” that) the article. Okay before I get raged. Sign: — xZise [talk] 15:05, 14 September 2013 (CDT)

Quite frankly, I don't think you should be running this Wiki, XZise, but the least you can do is quit lying on your language matrix. Featherwinglove (talk) 15:16, 14 September 2013 (CDT)

Ops that thing with geosynchronous equatorial orbit slipped my mind. Sorry. Oh and I don't run the Wiki. I do edits like anybody else. Okay I can delete/move pages but in 99.99% somebody else requested it. — xZise [talk] 15:31, 14 September 2013 (CDT)

Thanks, it appears to be safe enough to contribute, so I'll see what I can do. I don't have as much time I can give to KSP as I did back in July. I have ArrowStar's TOT, he's not around here, near as I can tell, and it is not so easy to use. We need some porkchops, so I'll start cooking some up (it'll be slow coming.) As for naming orbits, one of the things I always ask, and was being asked years before I was born is "What do we tell Sulu?" We now have over two thousand planetary bodies to deal with in real life, plus a similar number in fiction. "Low Earth Orbit" and the like just doesn't cut it anymore, and "Standard Orbit" isn't enough. Let's see if we can set an example here. - Featherwinglove (talk) 16:40, 14 September 2013 (CDT)

Now your approach is a bit odd: On the one hand there is your redefinition of LEO to low energy orbit but on the other hand there is the special name of KSO which is only defined for Kerbin (although the K could stand for Kerbol). I personally prefer apoapsis/periapsis instead of apogee/perigee/apohelios/perihelios so I'm on your side with low energy orbit. That's why I created the synchronous orbit article: This is a general topic which handles all synchronous orbits and not only around Kerbin. — xZise [talk] 09:31, 15 September 2013 (CDT)

KEO, not KSO, remember? (Ah, link colors, lol!) The name Kerbol is not canon, the game still calls it "Sun" (also, "heliocentric" might be generic, but we can put that one off because it looks like space politics will mean the first spacecraft to get far enough from our Sol that we have to make up our minds isn't likely to do so for another 43,000 years. By the way, it's "aphelion" and "perihelion"; surprisingly enough, Firefox's spell checker knows that!) Featherwinglove (talk) 22:25, 26 September 2013 (CDT)

Okay, the real reason I came here... Can we move KEO over to Kerbisynchronous Equatorial Orbit and make the acronym a redirect? I think that's more appropriate, especially since whether we should be calling Earth's Clarke Orbit GEO or GSO is still unclear. Should we capitalize that? I was surprised by the redlink on what I thought was going to be my final pass preview, which turns out to result from lack of capitalization on the extant Kerbisynchronous equatorial orbit redirect linked to Kerbin. Featherwinglove (talk) 22:25, 26 September 2013 (CDT)

Now I can most certainly move KEO to kerbisynchronous equatorial orbit but without the capitalisation, which is the way the Wikipedia handles it (geosychronous equatorial orbit) and I personally see no reason why this should be capitalised. And I never read any of Clarke's books so I don't know if he described the GEO or GSO. But I don't see how it is important if Clarke Orbit does mean GSO/KSO or GEO/KEO, because there are already different terms for them. Okay about GSO and GEO I thought they are the same, but actually a GEO (stat.) is a special type of GSO (synch.). About helios/helion: That's why I prefer apo-/periapsis. And we don't need to visit the other stars, maybe we are able to determine the apises only through telescopes some time. — xZise [talk] 03:59, 27 September 2013 (CDT)