Welcome to Battlestar Wiki![edit]
Welcome to the Wiki, Rafale. Feel free to tell us about yourself on your user page. Before you get started on other edits, please read the Battlestar Wiki:Standards and Conventions, which details the policies we use in editing pages (this differs from many other wikis in consistent use of phrasing, abbreviations, format, and the like).
Also, if you have any questions or suggestions you wish to offer, please feel free to do so either on your user talk page, the Wikipedian Quorum or Administrators' noticeboard. Remember to sign your posts on any talk pages using four tildes (~~~~)! We look forward to your contributions to the community!--Mercifull 09:48, 31 May 2006 (CDT)
Edit Rollback[edit]
Hi, Rafale, and welcome to the wiki. I reverted an edit you made in Tactical Officer because it created a red link (uncreated article). It's probably not necessary to create a page on emergency jump coordinates since the show has only addressed that topic once. I did transpose the text, however, to read the same as the edit you initially added, but without the link. --Spencerian 13:51, 31 May 2006 (CDT)
- In reply to your question on EJC:
- Hm. The hardest part of this wiki is that, since it's fiction, we allow some speculation provided there's some history or aired content that supports it sufficiently. Given that, yes, for Galactica to have had EJC prepared suggests they would (when they were once part of a battlestar group) able to create this information for her support ships and other battlestars. That's not a lot to go on, and we'd be stretching it from there, but yes, it sounds like you have enough to work a small article on it. I recommend tying in what Colonial Fleet battlestars as battlestar groups would use EJC for, and how Galactica and Pegasus use it for its civilian fleet. "Scattered" should be your primary reference for this, as perhaps "33". I recommend the article name as Emergency Jump coordinates. --Spencerian 14:09, 31 May 2006 (CDT)
- Just did some cleanup on your new article, Rafale. Nice work. Initially one contributor marked it as a candidate for deletion. However, the contributor actually suggested in the edit comments to merge the content into FTL, so "merge" would have been more appropriate for his opinion. I thought about that before, but wanted to see what you had in mind. I think the content stands well on its own (no need to merge in my opinion), and it sources things well, too. It also links to two rarely used articles, which I liked. Nice work for your first article. To compare, visit my first article (so long ago now): Case Orange. Thanks again for the new article! --Spencerian 16:54, 31 May 2006 (CDT)