Battlestar Wiki:Galactipedians Quorum

This page is one of Battlestar Wiki's many projects. This page serves to coordinate discussion on a particular aspect of this Wiki. The formal recommendations of a project may be treated as policies.

Welcome, newcomers and baffled oldtimers! If you have a question about Battlestar Wiki and how it works, please place it at the bottom of the list, and someone will attempt to answer it for you. (If you have a question about life, the universe and everything, go to the reference desk instead.)

Before asking a question, check if it's answered by the Battlestar Wiki:FAQ or other pages linked from Battlestar Wiki:Help.

Before answering a newcomer's question abruptly, consider rereading Please do not bite the newcomers.

Questions and answers will not remain on this page indefinitely (otherwise it would very soon become too long to be editable). After a period of time with no further activity, information will be moved to other relevant sections of Battlestar Wiki (such as the FAQ pages) or placed in one of the village pump archives if it is of general interest, or deleted. Please consider dating and titling your discussions so as to facilitate this.

Ask a new question or begin a new discussion by clicking here

Need help with a new article namespace

I want to create an entry on the atmosphere testing stick Starbuck used when stranded on the small moon in "You Can't Go Home Again", but do not know what the official name of the device is in order to name and initiate the page , and thoughts? — Lestatdelc 21:40, 3 December 2005 (EST)

"Field oxygen meter"? --Peter Farago 21:55, 3 December 2005 (EST)

We use many descriptive terms here to give a name to something not yet officially named in the show. "Humano-Cylon", Unknown Cylon Ship, and "Presidential security service" are good examples. Feel free to create a descriptive term, and note it as such in a note in the article. It can always be moved later to its official name once we find it. --Spencerian 00:06, 4 December 2005 (EST)

Why is a raven like a writing desk?--Ricimer 23:16, 30 January 2006 (EST)

You should probably use something like F.A.T (Field Atmosphere Test[er]). The military loves

to abbreviate and soldiers love to make these terms into vulgar slang whenever they can.--IcePlanetZero 00:15, 18 February 2006 (EST)

Colonel Tigh / Colonel Tye historical connection in TOS?

Hi, I'm sorry if this has been mentioned before, but I searched the wiki for mentions tying (heh) together the TOS Col. Tigh and the historical Col. Tye, who was a feared military commander on the side of the British during the American Revolution, and a freed African-American slave.

More info on him here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonel_Tye

Has anyone ever asked Terry Carter if this historical figure had any impact on his portrayal on TOS? I can't believe the name's a coincidence. --Boradis

I'm sorry, but I think that's pure coincidence.--Ricimer 00:31, 2 February 2006 (EST)

Cast Data infobox?

With all the work Peter and the others are doing in regards to the cast and behind the scenes crew, I am wondering whether or not it is time to create a cast data template (similar to {{Character Data}}). It would probably look a lot better than blurbs on top of the main pages (such as those presently on the Edward James Olmos page). Thoughts? Critisims? Questions? -- Joe Beaudoin 22:10, 11 February 2006 (EST)

Wikipedia uses Template:Infobox Biography, which includes full name and dates and places of birth and death. I'm not entirely sure such a thing is useful, and there was enough controversy to generate a fairly active debate on Templates for Deletion (which it survived).

Joe, what sort of information would you want to include in addition to that? Links to IMDB, episode categories and offsite biographies such as on EJO's page? --Peter Farago 23:16, 11 February 2006 (EST)

Actually, it apparently survived a TfD twice. Here's the other one. Let me make it clear that my feelings on this are extremely mixed - I think the possibility exists that it could be done right, but I'd rather figure out what "right" is before we implement it than after. --Peter Farago 23:25, 11 February 2006 (EST)

I don't think the "infobox biography" template that Wikipedia uses is all that terribly useful either. Typically, the fields I would like to see included are: name, birth date and location, date of death, character actor portrays; the infobox would include links to IMDB and NNDB, as well as the actor's official site. -- Joe Beaudoin 10:18, 12 February 2006 (EST)

Would we want to include things like marital status or anything like that, or is that too tangental? --Day 20:23, 12 February 2006 (EST)

I would find that a bit voyeuristic. --Peter Farago 20:59, 12 February 2006 (EST)

I would avoid going into that much detail. Just the fields I listed above should be satisfactory. -- Joe Beaudoin 21:53, 12 February 2006 (EST)

The Kitt Joke

dunno if anybody made this joke before... once upon a time, humans and cylons were friends and were working together: click me (may be deleted, xbruce ;-) EDIT: sorry, didn't know where to put this...)

Yeah, but we all know what happened to the first version of this nice device. --Astfgl 04:52, 14 February 2006 (EST)

When Earth is found...

I know this may be a little too early, but it is inevitable. When Galactica finds Earth what time frame will it be set in (according to earth as we know it). Will they arrive in our past and find dinosaurs, thereby fulfilling a prophecy of the 13th tribe as well as our becoming our ancestors. Will they arrive in our present and fly a raptor the U.N. and ask for some nukes? Or will they arrive in our future, as they did in the original series and ask for Earths military assistance?

What would you prefer, or predict? Personally I think a Raptor should come back from a recon mission with the Voyager space probe, just when the fleet gives up hope on finding earth.

This is all speculation, but its coming and who knows, if Ron Moore is reading this maybe he'll use one of our ideas.--IcePlanetZero 00:17, 18 February 2006 (EST)

Ron D. Moore has repeatedly stated that they have intentionally never adressed this point or decided it, and are purposefully not going to; the story could take place at any time in the past, present, or future relative to Earth; see Miniseries DVD commentary.--The Merovingian 03:35, 18 February 2006 (EST)

I don't want to be a party pooper, but I don't see anything remotely inevitible about the idea that Galactica and the Fleet will eventually find Earth, even if they appear to have coordinates. If it were inevitible, I'm not sure there'd be any point in telling the story. This series is not necessarily about happy endings, after all.

That said, one speculation that leapt into my own brain a couple of weeks ago was this: suppose the Fleet finds an Earth of the not-too-distant future -- say, 50 years out. A future where humans casually jack in to networks, replace random limbs and organs with cybernetics, etc -- in short, a cyberpunk Earth a la Gibson, Sterling or Stephenson. It's not unimaginable that the Fleet would be a little fundamentalist on the point of human vs. machine at this stage, while such an Earth would be totally casual about humans using and integrating with machines. If the Fleet reacted too strongly to the cyborg culture they found, the Fleet could find Earth, only to see Earth side with the Cylons!--Uncle Mikey 11:31, 4 March 2006 (CST)

IMHO, I've got a feeling that the Galactica and the Fleet will arrive at Earth in the far-flung future becuase from the looks of the re-imagined series of Battlestar Galactica, it appears that the story is set in the far-flung future (the evidence that the humans of Kobol and the Twelve Colonies did originate from Earth is pretty strong which places the possibility that Kobol was settled by humans from Earth in the far future).

I've got a feeling that the Colonals will be in for a real shock when they get to Earth and they find that Earth is NOT the 13th colony of Kobol and they find out that they and the humans of planet Earth were a product of 2 million years of evolution that occured on Earth as well as finging out that they originated from Earth. Also, I've got a feeling that they will be extremely shocked with the humans of Earth being highly multi-cultural, multi-religious (e.g. Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Daoism, Sikhism etc), and multi-lingual (e.g. English, Russian, French, Mandarin Chinese, Japanese, Korean, German, Arabic, Persian, Italian, Greek etc) which is in stark contrast to the mono-cultural, mono-religious, and mono-lingual nature of the Twelve Colonies because they would be expecting the people of Earth to be worshipping the Lords of Kobol and have similar values and principles to what they would have.

Another thing that the Colonals would be very shocked with would be the humans of Earth embracing high-technology and science to a very high degree - something the Colonials are really petrified about because they created the Cylons and they got burned in a very big way for that. -- Roughneck Jase.

A proposal

I know this may come as a little unorthodox, but I would like to propose that a rule to our Standards and Conventions page, that at no time may any Battlestar Wiki User travel to planet Talos IV, under penalty of death. --The Merovingian 19:12, 18 February 2006 (EST)

Captain Christopher Pike is, of course, exempt from this. -- Joe Beaudoin 12:10, 4 March 2006 (CST)

Server time is wrong

Server time says 58 minutes after, time.org and time.windows.com (sync) says 21 minutes after. there are no time zones that are 23 minutes off GMT, are there? --Bp 01:59, 7 March 2006 (CST)

Let me do a time update/sync for the server. That should fix any discrepancies. -- Joe Beaudoin 09:32, 7 March 2006 (CST)

Wikipedia user box

Just letting everyone know that Battlestar Wiki has its own userbox on the English Wikipedia. Simply enter in {{User Battlestar Wiki}} on your Wikipedia user page and off you go. :-) -- Joe Beaudoin 15:34, 7 March 2006 (CST)

Uhm... Wha? I dropped it in to see what it was and... It no worikie. What's it supposed to do? I tried to find it to see if I was breaking it, but it seems not to exist? --Day 23:50, 7 March 2006 (CST)

Eh, it's on Wikipedia, not on Battlestar Wiki. -- Joe Beaudoin 17:15, 8 March 2006 (CST)

Oh. Ahha. I see... If you're a Wikipedia editor AND a BSG Wiki editor, you can note your editorship here on your user page there. Got it. --Day 03:58, 9 March 2006 (CST)

Battlestar Galactica Model Kits

Hello all,

I am writing this because I am a bit peeved about the prices of "Battlestar" models. I have 3 Battlestars from Revell/Monogram and after all was said and done it came to me that these are way over priced( aftermarket wise ). You can get the Cylon Basestar for $5 on ebay but when you type in "Battlestar" you can expect to pay at least $50.00+ and I have seen them way higher! I know the kit is now out of production but come on now!

I wrote Revel/Monogram a few months back asking if they will ever be re-issuing the line again and what I got back from them was simply that they did'nt believe the Name was popular enough to re-issue the kits (I'm gussing they don't ever look on the internet to see the litteraly hundreds of popular Battlestar Galactica devoted websites or read Time Magazine which stated that Battlestar Galactica was THE show to watch!)

I guess I am venting somewhat but really, those of us who missed out on the 78-79 Issuing of these models and then again in 97 (Which no model shops anywhere near me ever got) what are we to do? Getting a battlestar model is like going to a scalper outside of a popular concert and having to pay 8 times what the ticket is worth!

Looking at the new and very small Battlestar kits from the new Battlestar Galactica show make me nervous as well. An 8 inch model can cost $75 to $100 canadian, makes me wonder how much it would be if they made it to scale with the old Revel/Monogram ( 18inch ) kits!

Does anyone out there feel the same way, or is it just me that these are over priced!?

Also ,does anyone know if they will be doing a larger Battlestar Models, close to the size of the original models?

error on Battlestar Wiki:Help

This header has the h4 font, but is NOT in the Table of Contents

shows up in the Table of Contents... I do not know why. I have checked multiple browsers and It shows up in all of them.

Talk pages for actors?

If you click on William Adama you get a page describing the character and naming the actor playing the character. Associated with that page is a "talk page" containing discussions and inquiries about the character. All very logical.

Now if you click on Edward James Olmos, the actor in this case, you are taken to a page containing his biography (and it's a good read, too). But there doesn't seem to be a "discussion" page for the actor. Is there a reason for this? Maybe nobody wants to talk about Edward James Olmos (or Mary McDonnell or ...) outside of the context of BSG. Or is there some policy to the effect that one simply doesn't do that in the BSG Wiki? --JohnH 15:38, 11 March 2006 (CST)

Sir, the only reason there is "no talk page" is because nothing has been posted in it yet; it's "there", it's just that there's been no discussion yet. Discussion for actor pages would be used if someone says something controversial and not yet verified, which we would wait to find a source for. For example, if someone wrote on EJO's page "EJO thinks abortion is morally wrong", with no sources, the comment would be moved to discussion (in italics and quotes), and we would request a source (from a newspapaer, interview, etc.) Before either adding it back onto the page, or deciding never to put it back (be advised; I have no idea what EJO's views on abortion are, I just picked an issue at random). --The Merovingian 15:54, 11 March 2006 (CST)

Fatal error

When I Click this link: Gaius Baltar, I get...

• Fatal error: Call to undefined function: wfregexreplacement() in /home/admin/domains/battlestarwiki.org/public_html/en/includes/MagicWord.php on line 297

Same thing for Tricia Helfer.

When I click your links I only get it for Tricia. Let me try : Tricia Helfer --Sauron18 21 March 2006

I'm getting the same thing for James Callis. --Steelviper 15:33, 21 March 2006 (CST)

New scary error on "Recent Changes":

"Fatal error: Call to undefined function: wfclone() in /home/admin/domains/battlestarwiki.org/public_html/en/includes/Linker.php on line 899"

Problem fixed. Let me know if there any additional issues. -- Joe Beaudoin 15:57, 21 March 2006 (CST)

The spam filter

The spam filter is lame. It refuses to save an <hr> with style="". Of course, it doesn't tell you that your work will be rejected while you preview it. Very frustrating. So what's the problem with <hr style="width:..."> anyway? --Bp 02:01, 22 March 2006 (CST)

I've removed the spam filter. It was causing too many issues anyway. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 09:37, 7 April 2006 (CDT)

Peabody award

On April 5th, 2006, BSG won a Peabody award.

From the peabody press release [1]:

[BSG] A belated, brilliantly re-imagined revival of a so-so 1970s outer-space saga, the series about imperiled survivors of a besieged planet has revitalized sci-fi television with its parallax considerations of politics, religion, sex, even what it means to be "human."

FYI. --Bp 22:39, 6 April 2006 (CDT)

BSG in the Comics

Battlestar Galactica has made it into the comics! In the syndicated comic strip "Baldo" by Cantu and Castellano, Baldo and his friend are watching BSG. It focuses on Adama giving commands with a Latino flare. The comics can be viewed at the Baldo Website. Click on the dates for April 5, 6, 7, 2006.--Monkeyboy

Yes, thanks. It was also in this great Dilbert a few weeks back. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 12:58, 7 April 2006 (CDT)

Season 2.0 and 2.5 DVD

Can anyone confirm whether they plan to release Season 2.0 and Season 2.1 as a complete DVD set of Season 2?

We don't know, although we think they will make a separate set of DVDs for the second set of 10, so everyone that bought the first set will buy the second set. It would cost less, thus more people would buy it. It's not called "2.1"; going by that terminology there would be 9 other halfs to season two. It's "season 2.5". --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 01:00, 10 April 2006 (CDT)

I would guess the studios would do like they did with Lost, release both a 2.5 disc set and a complete set. However in the UK, as we have not had any dvds released yet at all for season 2, i'd hazard a guess that we'll only get a complete series. --Mercifull 03:01, 10 April 2006 (CDT)

Spoiler policy

Moved from Administrators' noticeboard by User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.

I would like BattlestarWiki's Standards and Conventions page to address the following re: Spoilers. You see, I think that a cast member mentioning something happening in an upcoming episode is a spoiler which we can post on BattlestarWiki. However, as you may recall Ron Moore warning in his blog, in the days leading up to the season 2 finale one guy got his hands on an advanced DVD of the show and posted a lot of screencaps giving away most of the major plot points. RDM was not pleased, nor was I. We should not include such news into our updates of BSwiki. Actually, what I wanted to bring up was something else more important: From time to time, people post what they CLAIM are "advanced script fragments" from upcoming episodes. More often than not, they're actually either fake, or (rarely) from such an early version of the script that it has little to do with the finalized story. The idea which lends a shade of credibility to this (instead of just instantly thinking "someone made this up") is that logically, they send out early fragments of the script for potential guest stars to audition with. Still almost all of these things I've ever seen are faked, while the others were from such early draft versions that they did not resemble the story at all. You could count on one hand the times these things are actually what appeared in the show. ---->Also, they're not exactly sourced. As a result of this lack of sourcing, many are faked. I mean, there is that handful which might actually have been "demo scripts" for guest actors, but as I said, these are rarely relevant to the actual plot. As a combination of their generally fake nature and lack of sourcing, I propose that we add to our Standards and Conventions a rule clarifying our spoiler sourcing policy, that such "advanced script fragments" found on messageboards and such should not be used as a source of information to be put onto BattlestarWiki in any form whatsoever. The only acceptible "spoilers" we use are cast and crew interview information, etc. '--The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 15:25, 10 April 2006 (CDT)

For the sake of clarity, I would be fine with this being noted in S&C. However, I believe "script fragments" and message board postings don't qualify as sources and would be eradicated due to the Battlestar Wiki:Citation Jihad. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 15:36, 10 April 2006 (CDT)

Indeed. It's just that several people have been circulating these things and new users (infuriatingly) take them as fact over there. I mean that D3u5 user probably saw it and assumed it was fact and tried to write it up here. That's why I brought it up. But I actually think our current spoiler policies cover this very well, I just felt it should be re-iterated. Thanks. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 16:50, 10 April 2006 (CDT)

I think that's not unreasonable. Maybe a shortened, kind of condensed blurb on S&C with a link to the full text of the Spoiler policy. Unless you would rather someone else do it, Merv, I'd like to see how you would realize this (i.e. go ahead and do it, unless you don't have the time or whatever). --Day ^{(Talk - Admin)} 19:36, 10 April 2006 (CDT)

Our current policy is that rumors and spoilers need to be sourced, and should be hidden by spoiltext when not on episode pages. I don't think we need to ban references to non-production sources - that would rule out the accurate and helpful Patriot Resource, among other things. Do I misunderstand your intention? --Peter Farago 19:45, 10 April 2006 (CDT)

The policy I would like to see, personally is something like this: "Encyclopedic pages should contain only officially released (press release, TV listing) or definitifely sourced (producer's blog or podcast, detailed interview) information. After the episode airs, the episode itself is of course definitive. No detailed synopsis, no matter how credible the source, should be posted on an encyclopedic page before an episode has aired in one of its major markets."

I deliberately chose not to batten that down to "...aired in the US..." on the chance that some scheduling oddity might lead to, say, the UK seeing an episode before SciFi ran it. That sort of thing happened all the time with B5, but I don't actually know if it can happen with BSG.--Uncle Mikey 14:15, 11 April 2006 (CDT)

The UK has Season 1 before it was shown in America but season 2 is about 3 months behind the us airdates :( --Mercifull 14:49, 11 April 2006 (CDT)

Gateworld.net recently posted up the "spoiler" which I have been referring to. It's not from any legitimate source; they saw the exact same messageboart post I did, and THEY decided to accept it as fact. It sounds kind of weird. Anyway, I have asked Ron and Mrs. Ron on the official messageboard if there is ANY SHRED OF TRUTH in this report, or if it is someone's fanfic. I probably won't get a reply. Still, give me two days for an answer. I don't like the way things are headed. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 01:11, 12 April 2006 (CDT)

So the leasson learned, assume anything unless it can be disproven. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 01:20, 12 April 2006 (CDT)

No....no...Shane, the entire concept of BattlestarWiki's Standards and Conventions is that we assume NOTHING until it CAN be proven. The entire point of the post I just made was "those idiots at Gateworld.net saw the same messageboard post I did, which I think might be fake, and they posted it up on their website without regard to the consequences; dear God, now other websites will assume it is fact, simply because Gateworld was dumb enough to post it themselves". --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 01:24, 12 April 2006 (CDT)

We should not be posting here, as this is a place for alerts, but everything Gateworld get their hand on or reports seems to be true. Maybe they have the correct information. I already read the plot for Episode 1, Season 3. If you say GateWorld posts bad information, Gateworld would not be the place where you look up information. Simple math. We can discuss this further if you want on Season 3 talk page, but this alerts all the administrators. This is a trivial matter that could have been discussed on S&C also. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 01:30, 12 April 2006 (CDT)

Shane, bother to read the posts I make. Gateworld *IS* an almost always good source of information....that's why it would be so damaging if they posted something wrong. Because then everyone would assume it to be correct, coming from a reputable source like Gateworld. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 01:55, 12 April 2006 (CDT)

I'm afraid I just don't see the urgency. Rumors are rumors. The best thing to do is cite agressively and not hold our breath. --Peter Farago 01:57, 12 April 2006 (CDT)

I agree. This is why I am moving this to the Battlestar Wiki:Wikipedian Quorum, the more apt place for this sort of thing. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 10:03, 12 April 2006 (CDT)

Screencaps

Just to notify people that I have all of Season 1 in HR-HDTV format (960x528 res), as well as Season 2 episodes 6 to 12 inclusive (960x540). If anyone wants me to take a screencap of any point in any particular episode, drop me a line at: kai (underscore) robinson (at) hotmail (dot) com

Cheers :) --Fordsierra4x4 15:13, 15 April 2006 (CDT)

Thank you for that most gracious offer. I am curious, though - what HDTV format has those dimensons? As I understand it, HDTV should be in either 720x1280 or in 1080x1920. 960x540 appears to be a quarter the resolution of a 1080i image, and the 960x528 dimensions (20:11 aspect ratio?) are even more confusing. --Peter Farago 16:00, 15 April 2006 (CDT)

As far as i'm aware the 960x528's are actually slightly cropped from 960x540 to produce the actual picture as the HDTV version still has black bands on it (only just). This is due to them being capped in Australia from 'Network 10'. The 960x540's are indeed 50% reduction in vertical and horizontal res from the 1920x1080i, but thanks to the way that 'UniversalHD' have broadcast them, there are no black bands to crop off. I still have to wait to see if anyone manages to pull off capping BSG from SkyOne HD when it starts broadcasting later this year, although judging from the amount of proprietary DRM crap they'll use, its unlikely. Still, the offers open to all that want the caps that i've got. --Fordsierra4x4 20:52, 16 April 2006 (CDT)

I didn't mean to imply that they'd be unwelcome - obviously, even 960x540 will be considerably better than anything we have here currently. Feel free to browse the newly created Category:Screen captures requiring upgrade and upgrade any images which strike your fancy.--Peter Farago 21:38, 16 April 2006 (CDT)

Wasnt taking it that way :P I noticed several categories for screenies for each ep, however, is there no place I can just upload a bunch of them to? If not on the wiki, then i'll create a separate directory on my webspace and post the URL for other more seasoned wiki veterans to upload... --Fordsierra4x4 00:37, 17 April 2006 (CDT)

Uploading images is pretty straightforward, all you need to do is pick a filename. They land in the appropriate categories automatically after you tag them. --Peter Farago 00:39, 17 April 2006 (CDT)

Can't find a picture

I'm looking for a picture of the Pegasus' rail guns in Resurrection Ship Part II. Any picture showing the Pegasus firing would work.

How about the ones on Pegasus (RDM)#Equipment? --Peter Farago 00:47, 17 April 2006 (CDT)

Sitenotice on Koenigrules vote

Anybody mind if I update Mediawiki:Sitenotice to draw attention to the vote underway at Battlestar Wiki talk:Citation Jihad#Koenigrules/Hollywood North Report? (Moreover, can we do this for any vote of public interest in the future, such as RFAs?) --Peter Farago 22:04, 20 April 2006 (CDT)

I'm fine with this. These things do affect the wiki on a wide scale, after all.-- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 22:27, 20 April 2006 (CDT)

Done. I used a separate box since the Portal notice will probably continue to be relevant after this vote closes. --Peter Farago 22:35, 20 April 2006 (CDT)

Great! -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 22:43, 20 April 2006 (CDT)

Battlestarwiki Deutsch

First of all, I'd like to thank all Battlestarwikipedians involved for creating the German Edition. But the pages can be edited by anyone, not just registered users. -- Astfgl 07:26, 22 April 2006 (CDT)

I'll fix that... :::rolls up sleeves::: -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 14:33, 22 April 2006 (CDT)

Fixed. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 14:44, 22 April 2006 (CDT)

Main Page Redesign

Hey all. Just for a heads up, I have been working on a Main Page redesign and will want your input before it does go live. The talk page (after you click the link above) brings you to the discussion. Also in the design are portals. The "look" is now working! So be sure to check out Battlestar Wiki:Portals to see some examples. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 15:00, 22 April 2006 (CDT)

I think you should change the names like "President's Docket" to stuff that's more functional or intuitive; we get a lot of newbies in using us purely as an encyclopedia and I think it should be as new-user friendly as possible. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 15:13, 22 April 2006 (CDT)

The top part needs some work; the large big box on top region; links to the quorum, other shows etc seem squeezed in; the quote of the day box needs some fixing for aesthetics. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 15:15, 22 April 2006 (CDT)

Proposed Policies

Category:Battlestar_Wiki_proposed_policies - I think we need to start going through this list and looking at these pages so they can be impemented or not with Community Consenus. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 11:37, 25 April 2006 (CDT)

Community Portal

If everyone can give input on what we should include on the Community Portal, we could get it up and fully running quicker! Thanks! --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 11:38, 25 April 2006 (CDT)

To get the ball rolling... Basically, the community portal should have links to the Quourm and the noticeboard in place. Also, while we're not a search engine service, we should list links to news sites, forums, and hot community spots. Additionally, the Community Portal should link to the Portals throughout the site as well. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 22:41, 1 May 2006 (CDT)

An apology regarding spokesmanship

As many of you have read, I recently offered an apology to Jim Iaccino (a.k.a. Koenigrules) on the behalf of the Battlestar Wiki community, for the comments of one of our members. This was shortly after I pointed out that it was inappropriate for any of us to speak as the sole voice of the wiki, and therefore makes my action extremely hypocritical.

I am fully aware that my status as an Administrator does not confer on me authority to act as a spokesperson for the wiki, and I apologize to any users here who may feel that I misrepresented them. In my defense, I will say that I felt it was a necessary step to restore civil discourse to a situation which was quickly escalating out of hand.

If Joe or the other admin staff feel that my action was inappropriate, I will abide by any disciplinary ruling they decide to issue. --Peter Farago 21:22, 26 April 2006 (CDT)

Ah, I don't see it as more than a single faux pas. The end (apologing in proxy for others who personally insult someone to the point of slander on a internet site) justified the means (albeit unkosher). Given the harsh tone done by the contributors on the subject, I'd say it was the right thing to do. I don't feel you need to be busted down to take Mop Boy's job or anything (yet. ;) --Spencerian 14:20, 1 May 2006 (CDT)

I do not want to drag this up again as it was resolved, and I agree that it inappropriate for anyone to act as sole spokesperson. However, my accusation against KR was at the time a believe based on facts available to me at the time, and I believed in them. **However, when I got pointed towards more information which dispelled the belief I had developed because of the earlier one, and it was clearly established that KR was a reliable source, things changed: rather than flying into a rage or adamantly declaring that I was right and would "stay the course" despite all the info, I changed my position, admitted my positiion was wrong (as there were things I didn't know) and appologized, and retracted the whole thing. This was resolved, and to be honest, more amicably than I had hoped. More to the point, before KR responded everyone here voted that they agreed with my (previous) position. I think this was all just a bad incident we need to learn from, developing our spoilers tags more and so forth, and I think we're making good progress discussing that. The kinks a Wiki site going through as it grows and becomes a mature full fledged site. At no time did I feel that Peter is or has been out of line; he needs give no appology :) officer and a gentleman all the way. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 14:38, 1 May 2006 (CDT)

Peter, I have no problem with what you did. If I had problems with what you did, you would have known well before now. The problem was solved and everyone came to an agreement. Kudos! -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 22:21, 1 May 2006 (CDT)

Nevertheless, it needed to be said for the benefit of the community in general. I'm glad this whole situation is close to resolution. --Peter Farago 22:41, 1 May 2006 (CDT)

I'm happy it's done too: now we can get back to serious work; painstakingly transcribing Ron Moore's drunken podcast ramblings after 100's of hours of manpower. :) --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 23:32, 1 May 2006 (CDT)

User Feedback

We, the editors of Battlestar Wiki, quickly become versed in the ways of Wiki-code. However, a great many of the users of this site lack such knowledge, and don't really want/need to learn it in order to use the site. The only problem with this (other than losing out on potential contributors), is that we don't really get feedback from them. Mazzy recently left some feedback on the main page redesign, and I thanked her for the feedback off-wiki, where she pointed out this problem. Does anybody have any ideas on ways that we could solicit feedback from users without having to use the "edit" button and wikicode? Maybe some sort of a simple javascript form or such that allows (even non-logged in users?) to post thoughts/suggestions? It'd be ripe for vandalism, but I'd like to hear from "the people". --Steelviper 14:02, 1 May 2006 (CDT)

One option: Starbuck, the head honcho over at the Galactica BS forum has offered that forum as a possible place for getting feedback about the wiki. I told her I would convey the offer here. (I wasn't acting as a spokesman, but just was brainstorming with Mazzy and Starbuck offered.) --Steelviper 14:13, 1 May 2006 (CDT)

Excellent. PaperBagPrincess (a.k.a. Starbuck) rocks. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 14:39, 1 May 2006 (CDT)

Not a bad idea, and it prevents spamming email boxes or wikis. I'd be interested in Joe's take. Are our portals useable as chat boards? --Spencerian 14:22, 1 May 2006 (CDT)

Unfortunately (or fortunately?) the portals are bound by the same restrictions as any other article. It's just a pattern for laying out the content. I was thinking maybe a javascript form with a simple text box, but when Starbuck offered I thought it was an interesting idea. The wiki's weakest area is in simple communication, and partnering with a message board (run by us or otherwise) might allow us to help overcome that deficit. --Steelviper 14:29, 1 May 2006 (CDT)

I own a vBullitien lience with no "forum" to hold it on. Though I think that it is great to "chat", alot of the Wiki stuff must happen on the Wiki because it's easy to link to different areas. However, we should not use a sperate outside "community" forum. I would be willing to donate my licence for use on Joe's server. (http://forum.battlestarwiki.org/) which could be intergrated with the Wiki "user" database so that you would not have to create a sperate user database. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 17:02, 1 May 2006 (CDT)

Well I figure I should throw this in, Shane has a valid point about not being a public forum. Starbuck assured me it could be done privately and if you needed external mods from our site we could help (there are those who have little wiki contact) but you could also do the admin stuff yourself. I dunno exactly what you are looking for but I think a place where non article discussions and feedback could be handled in a more user friendly and easily moderated place would have a positive impact. Guests can log in and comment as well. I personally am just learning the administrative functions but the board that Shane mentioned and the Invision power board formats would be adaptable to your needs. -- Mazzy 17:18, 1 May 2006 (CDT)

While I do appreciate PaperBagPrincess/Starbuck's offer of hosting a board, I would like to keep everything centralized to avoid confusion and duplication of efforts -- were we to go through with a bulletin board idea. The sole concern I have at this time is the fact that I believe that wiki communication should stay on the Wiki as much as possible. It's nice to solicit feedback from users, but I would like to keep it contained in one place, so that all can benefit from the conversations. (OTOH, I believe that the Wiki is for all the fandom, and they deserve the right to be heard as well.) Thus, while I'm obviously a bit leery of using bulletin boards, I would be willing to have Shane set up such a board. I figure that, even if it doesn't work out, we can always pull the plug later. Thoughts? -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 22:17, 1 May 2006 (CDT)

Well I think that's the concept of having talk pages and such but I think PBP's help would be good; I don't really think we should make a dedicated BSWiki forum. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 23:30, 1 May 2006 (CDT)

You're exactly right that talk pages should be the place for feedback. However leaving feedback requires:

1. Creating an account (which isn't all that hard if your name is 114167580 or whatever).
2. Editing the talk page.

I'm just afraid that the time/effort behind accomplishing both of those goes beyond what some users (who might have some good, valid feedback ideas) are willing to put forth in order to leave a comment. The path of least resistance, in this case, is "lurking". I didn't mean to start a revolution. (Well... Ok. Maybe a little bit.) Maybe we're just talking something as simple as a javascript form that guests could post through comments to a specific talk page under some sort of a "guest" account. --Steelviper 07:51, 2 May 2006 (CDT)

In lieu of a message board, I remembered something I came across earlier when I was looking to see what extensions we could use on BSG Wiki. It's an extension for input boxes and it was initially designed to add data to WikiNews. I don't know how well it will work, but if Shane can test it out on the Hangar Bay, then we can determine whether or not this is a method to solicit feedback anonymously from our lurkers. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 11:20, 2 May 2006 (CDT)

I just looked at the ext. so I will test it out. I think the only problem with the item is that it is an input box and it does not have the ability to "connect" with a block of comment like we do with :. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 12:00, 2 May 2006 (CDT)

"Battlestar Wiki Friends" section

Moved from User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 22:46, 7 May 2006 (CDT)

I'm not sure if you'll go for this, but I thought I'd ask anyway. Our 'site' isn't so much a site as it is a chat room. What would you think about a link in the friend box? We already link back to the BSG Wiki in the chat's topic line, and I'd be happy to add your thumb thingy (although it doesn't seem to exist yet) to the page that leads to the chat. ~ Aero 22:30, 7 May 2006 (CDT)

If you had stayed just a minute longer, I'd have noticed you ;) ~ Aero 22:43, 7 May 2006 (CDT)

I just popped in to look around; not much for chatrooms myself. :-) -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 22:46, 7 May 2006 (CDT)

This is something I prefer to leave up to the community. As for the thumb image, that's more User:Shane's (and Mercifull's department, so I'll leave it in their hands. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 22:46, 7 May 2006 (CDT)

What is a policy?

I have submited my ideas on the Battlestar Wiki:Policy page. I would like comments and change suggestions. Or if you like it as it is, that would be great because we should get this policy page up asap. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 21:06, 15 May 2006 (CDT)

Binomial nomenclature for ships

Quite a few ships of The Fleet appear to be named with two-part designations from some non-english language:

• Baah Pakal
• Daru Mozu
• Embla Brokk
• Fanu Sadin
• Kimba Huta
• Mutem Wia

There's been a lot of interest in the source of these names, and consequently a lot of half-baked etymological speculation. Would it make sense to have one centralized page listing these names and (sensible, well-cited) conjectures about their origin? --Peter Farago 10:18, 16 May 2006 (CDT)

I'd be interested to see that, whether it be a "ship name etymology" article, or just a subsection or subpage of "The Fleet". If it were limited to just the actual ship pages I doubt they would be likely to be seen. --Steelviper 10:27, 16 May 2006 (CDT)

In general, I'd think a note on the ship's page about the source of a name (Diomedes, for example) should be adequate. The reason I think these might deserve a page of their own is that on the surface at least, they all appear to be named based on a similar and non-obvious convention. --Peter Farago 10:40, 16 May 2006 (CDT)

Requested Articles

I've noticed Shane has been creating a number of new articles recently using the {{requested}} template. I personally think that unless we're going to had at least a brief description - that is, a {{stub}}, it's better to leave such articles empty, so that the red links alert other browsers to the need for such articles. A casual browser seeing a yellow link to one of these new pages would probably never follow that link to see that it's essentially empty, nor realize that their contribution could be valuable. --Peter Farago 00:22, 17 May 2006 (CDT)

I concur. Redlinks are a valuable tool for drawing people's attention to non-existant articles. --Day ^{(Talk - Admin)} 23:18, 6 June 2006 (CDT)

"Relationships" Article

A comment over on the FA debate got me thinking about the type of articles we have. A lot of articles/content I contribute to tend towards the technical/scientific/etc. However, being a character-driven drama, there's a lot of "emotional stuff" that could actually be encyclopedically documented. For example, a "Relationships" article, documenting different pairs (or potential pairs) and cited episode content to document the relationship/attraction. Potentially, some of these winks, nudges, nods, might turn into something (if RDM is trying to prepare the audience) so it might be used in forecasting, but at the very least it could be used to document incidents that led up to established relationships (for those that didn't keep up or follow that particular thread). Cally-Tyrol might be an example of something that might have surprised someone who hadn't been watching closely for that. This seems like a great way that "Shippers" could contribute to the wiki. --Steelviper 09:25, 6 June 2006 (CDT)

Well, SV I really think that would veer away into messageboard territory. I mean, besides we've already got a section of Ethinicity in the Colonies dealing with relationships plus indicating who's expressed interaction with people. I think it would be difficult to document, and I'm sorry but it just seems like we shouldn't do that; I mean Memory Alpha doesn't. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 09:28, 6 June 2006 (CDT)