Talk:Cyrannus (system)/Archive 1: Difference between revisions
JubalHarshaw (talk | contribs) m (typo) |
(Nomination for deletion) |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
:Yeah, its relevance and speculative nature is kinda borderline. While on screen, it's only been established that three or so colonies are in the same system - and I'd prefer for them to be spread over several systems - a RDM blog entry states, that internally they went with the "all in the same system" idea. --[[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 11:09, 15 April 2007 (CDT) | :Yeah, its relevance and speculative nature is kinda borderline. While on screen, it's only been established that three or so colonies are in the same system - and I'd prefer for them to be spread over several systems - a RDM blog entry states, that internally they went with the "all in the same system" idea. --[[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 11:09, 15 April 2007 (CDT) | ||
::I definitely feel the same as you both, OTW, Serenity. I was questioning keeping this at all when I did the original split of the "BSG solar system / Cyrannus / Cyranus" article. In the end, it's interesting, possibly relevant, researched and cited, and marked with the "plausible speculation" warning ... I could go either way on it. Also, no need to be sorry about asking ... that's an important part of how things get noticed and changed around here! [[User:JubalHarshaw|JubalHarshaw]] 11:18, 15 April 2007 (CDT) | ::I definitely feel the same as you both, OTW, Serenity. I was questioning keeping this at all when I did the original split of the "BSG solar system / Cyrannus / Cyranus" article. In the end, it's interesting, possibly relevant, researched and cited, and marked with the "plausible speculation" warning ... I could go either way on it. Also, no need to be sorry about asking ... that's an important part of how things get noticed and changed around here! [[User:JubalHarshaw|JubalHarshaw]] 11:18, 15 April 2007 (CDT) | ||
== Nomination for deletion == | |||
Considering the factors in the discussion above I believe that the content of this article does is neither necessary or useful for this wiki. It is an interesting discussion of planetary dynamics, and indeed quite accurate, but its revelance is questionable. In short, 12 planets will orbit one star if RDM says they can, regardless of physics. It is exceedingly unlikely that the writers will have considered the papers cited here, indeed the Canup and Ward work which forms a significant part of the first section post-dates the miniseries by two years. | |||
In short, there are 12 planets in this system because it works well for the plot, and it is not too significant a leap for the layman to accept with the general [[Naturalistic Science Fiction]] theme. This speculation may be accurate when one considers real-world science, but is unnecessary and incorrect with regard to the fictional universe we're trying to document. | |||
--[[User:OTW|OTW]] 14:04, 28 June 2007 (CDT) | |||
Revision as of 19:04, 28 June 2007
See relevant discussion on this article here. JubalHarshaw 14:47, 9 April 2007 (CDT)
Sorry to ask but...
...what does this article actually have to do with Battlestar Galactica? As far as I know, in TOS we are only told that the colonies are in the same galaxy, whilst in the Re-Imagined Series we are only told that a few of the colonies were in the same, as yet unnamed, system.
This is an interesting discussion of planetary dynamics, but it's relation with the series seems tentative at best and fanwanking at worst. Could this be moved to a better location (i.e. outside this wiki)? -- OTW 11:00, 15 April 2007 (CDT)
- Yeah, its relevance and speculative nature is kinda borderline. While on screen, it's only been established that three or so colonies are in the same system - and I'd prefer for them to be spread over several systems - a RDM blog entry states, that internally they went with the "all in the same system" idea. --Serenity 11:09, 15 April 2007 (CDT)
- I definitely feel the same as you both, OTW, Serenity. I was questioning keeping this at all when I did the original split of the "BSG solar system / Cyrannus / Cyranus" article. In the end, it's interesting, possibly relevant, researched and cited, and marked with the "plausible speculation" warning ... I could go either way on it. Also, no need to be sorry about asking ... that's an important part of how things get noticed and changed around here! JubalHarshaw 11:18, 15 April 2007 (CDT)
Nomination for deletion
Considering the factors in the discussion above I believe that the content of this article does is neither necessary or useful for this wiki. It is an interesting discussion of planetary dynamics, and indeed quite accurate, but its revelance is questionable. In short, 12 planets will orbit one star if RDM says they can, regardless of physics. It is exceedingly unlikely that the writers will have considered the papers cited here, indeed the Canup and Ward work which forms a significant part of the first section post-dates the miniseries by two years.
In short, there are 12 planets in this system because it works well for the plot, and it is not too significant a leap for the layman to accept with the general Naturalistic Science Fiction theme. This speculation may be accurate when one considers real-world science, but is unnecessary and incorrect with regard to the fictional universe we're trying to document.
--OTW 14:04, 28 June 2007 (CDT)