Editing Talk:Cylons (RDM)/Archive 1

Doesn't the "twelve models of Cylons" that Six referred to mean only twelve humanoid models, not metal kinds as well?

If she really meant "twelve kinds of Cylons altogether" then you'd have to include Old/New Raiders, Recon Drones, and Old/New basestars - leaving only one more type of Cylon to be discovered. And with RDM saying that "two new Cylons will be revealed this [second] season," that's obviously not the case. [[User:Kuralyov|Kuralyov]] 19:39, 15 Apr 2005 (EDT)

: The consensus seems to be that there are 12 models of Humano-Cylon.  Although I do understand the confusion, particularly in light of the note that Adama read at the end of the [[Miniseries]]. -- [[User:Joe.Beaudoin|Joe Beaudoin]] 22:57, 15 Apr 2005 (EDT)


==Zarek Rocks' Edits==

[[User:Zarek Rocks|Zarek Rocks]] added the following on August 8th:

:In the reimagined series, Cylons are a creation of man, used primarily for dangerous work. However, they were eventually intended to be used by humans for all production continuing the colonial's [[Golden Age]]. The Cylons [[Cylon War|revolted]] against their masters, eventually [[Cylon Attack|killing off]] all but approximately 50,000 humans. Their creation for enslavement is likely their reasoning for choosing the name for their species. Cyone is a character from Greek mythology that was raped by her father and then sacrificed him on an altar in a nearby temple. The obvious parallels to the human-cylon relationship, the Colonial's religion being closely similar to the Greek Gods, and the similarity in the spelling: cylon cyone are all conclusive evidence of the origin of the name cylon.

I have a number of concerns:

#What is this [[Golden Age]] to which you refer?
#The name [[Cylon]] comes from the [[TOS|original series]], in which the Cylons are the robotic creations of a race of malevolent lizard-men. Allthough the Cyone/Cylon naming coincidence is a tempting avenue of thought, it would probably be better to note it as an odd coincidence than claim it as "conclusive evidence" for a name which antedates this version of Cylon history by over twenty-five years.
#I can't find more than a one-sentence reference to a character from greek mythology by the name of "Cyone" anywhere online. Do you have a reference to the legend that you could point us at for discussion?

Please leave the previous content intact when you make future additions unless you find it impertinent, redundant or factually innacurate.

--[[User:April Arcus|April Arcus]] 00:21, 10 Aug 2005 (EDT)

:I apologize for my lack of background for my articles.  I must confess to being much more concerned with the re-imagined BSG and so therefore have been using it as a reference point for my articles.  TOS and the re-imagined series have been so different that you almost can't connect the two because of the many differences.  Everyone will agree that the characters are completely different, as has the background info.  The Golden Age I refer to takes place before the Cylon War.  The article I used for this was found on this site, [[History of the Twelve Colonies of Kobol]].  I realize this is not canon, but it seems close enough to be considered factual.  Besides, the two series are so different one could not find a 100% bulletproof article anyways, unless it referred to a tiny specific (and probably therefore uninteresting) piece of information anyways.  The one sentence online you refer to about Cyone, I assume is on the same website I found it, http://www.pantheon.org/.  This is a reliable website that is valid to cite in reference to Greek mythology; the information on it is reliable and in depth enough to be quoted.  Please let me know if you have any questions, as I realize all of your previous ones were completely valid.

::I completely agree about the re-imagined series having very little to do with (and being far superior to) the original, but about the only thing that is clearly sourced from the original are the various character and technology names. I find the Encyclopedia Mythica entry to be a bit lacking to be worth noting here, but if you feel compelled it would be perfectly fine to note the coincidence in a "Notes" section

::P.S., to sign your comments with your name and a time stamp, use this string: <nowiki>--~~~~</nowiki>. --[[User:April Arcus|April Arcus]] 18:37, 10 Aug 2005 (EDT)

Thanks, and I agree the Re-imagined series is far superior.  SHould we restore my edits to the article or shall we leave as is? [[--Zareck Rocks 18:49, 10 Aug 2005 (EDT)--]]

:I don't personally feel it's worthwhile, but as I said above, there would be nothing wrong with pointing out the coincidence along with a citation. --[[User:April Arcus|April Arcus]] 19:05, 11 Aug 2005 (EDT)

==The Late Unpleasantness==

I'll begin. Since philwelch admits that the various Cylon craft may not count as Cylon models, it seems that the main point of controversy is whether to count the two models of Cylon Centurion. Would it be acceptable to both of you to make a note concerning the ambiguity of both the "twelve models of cylon" note and Six's assertion that "those models [the chrome toasters] still have their uses", and provide separate counts depending on which assumptions are made?

After this sticking point has been resolved, I recommend restoring the non-controversial edits lost in Ricimer's recent revert. --[[User:April Arcus|April Arcus]] 11:49, 1 September 2005 (EDT)

:I don't count the earlier model because it's a 40 year old model and there's no evidence that it exists anymore. Anyway, I've made a compromise edit. [[User:Philwelch|Philwelch]] 13:10, 1 September 2005 (EDT)

::Philwelch's disclaimer in the "Twelve Models" section seems like a balanced reading to me, based on the available information. Ricimer, do you still object to it? --[[User:April Arcus|April Arcus]] 14:05, 1 September 2005 (EDT)

:::Philwelch I must commend you on your recent excellent compromise edit.  The main point of contention I had is that sometimes on messageboards you see people that say that "there are 12 Cylons, so counting centurions there must be 11 "human-looking" Cylons.  However, I think there are 12 models of humanoid Cylon, as well as the Centurion model.  I don't know if Raiders, etc. count as a "model" or not, unless they say that in a later episode.  I thought it ambiguous as to how "organic" they are; i.e. their internal muscles, ligaments, nerves were more obviously synthetic; they looked like artificial skin and muscle like you'd use on burn victims.  I mean, they looked more obviously silicon-based on not vat-grown; the line were "organic" and "machine" blurs (if we consider animals to be just a complex bio-chemical machine).  Anyway, I really like the current edit.  ---Ricimer. 1 Sept, 2005

That's called "limited special effects", I think. [[User:Philwelch|Philwelch]] 20:18, 1 September 2005 (EDT)

:::: Something to take note. When Boomer recently told Gaius Baltar that there were 8 more cylons within the fleet, that added up to the 12 stated long ago by Number 6.  The fleet has seen Boomer, Number 6 (as Godfrey), Darol, and Leoben Conoy. They hadn't seen the 8 other models (who logically would only have 1 of each in the fleet). We've discussed D'anna Biers and we know about Simon both will show up. In the recent show, Baltar was talking to Six about other cylons aboard- that they could be anywhere. My tv was a bit dark but I swear I saw Simon pass by in military khakis when he said that. As for Ellen Tigh, look at the show where Baltar says "She's green!" when he checks her out in the test. If you zoom into the computer, it does show green. Then again, everybody was there to watch his testing so he may have covered it up. --[[User:QuintusCinna|QuintusCinna]]

Baltar altered the program when he tested Ellen. Anyway, you're assuming (a) that Boomer was right (b) There's only 1 of each (c) Godfrey isn't there. The question was "how many Cylons are left in the fleet?"  and the answer was "eight". Godfrey isn't known to be a Cylon quite yet and may be in hiding. Also, why can't there be Cylon "identical twins" or Cylon doppelgangers? And how do we know Boomer is a reliable source? You're making a lot of assumptions—assumptions that I think can be abandoned just as easily if not more easily than the assumption that there are only twelve Cylon models. [[User:Philwelch|Philwelch]] 20:18, 1 September 2005 (EDT)

By the way, Peter's more recent edits to the article pretty much turned my exposition of the issue into an argument for his side. I went ahead and fixed it, and right now it's just an examination of all the related assumptions one could make regarding this issue and how they apply. [[User:Philwelch|Philwelch]] 20:51, 1 September 2005 (EDT)

:I don't really have a "side", Phil, and frankly if you and Ricimer agree on your previous version, I don't mind if you revert it. I think the current exposition here is rather monstrous. --[[User:April Arcus|April Arcus]] 21:28, 1 September 2005 (EDT)

It seemed a little biased to me, and removed a bunch of stuff that didn't need to be. [[User:Philwelch|Philwelch]] 21:33, 1 September 2005 (EDT)

I'll just say I'd like to think that afer Adama read the note, he had a similar debate: 12 Human models, or 12 all together. Life imitates Art. Sorta. [[User:Colonial one|Colonial one]] 21:47, 1 September 2005 (EDT)

Philwelch and I have agreed that this argument is best handled in its own article, so he's moved it to Twelve Cylon Models. As my main concern here is for accuracy and concision, I'm content to stay out of the debate as long as it doesn't spill over into less interpretive pages. --[[User:April Arcus|April Arcus]] 22:07, 1 September 2005 (EDT)

==On Cylon Tactics==

I would like to open a section on Cylon tactics in this article.  I was inspired to do this by the Humano-Cylon page: I feel that it fails to communicate the fundamental, asymmetric threat the Cylons pose to the Fleet.  I'll start with this topic, others are welcome to contribute.  Maybe eventually we can have a whole page on Cylon methods of war.  It also grieves me to say that any objections or criticism will not be taken in good humor, will be interpreted as an attack on my person and may very well initiate a flame war, so please do not post them.

::Just kidding :)   ''[[User:Jzanjani|Jzanjani]] 01:18, 7 October 2005 (EDT)''

:::I disagree ;) --[[User:Watcher|Watcher]] 02:08, 7 October 2005 (EDT)

:::: :-| ''[[User:Jzanjani|Jzanjani]] 03:48, 7 October 2005 (EDT)''

::::: "Your day is coming, laughing boy" (Col. Tigh to Tom Zarek).  ---[[User:Ricimer|Ricimer]] October 7, 2005

Ricimer, Jzanjani: This message is generally directed to you, but others should be reminded of  this as well. Jzanjani's addition to the page is a welcome and insightful breakdown of what we all knew but have not put down to words with such eloquence. I have returned the page (with edits) to Jzanjani's last edit, reverting Ricimer's full removal. It is highly customary on this Wiki never to fully remove anyone's edits, as we go by the logical presumption that everyone has something beneficial to add to the page. Jzanjani's latest contribution certainly fits this.

When I encounter an edit that does not seem appropriate to either location within or in the article, I attempt to blend in the contribution, which forces me to see the contribution as a puzzle piece that should fit. If the "piece" does not fit, then I reject the edit, but always give a reason in my edit comment or in Talk as I do here. Ricimer, I do not explicitly center you out on this as we all are guilty of such things from time to time. However, I have personally monitored your lashings between Jzanjani. Anonymity on a site like this does not authorize any of us (Jzanjani included) to be rude or assume sole interpretation of the worth of a contribution (as you had done with this last edit). Besides, such a large contribution should be seen by the collective before such a massive deletion.

As we all know, such contributions take a lot of time, and odds are that that time was spent in good intent. While technically allowable, striking out such a large contribution moments after its post is insulting to the contributor since the collective hadn't a chance to chime in. Please restrain from direct attacks (as this was something I could interpret as nothing less), refresh yourself on the Wiki's standards and policies, and continue the insightful edits and contributions you've made such as your Battle pages. Just because BSG is a Wiki about humans that screw themselves over doesn't mean we have to emulate that here. [[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 11:38, 7 October 2005 (EDT)
:I see ---Ricimer, October 7, 2005
:Well put, Spencerian. --[[User:April Arcus|April Arcus]] 17:28, 7 October 2005 (EDT)

*I have been looking through it again, and feel that "Cylon tactics" is in regards redundant, as well as not very NPOV at all.  However, as there has been contention in the past over this, I don't think I should be the one to re-edit it.  However, I really would like someone to go through this page again, remove redundant stuff and make it more NPOV. --[[User:Ricimer|Ricimer]] 12:10, 1 December 2005 (EST)

=== Notes for future edits ===

*'''Subornation''', or '''suborn''', is a real word meaning:
:<tt>to induce a person to conduct an unlawful act </tt>
::(see [http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=suborn here])
*'''Subordination''', or '''subordinate''' is a distinct word meaning:
:<tt>1. Belonging to a lower or inferior class or rank; secondary.
:2. Subject to the authority or control of another.</tt>
::(see [http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=subordinate here])
*When I'm discussing the number of Humano-Cylons revealed as such, I'm discussing it from the perspective of the human beings in the Fleet and Galactica.  Clearly they know of Doral, Conoy, and Valerii.  I think it's safe to assume Starbuck has filled the appropriate people in on Simon. They do know of Number Six since Starbuck encountered (and killed one of) several copies on Caprica. Also, Roslin makes a reference to getting one of those young, blond Cylon bodies (a joke but there is only two known blond Cylons, and they don't know about Biers). They definitely do ''not'' know of D'anna Biers.  So Galactica's security are on the look-out for five total known Cylon models (Maybe six) - the rest (whether that's seven , six or zero I'll leave to you guys) have yet to be revealed.
**Don't really understand what is going on here, but other's comments on a talk page shouldn't be edited?? Should add a reply. --[[User:Gougef|FrankieG]] 12:27, 6 August 2006 (CDT)

==Cleanup==

Do people like the format of the Twelve Colonies series as it stands? I think that the various Cylon articles good deal with a good bit of cleanup and compartmentalization along those lines, with a template linking various articles together. I think we can do much better on Cylon religion, and have certainly received enough information throughout the series (Through Leoben and others) to make a full article of it. Cylon military hardware and tactics could also be spun off. --[[User:April Arcus|April Arcus]] 17:40, 7 October 2005 (EDT)

: In my quest to make the Wiki an equally strong TOS resource, I am moving this page to Cylons (RDM) and creating a disambig page for "Cylons" with a redirect from "Cylon". I've already created a Cylon (TOS) page and copied some great data, kudos to Wikipedia. I'd like to disambig the TOS and RDM Twelve Colonies somehow, yes, and clean it up for this article (which I won't tamper with at the moment). I agree that there's more than enough data to make separate articles for Cylon religion, tech stats and tactics. [[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 17:49, 7 October 2005 (EDT)

::Suggested plan:
::*Cylon Models (incl. original centurion (museum scene), centurions, content from humano-cylon)
::*Cylon Religion (to be written)
::*Cylon Spacecraft (merge content from relevant articles)
::*Cylon Tactics (Jzanjani's comments)
::Anything else? I'm not sure whether merging the various spacecraft articles is the best idea, although they are very short. --[[User:April Arcus|April Arcus]] 18:02, 7 October 2005 (EDT)

I think this would be a good idea; hopefully it'll pay off with more revelations as the series continues.  I do have some concerns regarding the conjectural nature of the comments on Cylon "Evolution" and "Religion."  There should be plenty of quotes from both Six and Valerii which could make a better section, perhaps even page, on Cylon religion, and I believe more emphasis should be placed on the ''monotheistic'' aspect of it to reflect that contrast in the show.  As far as evolution goes, I haven't heard any mention of biological evolution in the show; there are mechanical Cylons and humanoid Cylon clones.  This should be written down, there should be links to the corresponding articles, but as far as I can tell Cylons have nothing to do with biological evolution.  As for the very valid comment on the glowing spine, don't we have a place for continuity fudges and such?

==Glowing Spines==

Can someone with the DVDs upload a screenshot of Boomer's glowing spine from "Six Degrees of Separation"? It's about 35 minutes into the episode, and was cut from the UK broadcast. --[[User:April Arcus|April Arcus]] 13:33, 9 October 2005 (EDT)

== Cylon Religion ==
I'm total newb, as if it won't become obvious.
Without objection, I'd like to add some changes to the cylon religion section.
First, the parallel to historic Judaism should be pointed out.  The reference to "the one true God" is more than a description of monotheism, it is precisely the language used in the Pentateuch and other ancient Hebrew texts, and I think the writers of the series mean to suggest this actually (see my upcoming discussions on getting a BSG in Context page going).
I strongly disagree with the assertions about Human, Cylon and God relative perfection quotients.  I think they think only that God's plan is perfect.  I am unaware of the Cylon's claim of perfection, or even their knowledge of God's plan.  In fact, they admit their own imperfection relative to God's injunctive to "be fruitful and multiply," hence their experiments on occupied Capica.  I don't believe they consider themselves to be God's "agent of purification," either.  If extrapolate from ancient Hebrew thought, though, they may consider themselves "chosen" and that they expect God to deliver their enemies to them.

There it is.   --lovemydick (phil k, that is)

:The production team has stated repeatedly that it does not reflect one monotheistic religion in particular, but is a generic monotheistic religion.  It is not inspired by Judaism.  Christianity and Islam are loosely derived from Judaism, but the Buddhist faith also is monotheist (well, depending on the sect).  It in no way was meant to suggest this.  Further, '''CHANGE YOUR USER NAME TO SOMETHING APPROPRIATE''' --[[User:Ricimer|Ricimer]] 23:22, 12 November 2005 (EST)

::Public statements writers make about their writings and their intent while writing are often at odds.  The prases "One True God" and "Be Fruitful and Multiply" are uniquely Hebrew in origin.  Christianity refers most often to Christ, Holy Spirit or Heavenly Father.  Islam states "There is no God but Allah" and Buddhism is more a philosophy than a religion.----[[User:Lovemydick|lovemydick]] 17:36, 13 November 2005 (EST)

::Lovemydick, the whole article badly needs a revamp. I have ideas about this but won't have time to implement them for some time yet. In the meantime, if you feel you can add something helpful, by all means do so.

::Ricimer, personal comments should go on user talk pages. And don't use caps. --[[User:April Arcus|April Arcus]] 01:14, 13 November 2005 (EST)

== Cylon Religion II ==

Since there appears to be a little controversy, I'm going to propse the following re-write for the Cylon Religion Section.


The Cylon religion seems to suggest ancient Judaism.  The reference to "One True God" is of Hebrew origin, as well as ideas of an active and powerful God with a plan for Creation (in this case Cylon and Human alike).  Additionally, there are profound similarities to the journey of Gaius Baltar and those of the Hebrew Patriarchs:  an angel appearing in Human form which can only be seen by the character, a process of exalting or humiliating depending on the character's willingness to surrendur to God's will, repetion of this process but having begun with a singular, profound experience of God.

The Cylons believe there is a cyclical direction to history, which is a manifestation of God's divine will.  The paradox that priests and philosophers have always struggled with is readily apparent in Cylon theology: how can God remain in control and individual free choice remain intact?

It is unclear whether the Cylons believe they have a complete grasp of God's ultimate plan.  It is clear that they are aware of their sin in terms of their inability to reproduce and therefore fulfill God's edict to "be fruitful and multiply."


As we meet  in time...lovemy(PK)dick

*....No.  How is this a re-write?  You just restated what you originally said.  Again, the Cylon God is not related to Judaism or the Hebraic god Yahweh.  Actually, as stated on the religion discussion sections, Baltar's conversion to the Cylon faith seems more like that of evangelical, 'born again' Christianity.  And although no theologan I think the idea of "God=Love" is more of a Christian ideology.  Long story short, the above re-write didn't solve the initial problem. --[[User:Ricimer|Ricimer]] 18:19, 13 November 2005 (EST)

:Your analysis seems generally insightful, but try to keep your remarks pithy and relevant. It is easy to veer into baseless speculation on this topic. --[[User:April Arcus|April Arcus]] 18:53, 13 November 2005 (EST)

== Racial naming convention ==

[[Number Three]] often used "Cylon" as one would "human" to describe a race and not a individual in "Downloaded" and several S3 episodes. The [[Hero of the Cylon]] article uses this convention as well. I feel it's acceptable to use "Cylons" or "Cylon", but the use of it should be consistent within any article. --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 11:56, 19 April 2007 (CDT)
:I think that a singular Cylon could refer to that kind of council where one Cylon model votes for its entire model line. Like when they say "We agree...". While it's used to refer to the Cylons in general, it's relatively rare. I'd note it somewhere, but only use it where it's also used in the show. Like with "Hero of the Cylon" or direct quotes from other episodes. --[[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 12:06, 19 April 2007 (CDT)
::True, she has said that a few times, but far more times has she said "Cylons", and just as well have the other Cylons used the "s". Not to mention "Cylons" is how it's presented in the intro. --[[User:Sauron18|Sauron18]] 22:03, 19 April 2007 (CDT)

==Cybernetic Living Organisms==
A few months ago I read a spoiler for "Caprica" that stated that in the pilot episode the meaning of the name "Cylon" would've been revealed, and the writer of the article only remembered 2 of 3 words, stating : "Cybernetic SOMETHING Organism". However, recently I heard someone say they heard in a spoiler that it was "Cybernetic Living Organism", and considering the fact that it fits with the other spoiler I gave it a second glance, but the person couldn't remember where he read the spoiler.

So I'm wondering if anyone has heard of this, and if so from which spoiler source, because if so it could be interesting to at least mention in one of the articles. --03:08, 6 July 2007 (CDT) {{unsigned|Sauron18}}

: It was actually one of the people from Sci-Fi's offices that said it in an interview, I think it was the person responsible for programming. (No one actually connected to the show has said anything, as far as I know.) However, while it does seem to make sense, we may want to ask the question on [[BW:OC]] to verify. -- [[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 &mdash; ''New'']</sup> 09:01, 6 July 2007 (CDT)

::Cool, I'll post the question. --[[User:Sauron18|Sauron18]] 15:06, 6 July 2007 (CDT)