Talk:Gor

message: Since it looks like people are going to keep adding in their play places, we might as well have a sub-section for them and one that makes it very clear what they are. This differentiates it from the offline and lifestyle web sites.
--Malkinius 17:29, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Online Gorean Gaming Sites

message: I've taken out the link to the non-existant "Gorean Slave Positions" page.  If anyone does want to write this up (and God knows there are enough versions of this on the web to make it unnecessary), I think it would better enrich the kajira page.  Mind you, expanding that page would be a fine thing.  Wyvern 23:54, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Red link

message: I honestly can't see calling something a "Redneck soap opera" or something being "edited by Rednecks" in an encyclopedia. The article also seems to be leaning towards an opinion that, to use the vernacular, "John Norman is teh suk lolol". In fact, I believe the last paragraph of "General notes" is mainly hogwash and could be deleted easily. "His greatest works are considered his first third..." By who? Certainly not me. Where is this information coming from?
Kyou 17:29, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV

message: It's been a long time since I read any of the Gor series (well, except Slave of Gor a year ago or so) and I've forgotten whether there are detailed rules for Gorean chess, and if it has a proper name in Gorean.  Dropped by here between the Barsoom page (looking for Martian chess) and the Ouroboros page, then the variants of chess page.  Does Gorean chess have known rules, or is it only known through vaguenesses in the text?Skookum1 06:43, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Over on the new quasi-official Gor site (Gorchronicles.com), it's said that Norman devised a full set of rules for Kaissa (or one version of Kaissa), but never did anything with it partly because someone unconnected with him trademarked the word "Kaissa" (though that trademark may have run out by now)... AnonMoos 22:28, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Trademarks don't "run out" (expire in any specific length of time).  They are, in most jurisdictions, valid for as long as the holder is a "going concern" (basically so long as the mark is in use and so long as trespass against the mark could reasonably cause confusion in the marketplace).  Remember that trademarks and service marks are intended as much for consumer protection as for protection of the mark's holder.  They exist so that consumers are not misled by similar packaging and labeling into buying products which are from some entity other than the one they'd intended ... and so that producers can build and maintain a reputation which will not be sullied by deceptive imitation.JimD (talk) 22:43, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

text: In the matter of Kaissa; many years ago I met one person who created a game from the passing references in the Gor novels.  He was a vendor at a local Science Fiction convetion (Orycon, Portland, Oregon, circa the early to mid 1980s).  He related to me the story of how he created the game and how he had attempted to work with John Norman on marketing it, et al. He explained that he had been initially unable to garner any response from the author and how, after he'd consulted with his own legal counself, he had sought and been granted a trademark on his work.  (In particular it was believed that the references to Kaissa in the book were sufficiently vague and "passing" that the game as created and published could not be legal held to be an infringing derivative work).  I only offer this anecdote here informally since I cannot verify any of the details (I don't remember the man's name, the specific year of this conversation, etc).  So it is only hearsay at this point.  (I should also note that the notions of "derivative work" have been in flux in recent decades as MPAA, RIAA and various other media and software industry interests have tried to extend much of the law surrounding "intellectual property" for their own purposes).JimD (talk) 22:43, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I know the guy you mean; his name is Jeff something, as I recall.  He stopped going to Orycon a while ago, although the last time I heard of him he was still in Portland.  (And I never did get a Kaissa set.)  What ran out was a patent that he got for some game rule gimmick or another (I don't think I was ever clear on how one patents a set of game rules); I remember commenting on a Gor forum that his IP claims were not worth fighting, as his patent was due to run out in less than two years from that time.  It's certainly a derivative work, and John Norman probably could have won a legal battle if he'd chosen to fight one, but it's all moot now.  Wyvern (talk) 10:16, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Gorean Chess?

message: At some point we should write up a section on the literary influence of the Gor novels.  People have long remarked on their own antecedents, particularly the "planetary adventure" stories such as ERB's Mars novels.  The Gor novels were ground-breaking and experimental in their day and have had much influence on later authors, not in the least by demonstrating that one could write about sex in a SF novel, even (or particularly) nonconventional sex, and still get published.  Wyvern 02:12, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Norman may have broken some ground in subject matter, but not necessarily more so than the late 1960's science-fiction "new wave", and I'm not sure that he really has a broad "literary influence" as such (other than unleashing some second-rate imitators during the period when the Gor novels were having their greatest commercial success).  What Norman was really successful at was getting books which many think revolve around bondage practices and "kinky sex" (though of course without "dirty words" or detailed descriptions of body parts) adopted into small suburban branch libraries across the U.S. in the late 1970's and early 1980's, where they were filed in with all the other sci-fi and fantasy books (as I saw with my own eyes on several occasions). AnonMoos 13:09, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Literary Influences

message: Ghetto Girls of Gor (the intentionally lost scrolls) is listed under parody/humor.  Maybe I just haven't encountered enough Gor stuff, but I can't see the parody/humor in it; to me it reads as a straight piece of fan-fiction involving the basic universe.  Perhaps someone could leave a note here explaining why it's parody/humor?? 156.34.221.174 18:52, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, I deleted the link --  it was added before I started keeping an eye on the article, and I never actually visited it (the title sounded sufficiently outlandish). AnonMoos 06:36, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Nor for me.  It worked the last time I tried it; if we're lucky the site is only temporarily down.  I'm not sure where else the parody might be found, offhand. Wyvern 15:31, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone's fixed it without updating the talk page.  There's a link to the copy on adultfanfiction.net now.  Wyvern 20:49, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Parody/humor 

message: Someone's changed 'British professor Tarl Cabot' to 'New England professor Tarl Cabot.'  He's British, but taught for one term in a New England college; this seems tricky to explain well.  I'm thinking of just calling him British, since his teaching carreer was short and of little consequence.  Comments?  Wyvern 20:43, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  British vs. New England 

message: On the matter of Tarl Cabot's surname might it have been chosen by John Norman as a nod to Ralph Milne Farley's 'Myles Cabot' character?  Apparently Farley was a friend of Edgar Rice Borroughs and was writing similar interplanetary swordsman type stuff.  I must confess I've not (yet) read any of this Ralph Milne Farley's books though. Wageslave61 21:22, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Myles Cabot 

message: I just edited out the bit at the top of the page where someone edited in, "The Counter-Earth(this phrase has never been mentioned in any of the Gor books.)]]"  (Good grief.)  I am holding in my hand a copy of Captive of Gor, 1972, ISBN 345029941095, and I QUOTE from the cover: "VOLUME VII IN THE CHRONICLES OF COUNTER-EARTH" Between the title, and the author's name.  Good enough citation???  Evening Scribe 08:48, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The anonymous IP 208.179.111.64 has added this in twice, even though in my edit summary of three weeks ago I said "rv -- it's the title of chapter 2 of the first book, and some editions of the books have it printed right on the fricken cover!" -- AnonMoos 16:26, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: the Counter-Earth

message: I have a version of the flag flown by the ships of Bosk of Port Kar, and will probably be adding it to the page in a day or two: -- AnonMoos 09:39, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "It was a broad flag, white, with vertical bars of green. Superimposed upon the bars of green, it bore the head of a bosk, gigantic, black and horned." -- Chapter 22 of Gor book 11 (with slightly rearranged word order).
===Another image, maybe to be added===
This is one visual interpretation of the "moons and collar" brand of the Priest-kings, as described in Gor book 13 (i.e. the three moons of Gor ascending diagonally above a closed collar).  This seems to be the closest thing to a general overall Gor emblem which is included in the Gor books (unless you count the golden circle of the caste of the initiates), and so might be useful for the Gor article in that respect (though according to Norman, the moons and collar is actually only rather rarely encountered on Gor itself...). AnonMoos (talk) 15:48, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

text: The images currently being used seemed to be done in Microsoft Paint.  Is there any source that attaches them to the novel series or are they just a creation stemming from the vision of a fan? -Xcuref1endx (talk) 04:41, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately for your understanding of graphics, MS-Paint does not produce vector SVG images!!  They're abstractly symbolic, favoring simple geometric outlines over artistic detail, if that's what you were trying to indicate.  In any case, images are not commonly footnoted as displayed in articles, so adding "citation needed" tags was the wrong way to go.  If you follow through to the description page of each individual image, there's a lot of detailed description given for most of the images. AnonMoos (talk) 17:53, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Image to be added

message: This is one visual interpretation of the "moons and collar" brand of the Priest-kings, as described in Gor book 13 (i.e. the three moons of Gor ascending diagonally above a closed collar).  This seems to be the closest thing to a general overall Gor emblem which is included in the Gor books (unless you count the golden circle of the caste of the initiates), and so might be useful for the Gor article in that respect (though according to Norman, the moons and collar is actually only rather rarely encountered on Gor itself...). AnonMoos (talk) 15:48, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Another image, maybe to be added

message: Made a diagram of the Gor as the "counter-earth" according to the descriptions in the books, and will be adding to the article when I figure out the best way to do so... AnonMoos (talk) 03:14, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The images currently being used seemed to be done in Microsoft Paint.  Is there any source that attaches them to the novel series or are they just a creation stemming from the vision of a fan? -Xcuref1endx (talk) 04:41, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately for your understanding of graphics, MS-Paint does not produce vector SVG images!!  They're abstractly symbolic, favoring simple geometric outlines over artistic detail, if that's what you were trying to indicate.  In any case, images are not commonly footnoted as displayed in articles, so adding "citation needed" tags was the wrong way to go.  If you follow through to the description page of each individual image, there's a lot of detailed description given for most of the images. AnonMoos (talk) 17:53, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Another image

message: :Image:Hunters of gor.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 16:56, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Took care of it (hopefully...) -- AnonMoos (talk) 23:45, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Hunters of gor.JPG

message: The simplified map shows the Sardar Mountains as being north of the Vosk.  They are actually south and somewhat inland of the coastal city of Brundisium - approximately above the "Civ" in "Civilised" on the map.  There was some ambiguity in the early books as to the exact location of the Sardar but the descriptions of Tarl's travels in Players of Gor make it clear this is where they are.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.78.165.2 (talk) 12:20, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry I didn't see your comments before.  I don't think that Book 20 is all that clear, but in book 24 it's said "Raiding parties of the Wagon Peoples have been reported as far north as Venna. Some claim to have seen them even in the vicinity of the Sardar." -- while in book 14 it's said that "Venna is a small, exclusive resort city, some two hundred pasangs north of Ar." -- AnonMoos (talk) 11:34, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: In book 27, it's said that Ar is southeast from Brundisium, though Brundisium and Ar are shown at almost the same latitude on the Marcus map... AnonMoos (talk) 06:38, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Error in the map that accompanies this article

message: Somehow, this article seems to go out of its way to avoid mentioning the main point of these books, and the reason they are (in)famous among fantasy fiction. From an article by Dave Langford:
:As the Encyclopedia of Fantasy primly puts it, 'later volumes degenerate into extremely sexist, sadomasochistic pornography involving the ritual humiliation of women, and as a result have caused widespread offence'.
:John Norman particularly likes writing about uppity feminist Earthwomen who are abducted to Gor, enslaved, and whipped a lot – whereupon they realize with joy that being a slave is their true and liberating role in life. (Source:)
Our article, by contrast, vaguely describes the setting of the novels, their plotlines and their historical influences; but nowhere mentions that they're about a misogynistic society where women are enslaved by men, or that they're basically one long BDSM fantasy. Surely that's the only reason why anyone reads them, not for the 'intricately detailed' flora and fauna? Would it be too much to put the above one-line description from the Encyclopedia of Fantasy into the lead of this article? Robofish (talk) 23:21, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: First off, it would be somewhat controversial to describe the books as a "BDSM fantasy", since (among other reasons) the modern BDSM movement didn't really begin to take shape until the mid-1980's (and there's no evidence that the acronym "BDSM" itself was coined before about 1990-1991), and BDSM advocates and Goreans often don't get along.  Also, Norman says a number of times in the books that only a minority of women are enslaved on Gor.  On Wikipedia, this whole area is discussed on the Gorean article than on the Gor article.  However, if you want to incorporate material from the alternative Wiki article http://www.londonfetishscene.com/wipi/index.php/Gor , feel free... AnonMoos (talk) 11:45, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately, wikis aren't reliable sources, but the SFX column is.  I've added a brief summary from that and a source I found on Michael Moorcock's page.  I'm sure that there are rebuttals to these criticisms from Norman and Goreans, but it would be best if those too were supported by reliable sources. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 03:21, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The reasons why DAW dropped Norman were more complex than merely "low sales" -- sales were declining on books released in the 1980's, but they were almost certainly still profitable for the publisher; however the books were coming under attack and there was a change of direction at DAW after the incapacitation of Wollheim (see past discussions at Talk:John Norman etc.)... AnonMoos (talk) 06:04, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Any reliable sources discussing other reasons for DAW dropping the books would be useful. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 04:25, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: If you read between the lines a little and gather information from various sources, it's fairly easy to see that there were probably a number of factors which influenced why the Gor paperback series stopped being published when it did.  For one thing, Norman went off on his "Jason" plot tangent in books #14 through #16, and then went off on an "Injun" semi-tangent in books #17 and #18, so that the series was somewhat diverted for a full three years — and when Norman finally returned the series back to its core plotlines, things were no longer really the same as before (due to inside and outside factors).  By that time, Norman had managed to shake off all editorial supervision, so that he was able to fairly fully indulge his idiosyncracies of style ("muchly", "modality", "unoften" etc.) and pack the books with more dense ideological or "philosophical" expository passages.  The books also started to grow longer (book #18 was longer than all but one of the preceding books in the series, while books #22 and #25 were longer still, almost three times as long as book #1), and they were published more closely together (two per year in the 1980's, as opposed to one per year in the 1970's), somewhat saturating the market.  The books still had fervent fans, but interest among general science-fiction readers started to drop off.  Also, in the 1970's the Gor books had been widely distributed as ordinary science fiction books to many suburban or small-town bookstores and libraries across the U.S. — but by the 1980's the secret was out, and many buyers for libraries etc. now became aware of the Gor books' "controversial" status (at a time when many librarians still considered science fiction to be basically reading material for teenage boys), and the books increasingly came under attack from feminists and others.  When DAW Books came under new leadership as a result of Donald Wollheim's stroke, the new management weighed decreasing profits against increasing aggravation, together with their personal distaste for the subject matter of the Gor books and their plans to move DAW in a somewhat new direction, and fairly abruptly pulled the plug (even though Norman had already almost finished writing Gor book #26 when the decision was made to stop publishing).  Of course, this might be considered to be an "Original Synthesis" by Wikipedia standards... AnonMoos (talk) 00:11, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: "If you read between the lines a little and gather information from various sources .... this might be considered to be an "Original Synthesis" by Wikipedia standards."  Yep.  I'm not necessarily disputing any of the material you're presenting here, but none of it should go into the article without reliable sources. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 00:28, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Nevertheless, it's still a problem that the current explanation on the article page is so oversimplified as to be somewhat misleading... AnonMoos (talk) 01:04, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, that's what we've got, from the Langford article.  Admittedly, the tone of that article is somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but in terms of the information conveyed it's pretty clear.  Langford says that Norman is "upset by the wicked feminist usurpers at his US publishers DAW Books, who in the late 1980s cancelled the Gor series on the paltry excuse of falling sales."  In encyclopedic tone, that's what's in the article now: the publishers cite low sales, and Norman blames the cancellation on feminism.  We can — and probably should — include the other factors you mention (possibly in a "Publication History" section?), but we shouldn't introduce any of it unless we have a reliable source. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 03:56, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a somewhat frustrating aspect of the Gor/Gorean subject-matter that for a number of things which many people are interested in, and which would certainly be considered inherently "notable" by every other criterion, reliable sources (in the conventional Wikipedia sense) simply don't exist.  P.S. Another aspect of why the Gor series got the axe is that the books became more extreme in their advocacy of sexual slavery for women as the series progressed -- in the early books, Tarl Cabot still had some hesitancies and residual earth attitudes, but he converted to a thoroughgoing native Gorean viewpoint by book #10, and from then on seemed to develop an increasing proselytizing fervor.  The Gor books were probably overall more suited to the seventies (with its "sexual liberation" ethos) than the eighties (when there was a rising fear of AIDS, and feminism was no longer just an isolated radical protest movement, but now had some significant influence on mainstream American lives). AnonMoos (talk) 11:20, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Something is missing from this article... 

message: As I read through Joel Rosenberg's the Guardians of the Flame, I come to notice more and more parallels to Norman's Gor-series; much so that I would call it an antithesis to Gor. This begins with the slaves being "collared" and continues on the prename of the protagonist, Karl Cullinane. Is anything published to that respect?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.204.99.241 (talk) 21:49, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know anything about those books, but if you find a reliable source mentioning a connection, it could be added to the article... AnonMoos (talk) 15:32, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relationship to [[Guardians of the Flame]]? 

message: I'm concerned about the current descriptions attached to two sites in the External Links section.
* The site John Norman's Chronicles of Gor includes the disclaimer: "Please be advised that John Norman is not responsible and specifically disclaims any responsibility for any of the content of this website."  Given this fact, I think it's misleading for Wikipedia to describe the site as "semi-official."  This is a fan site, plain & simple.
* The site John Norman's World of Gor is seemingly devoid of any updates after 2001.  Given this fact, I think it's misleading for Wikipedia to describe the site spanning "2001-2007".  This is an old site, untouched since 2001.
This is my rationale for updating these descriptions. — HipLibrarianship talk 07:20, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The first bullet point is semi-disingenuous after the information I left on your user talk page. As the Norman-anointed site for the distribution of Norman-issued communiqués, it is simply not a supposed "fan site, plain & simple"[sic], even though Norman is not responsible for content on the site other than his communiqués.  As for "World of Gor" it was the location of a highly active user forum, including occasional communiqués from Norman, until 2007.  I don't know why you seem to think it's a productive strategy to simply blatantly ignore whatever you find inconvenient... AnonMoos (talk) 08:32, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Describing external links 

message: This statement -
The planet Gor has lower gravity than Earth's (which allows for the existence of large flying creatures
My understanding of physics is maybe not as good as some people here, but I think lower gravity means lower air density and makes it harder to fly, so the creatures would need to have wide wing spans, but smaller bodies.
Can someone who understands this better speak to this subject?  Jokem (talk) 18:49, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure lower gravity automatically means lower air pressure; it's probably more complicated than that (Venus has a very dense atmosphere).  Lower gravity + higher air pressure would make flying easier... AnonMoos (talk) 20:08, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Venus has nearly the same gravity as Earth, but it's atmosphere is mostly CO2, which is a heavier gas than Nitrogen so that might explain the greater density.  I would say in order to have a fair comparison both planets would have to have the same type of atmosphere, or at least a breathable one.  Jokem (talk) 14:39, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Force due to gravity has nothing to do with air density. It is dependent on the mass of the planet, and the distance between the two objects. The simplified equation is F=GM/(r.r). In this case M is the mass of the planet, r is the distance between the centres of the two objects and G is the gravitational constant. Basically the more mass the planet has the stronger the gravity, so either Gor is the same size as Earth but less dense, or Gor has same mass but is less dense and therefore larger in size. If force due to gravity (i.e. weight) is less then you can keep a larger body in the air without expending more energy, so larger flying creatures are more feasible. 88.109.86.197 (talk) 18:38, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: If Gravity has nothing to do with Air Density, why does Jupiter have a much denser atmosphere than Earth?  Even though Jupiter has much grater amounts of Hydrogen, Methane and Ammonia, all with lighter compositions than Oxygen and Nitrogen?  Heavy Gravity planets have denser atmospheres because the greater gravity attracts the gas molecules more strongly, compressing them more.  Jokem (talk) 17:31, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The mass of Jupiter is many times greater than Earth therefore it has much higher gravity. A thicker atmosphere will produce a higher air density - the thicker it is the more it presses down on the air below and the higher the density becomes. 88.109.88.210 (talk) 18:09, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

text: If you have the same amount of gases surrounding each of two planets of the same diameter, then heavier planet = higher gravity = higher air pressure at ground level (though the lighter planet has the taller atmosphere).  However, this is really not the main determining factor in the real world, because the other circumstances can in fact be greatly unequal.  So Venus is slightly smaller than earth with slightly lower gravity, yet has vastly greater air pressure at ground level than earth does... AnonMoos (talk) 17:23, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: As stated, what you have said is true, but the reality is it does not happen this way.  The heavier planet will tend to retain more of the gas, so you will not have the same amount of gases surrounding the planet.  In the case of Venus, it has vast amounts of CO2 in its atmosphere, as well as other heavy gasses which makes the atmosphere more dense.  I presume this is due to the intense heat which ignites the Carbon/Sulfur, etc making for denser gasses, but that is just speculation on my part.
In the case of Gor, it has a breathable atmosphere, not at all like the atmosphere of Venus.  Jokem (talk) 06:00, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gravity 

message: I have come back to this after a few years.  It looks like the people here are contradicting each other.  I claim that higher gravity means greater air density.  I think that is consistent with the laws of physics.  The only exception I can think of is the case where the atmosphere itself is made up of lighter or heavier components.  Jokem (talk) 09:47, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: If you have the same amount of gases surrounding each of two planets of the same diameter, then heavier planet = higher gravity = higher air pressure at ground level (though the lighter planet has the taller atmosphere).  However, this is really not the main determining factor in the real world, because the other circumstances can in fact be greatly unequal.  So Venus is slightly smaller than earth with slightly lower gravity, yet has vastly greater air pressure at ground level than earth does... AnonMoos (talk) 17:23, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: As stated, what you have said is true, but the reality is it does not happen this way.  The heavier planet will tend to retain more of the gas, so you will not have the same amount of gases surrounding the planet.  In the case of Venus, it has vast amounts of CO2 in its atmosphere, as well as other heavy gasses which makes the atmosphere more dense.  I presume this is due to the intense heat which ignites the Carbon/Sulfur, etc making for denser gasses, but that is just speculation on my part.
In the case of Gor, it has a breathable atmosphere, not at all like the atmosphere of Venus.  Jokem (talk) 06:00, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: 2015

message: Should there be any mention of this? An IndieGogo campaign with a $5000 goal raised #5,505. I'm a bit unclear on its dates. It says it closed 1 October 2014 but when I check the earliest archive, from 15 October 2014 it says it closed 30 September 2014. I know it's just 1 day's difference but it seems odd. The archive says it started August 21 but the current version doesn't state when it started.
It is supposed to be done by James 'Grim' Desborough from Andover of Postmortem Studios with art by Michael Manning. It is apparently being developed in association with ORIM.
There is supposed to be 2 books:
*Chronicles of Gor: Gorean Roleplaying 
*World of Gor: The Gorean Scrolls
According to a May 2015 update it was supposed to be done by August 2015, the last word I can find is January 2016 where they are still previewing art so it wasn't done by then.
I can't figure out if this is an officially licensed product or not. Does anyone know if John Norman approved it or not? Ranze (talk) 20:07, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: It claims to be licensed. If it actually gets published then it would be notable and need to be mentioned, but until it actually sees the light of day it is just pie in the sky. 78.150.78.107 (talk) 18:41, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Something called the "World of Gor: Gorean Encyclopaedia" was definitely published... AnonMoos (talk) 10:19, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: RPG campaign

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Gor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://www.worldofgor.com/reference.aspx?rpID=9
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081227220134/http://www.worldofgor.com/reference.aspx?rpID=12 to http://www.worldofgor.com/reference.aspx?rpID=12
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121031111019/http://ereads.com/2007/10/are-john-normans-gors-boy-books-2.html to http://ereads.com/2007/10/are-john-normans-gors-boy-books-2.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:05, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The book list is said to have books with another protagonist than Tarl Cabot in italic, however, all books are listed in italic.
I don't know off the top of my head which books are with another protagonist, so I can't fix it, but it'd be great if someone with that knowledge did.
:The names of the narrators appear after the publisher, so I reworded the sentence. Deagol2 (talk) 16:54, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Book list format messed up 

message: Why does the thing in the upper right corner have a list of words?  Tarnsman, etc.  Isn't there supposed to be some sort of header, like "Concepts" or "Known For"?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.198.87.192 (talk) 02:20, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Those are the book titles, with the repetitive of Gor left off. The infobox doesn't display a label for that section. Schazjmd (talk) 13:54, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  list of words 

message: The January proposal to merge Kajira to here seems very reasonable; not a concept with notability outside of the world of Gor, and many of the critisms of the series focus on Kajira (so, best discussed here). Klbrain (talk) 09:16, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge proposal

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Sa'fora and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 September 15#Sa'fora until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  1234qwer1234qwer4 08:17, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Sa'fora" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]