Editing Battlestar Wiki:Galactipedians Quorum/Archive2
From Battlestar Wiki, the free, open content Battlestar Galactica encyclopedia and episode guide
More actions
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
| Latest revision | Your text | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
Cheers :) --[[User:Fordsierra4x4|Fordsierra4x4]] 15:13, 15 April 2006 (CDT) | Cheers :) --[[User:Fordsierra4x4|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. --[[User: | :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. --[[User:Peter Farago|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. --[[User:Fordsierra4x4|Fordsierra4x4]] 20:52, 16 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. --[[User:Fordsierra4x4|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.--[[User: | :::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.--[[User:Peter Farago|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... --[[User:Fordsierra4x4|Fordsierra4x4]] 00:37, 17 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... --[[User:Fordsierra4x4|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. --[[User: | :::::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. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 00:39, 17 April 2006 (CDT) | ||
== Can't find a picture == | == 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. | 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]]? --[[User: | :How about the ones on [[Pegasus (RDM)#Equipment]]? --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 00:47, 17 April 2006 (CDT) | ||
==Sitenotice on Koenigrules vote== | ==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?) --[[User: | 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?) --[[User:Peter Farago|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.-- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]]</sup> 22:27, 20 April 2006 (CDT) | : I'm fine with this. These things do affect the wiki on a wide scale, after all.-- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]]</sup> 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. --[[User: | ::Done. I used a separate box since the Portal notice will probably continue to be relevant after this vote closes. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 22:35, 20 April 2006 (CDT) | ||
:::Great! -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]]</sup> 22:43, 20 April 2006 (CDT) | :::Great! -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]]</sup> 22:43, 20 April 2006 (CDT) | ||
| Line 54: | Line 54: | ||
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. | 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. --[[User: | If Joe or the other admin staff feel that my action was inappropriate, I will abide by any disciplinary ruling they decide to issue. --[[User:Peter Farago|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 [[User:Day|Mop Boy]]'s job or anything (yet. ;) --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 14:20, 1 May 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 [[User:Day|Mop Boy]]'s job or anything (yet. ;) --[[User:Spencerian|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 | ::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. --[[User:The Merovingian|The Merovingian]] <sup>([[Special:Contributions/The Merovingian|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/The Merovingian|E]])</sup> 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! -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]]</sup> 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. --[[User: | ::Nevertheless, it needed to be said for the benefit of the community in general. I'm glad this whole situation is close to resolution. --[[User:Peter Farago|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. :) --[[User:The Merovingian|The Merovingian]] <sup>([[Special:Contributions/The Merovingian|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/The Merovingian|E]])</sup> 23:32, 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. :) --[[User:The Merovingian|The Merovingian]] <sup>([[Special:Contributions/The Merovingian|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/The Merovingian|E]])</sup> 23:32, 1 May 2006 (CDT) | ||
| Line 104: | Line 104: | ||
*Kimba Huta | *Kimba Huta | ||
*Mutem Wia | *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? --[[User: | 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? --[[User:Peter Farago|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. --[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 10:27, 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. --[[User:Steelviper|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. --[[User: | ::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. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 10:40, 16 May 2006 (CDT) | ||
==Requested Articles== | ==Requested Articles== | ||
I've noticed Shane has been creating a number of new articles recently using the {{tl|requested}} template. I personally think that unless we're going to had at least a brief description - that is, a {{tl|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. --[[User: | I've noticed Shane has been creating a number of new articles recently using the {{tl|requested}} template. I personally think that unless we're going to had at least a brief description - that is, a {{tl|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. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 00:22, 17 May 2006 (CDT) | ||
: I concur. Redlinks are a valuable tool for drawing people's attention to non-existant articles. --[[User:Day|Day]] <sup>([[User talk:Day|Talk]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Administrators' noticeboard|Admin]])</sup> 23:18, 6 June 2006 (CDT) | : I concur. Redlinks are a valuable tool for drawing people's attention to non-existant articles. --[[User:Day|Day]] <sup>([[User talk:Day|Talk]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Administrators' noticeboard|Admin]])</sup> 23:18, 6 June 2006 (CDT) | ||
| Line 121: | Line 121: | ||
:: True. They don't, but then Trek tended to be a lot less driven by those factors. I think this is something worth considering, at least. Though I think it would take some diligence to keep it from devolving into slash fic. Maybe we should only get into things that actually turned into something (like Cally/Tyrol), so as not to feed the fires of fanfic. --[[User:Day|Day]] <sup>([[User talk:Day|Talk]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Administrators' noticeboard|Admin]])</sup> 23:21, 6 June 2006 (CDT) | :: True. They don't, but then Trek tended to be a lot less driven by those factors. I think this is something worth considering, at least. Though I think it would take some diligence to keep it from devolving into slash fic. Maybe we should only get into things that actually turned into something (like Cally/Tyrol), so as not to feed the fires of fanfic. --[[User:Day|Day]] <sup>([[User talk:Day|Talk]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Administrators' noticeboard|Admin]])</sup> 23:21, 6 June 2006 (CDT) | ||
:I don't see the need for this either. Relationships are currently discussed on character bio pages and within the context of the race article - do we have anything interesting to say about relationships on BSG in general? They all seem very conventional. There are no weird Minbari Mating Rituals to document, for example. --[[User: | :I don't see the need for this either. Relationships are currently discussed on character bio pages and within the context of the race article - do we have anything interesting to say about relationships on BSG in general? They all seem very conventional. There are no weird Minbari Mating Rituals to document, for example. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 01:22, 7 June 2006 (CDT) | ||
:I tend to agree with | :I tend to agree with Peter, although we shouldn't discount the weirdness that happens when ''anyone'' on this show hooks up. From half-robobabies, glowing spines, and ghosts, it's something to talk about, although I'll be damned if I know ''what to say'' beyond what we have already. --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 12:16, 12 June 2006 (CDT) | ||
== Quorum Definintion == | == Quorum Definintion == | ||