| Latest revision |
Your text |
| Line 7: |
Line 7: |
|
| |
|
| : Nice! However, the name is a bit of an issue and we should probably wait until "The Captain's Hand" airs to determine which spelling is correct, seeing as the current spelling comes directly from GateWorld (which, as far as I'm concerned, is more valid than most blogs). We can always move the page later. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] 08:14, 9 February 2006 (EST) | | : Nice! However, the name is a bit of an issue and we should probably wait until "The Captain's Hand" airs to determine which spelling is correct, seeing as the current spelling comes directly from GateWorld (which, as far as I'm concerned, is more valid than most blogs). We can always move the page later. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] 08:14, 9 February 2006 (EST) |
|
| |
| :: RDM mentions that legal was "whining" about issues with the name "Trammel", so I looked up the name and could only find this guy ([http://www.soonerspectator.com/meetWriter.php?id=btramel Berry Tramel]) as the possible name conflict. I'll maybe post a note once I've done the captain's hand podcast transcription so I can properly source it. --[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 13:15, 20 April 2006 (CDT)
| |
|
| |
|
| == Name == | | == Name == |
| Line 21: |
Line 19: |
| == Death Sequence == | | == Death Sequence == |
| Must simply say, the way that the writers scripted, and Mr. Heard portrayed, Garner's death sequence was succint and encouraging (in how it was delivered). It wasn't drawn out, overdramatized, or "sissy-fied". Garner simply went into the compartment, did the job, and succumbed to the environment. -- [[User:Hawke|Hawke]] 02:10, 21 February 2006 (EST) | | Must simply say, the way that the writers scripted, and Mr. Heard portrayed, Garner's death sequence was succint and encouraging (in how it was delivered). It wasn't drawn out, overdramatized, or "sissy-fied". Garner simply went into the compartment, did the job, and succumbed to the environment. -- [[User:Hawke|Hawke]] 02:10, 21 February 2006 (EST) |
| :I wholly agree, it was an excellent scene. I don't like Garner much, but, I really respect his character in that scene. - [[User:BklynBruzer|BklynBruzer]] 23:17, 6 August 2006 (CDT)
| |
|
| |
| == Razor ==
| |
|
| |
| Did anyone else notice that Garner has a brief appearance in Razor? Right after the initial nuke attack on ''Pegasus'', as Cain and Shaw are returning to the CIC, he's being helped off the floor. I don't know if it's notable enough to include in his article, so I figured I'd get some opinions before tossing it up. --[[User:Slander|Slander]] 12:16, 28 November 2007 (CST)
| |
| : Actually, I don't think the actor was in "Razor". It may have been a stand-in. I'll have to watch out for it when I get the DVD. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]] - [http://www.sanctuarywiki.org Sanctuary Wiki — ''New'']</sup> 12:03, 29 November 2007 (CST)
| |
|
| |
| == A Non-Pilot in Command ==
| |
|
| |
| I edited one of the notes to read as follows:
| |
|
| |
| :Unlike [[William Adama]], [[Helena Cain]], [[Saul Tigh]] and [[Jack Fisk]], Garner does not wear [[Uniforms (RDM)|flight wings]], indicating that a pilot background is not a necessary prerequisite for command of a battlestar. Although Garner's background appears to be primarily in engineering, the lack of high-ranking ''Pegasus'' officers might have persuaded Admiral Adama to waive this requirement.
| |
|
| |
| My rationale is partly based on what Ron Moore would know about the US Navy. Officers eligible to assume command (line officers) are in the course of their careers assigned as department heads, such as engineering. Although this does require gaining knowledge of that particular function, they are primarily managers and leaders of people, not technical specialists, and they do move on. To be fair about the Colonial Fleet being not being a strict parallel to the US Navy, in some navies, such as the British, engineering is highly specialized and an engineering department head would not assume command. But in either case, his flaw might have been his lack of command experience in areas outside of the engineering department, or a narrow vision of a command that should run with the precision and responsiveness of that department instead of the complexity of a larger human organization.
| |
|
| |
| In either case, my edit avoids a possible line officer "generalist" vs. specialist distinction, and does not overly assume the nature of Garner's background or the specifics of what kind of officers can assume command.-- [[User:Fredmdbud|Fredmdbud]] 05:27, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
| |
