Talk:Cylon Centurion Model 0005/Archive 1: Difference between revisions

Discussion page of Cylon Centurion Model 0005/Archive 1
No edit summary
Line 28: Line 28:
:''it is implied by [[Number Six]] that some might still be around''
:''it is implied by [[Number Six]] that some might still be around''
Haven't we been over this about half a dozen times? I thought consensus on this was that Six was most likely referring to the newer "bullethead" models. The 0005 hasn't been since since the miniseries, and only then in cardboard cutout form. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 14:17, 23 March 2006 (CST)
Haven't we been over this about half a dozen times? I thought consensus on this was that Six was most likely referring to the newer "bullethead" models. The 0005 hasn't been since since the miniseries, and only then in cardboard cutout form. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 14:17, 23 March 2006 (CST)
:In the event that I'm misremembering, and we haven't actually discussed this before, let me briefly lay out the basis for my position.
:*The current centurion still fits the appelation "walking chrome toasters", and they have been referred to explicitly by other characters on several occasions ("Let's go toaster shopping," etc.)
:*The leap between the 0005 and the current model is so miniscule when compared to the leap between the centurions and the humanoid cylons that Six's comment could easily be taken to refer to the current model, even if it was a considerably more advanced variety than the 0005, the last one the colonials had truly encountered.
:*We haven't seen any of the 0005s since their very brief appearance in the miniseries, which appeared to be a friendly call-back to the original series. In my opinion, it's highly unlikely that we'll ever seen the 0005s again, therefore it seems unlikely that we'll ever have any positive evidence that they're still in use. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 14:36, 23 March 2006 (CST)

Revision as of 20:36, 23 March 2006

You know, I really think it's spelled "centurion." Kuralyov 06:06, 15 Apr 2005 (EDT)

Yup - it looks like rather a lot of articles have had the spelling "corrected" recently! -- Arwel 08:08, 15 Apr 2005 (EDT)
(raises eyebrow) Interesting... For anyone interested, it is spelled Centurion. [1] Although, in the screencapture of the piece of paper that the Armistice Officer was reading from the mini-series, it is spelled "centurian"... Can someone please note that the spelling on that piece of paper is also incorrect -- as I noted, the paper also has the word "yahren" on it. Obviously, the Colonials in the new BSG don't use that term for year. (Then again, I suppose that the paper wasn't supposed to have been scrutinized by fans in the first place; they didn't account for the "pause" feature on DVD players and the screencapture ability of computer DVD playback software.) -- Joe Beaudoin 14:11, 15 Apr 2005 (EDT)
I'd be interested in seeing this freeze frame, if you have the image. I watched the miniseries on TV.... John Reese
Here's the image. It's also linked on this article's page... -- Joe Beaudoin 10:43, 18 Apr 2005 (EDT)


hi all. I changed them all to reflect the on-screen spelling. though Centurion is our historical spelling, it is not unexpected that the spelling could have changed to Centurian for the series. think yahren, volton, frack/frak, chamalla, etc. also, the old Mattel toys list the spelling with an "a" [2]. those toys and the Model 0005 sheet i took as canonical, but i admit it is possible the spelling changed between TOS and RDM. because of finances i do not own TOS on DVD; does the insert or extra materials have a definitive spelling? do the sub-titles reveal the correct spelling? is it possible it was "a" for TOS/1980 series, and "o" for the Hatch, video game, and RDM projects? if there is overwhelming canonical evidence (e.g., sub-titles, officially licensed products) regarding the true spelling(s), i will gladly change them back. -- ryq

As I own the TOS DVDs, I'll take a look into them to see what the spelling is. From what I remember, it is usually "centurion" as in the centurions from Rome. -- Joe Beaudoin 22:34, 26 Apr 2005 (EDT)
With the exception of the verbatim quote of the Armistice Officer's datasheet, I am (reluctantly ;)) moving the names back to "Centurion" or "Centurion (TOS)". I also moved this discussion page. Sorry for the delay. -- ryq 10:52, 4 Jul 2005 (EDT)

Unemployed

Some of these fellows have been seen panhandling on the street after their replacement by modern Centurions, it's quite sad: [3].


Question on Sentience

I am in full agreement with Farago on this. Just because the current upgraded Centrions are not fully sentient (free will, etc.), doesn't mean that the Original Centurions were not. Else how would they rebel? --The Merovingian 03:40, 10 February 2006 (EST) Take a chance!, S:AAB

Still around

Centurion 99 adds:
it is implied by Number Six that some might still be around

Haven't we been over this about half a dozen times? I thought consensus on this was that Six was most likely referring to the newer "bullethead" models. The 0005 hasn't been since since the miniseries, and only then in cardboard cutout form. --Peter Farago 14:17, 23 March 2006 (CST)

In the event that I'm misremembering, and we haven't actually discussed this before, let me briefly lay out the basis for my position.
  • The current centurion still fits the appelation "walking chrome toasters", and they have been referred to explicitly by other characters on several occasions ("Let's go toaster shopping," etc.)
  • The leap between the 0005 and the current model is so miniscule when compared to the leap between the centurions and the humanoid cylons that Six's comment could easily be taken to refer to the current model, even if it was a considerably more advanced variety than the 0005, the last one the colonials had truly encountered.
  • We haven't seen any of the 0005s since their very brief appearance in the miniseries, which appeared to be a friendly call-back to the original series. In my opinion, it's highly unlikely that we'll ever seen the 0005s again, therefore it seems unlikely that we'll ever have any positive evidence that they're still in use. --Peter Farago 14:36, 23 March 2006 (CST)