Editing Talk:Boxey (RDM)/Archive 1

According to IMDB, he was in Kobol's Last Gleaming Pt. I, also. Can anyone confirm this? [[User:Kuralyov|Kuralyov]] 14:08, 18 Apr 2005 (EDT)

: I've watched the episode and I can't see him anywhere.  Therefore, the only logical conclusions I could draw would either be an IMDb error or the actor's scenes were cut. -- [[User:Joe.Beaudoin|Joe Beaudoin]] 16:23, 18 Apr 2005 (EDT)

:: As for the scenes being cut... I have just downloaded the deleted scenes for KLG, Pt. 1 from SCIFI.com and don't see Boxey either.  (We do see Ellen Tigh, however, although all her scenes seem to have been excised. -- [[User:Joe.Beaudoin|Joe Beaudoin]] 18:09, 18 Apr 2005 (EDT)
:::A lot of Ellen scenes seem to have been cut; she was in one or two other episodes, but was cut out, as I recall.[[User:Kuralyov|Kuralyov]] 23:56, 18 Apr 2005 (EDT)

Well, from [http://blog.scifi.com/battlestar/archives/2005/04/index.html#a000025 this link] apparently Boxey won't be making any more appearances. [[User:Kuralyov|Kuralyov]] 20:51, 20 Apr 2005 (EDT)

: Honestly, I believe the Boxey element was just something to be thrown in, and I'm glad that TPTB have realized that.  In the grand scheme of things, and with everything going on, I imagine that it would be extremely difficult to find something (storywise) for a child to do. -- [[User:Joe.Beaudoin|Joe Beaudoin]] 22:04, 20 Apr 2005 (EDT)
:: ...in other words, the character of Boxey has been [[Boxed]]. ^^  [[User:Taiichi|Taiichi]] 23:18, 2 March 2006 (CST)
Your article on Boxey says that Boxey and his mother were running for the raptor, but Boxey's
aunt gave him up to the raptor. Uh, what evidence do you have of this? Because of many references to his aunt, I assume she was the one who gave him up, but I also assume his mother was not with him at the time.

There is an important deleted scene that seems to occur moments before Boomer's scene with the gun in Kobol's Last Gleaming part 1. This scene includes Boxey, who walks in while Boomer is practicing drawing a gun. So, I imagine that is the source of the allegation that he was actually in this episode.
[[User:MHall|MHall]]

== Boxey Wakefield ==
Since we assume the [[Armistice Officer]] is the father of Boxey, it might be a good idea to change the name of this article. Because we can assume he has the same last name (Wakefield). It's the '''(RDM)''' I want to clear... What do you think? --[[User:Karoshi|Karoshi]] 13:01, 3 March 2006 (CST)
@@ Line 18: / Line 18: @@
 == Boxey Wakefield ==
 Since we assume the [[Armistice Officer]] is the father of Boxey, it might be a good idea to change the name of this article. Because we can assume he has the same last name (Wakefield). It's the '''(RDM)''' I want to clear... What do you think? --[[User:Karoshi|Karoshi]] 13:01, 3 March 2006 (CST)
-:How confident are we of the Wakefield name? The fact that the article is still "Armistice Officer" and not "Wakefield" leads me to believe that there are still some doubts. --[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 13:06, 3 March 2006 (CST)
-::We know the name of the Armistice Officer from the [[Battlestar Galactica (2005 Novel)|novel]]. So first, is the novel is canonical? If is not, we stop the discussion here!<br/>Second, is it mentioned in the novel that Boxey is his son? ''or'' Do we are confident that he is? If yes of one of the last two questions, I think we must assume Boxey '''Wakefield''' is his real name. --[[User:Karoshi|Karoshi]] 13:39, 3 March 2006 (CST)
-A) We see the Armistice Officer actually looking at a picture of Boxey.  It's subtle, but conclusive. Plus RDM & Co. actually say in the DVD commentary "yeah, he's Boxey's father" etc etc.  But it's on screen.
-B) We really don't think the novelization is very canonical if at all.  We used it for placeholder names for characters that have none; for example, we used the novelization name "Natasi" for Number Six on Caprica, until Downloaded ''gave her'' an official name, "Caprica-Six" and we revised everything.  But Boxey already has "a name", so we shouldn't change it to "Boxey Wakefield" because it's almost certainly not canonical, and -->we have no need of a placeholder name. Best to leave a note of it in the notes section, as I believe we did. --[[User:The Merovingian|The Merovingian]] 13:45, 3 March 2006 (CST)