Talk:Fall of New Caprica/Archive 1 - Revision history

Joe Beaudoin Jr.: Text replacement - "Peter Farago" to "April Arcus"

2020-04-11T01:53:42Z

Text replacement - "Peter Farago" to "April Arcus"

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:53, 11 April 2020
Line 34:		Line 34:
	:::::::::::Adama getting shot was also a "momentous" event in the BSG universe. Finding the Tomb of Athena was a momentous event in the BSG universe. The birth of the Cylon/Human Hybrid Hera (she's the messiah) was a momentous event in the BSG universe. But they don't warrant their own pages. This is an online encyclopedia. We make up some special pages for terminology, battles, Cylon speculation, etc. but we're not writing a chapter book. None of the other "momentous" events are receiving their own page and neither should this one. We've already established that it's not a battle, but it appears that the consensus is in agreement that it's just restating things which should be said on "New Caprica". --[[User:The Merovingian\|The Merovingian]] 15:00, 15 March 2006 (CST)		:::::::::::Adama getting shot was also a "momentous" event in the BSG universe. Finding the Tomb of Athena was a momentous event in the BSG universe. The birth of the Cylon/Human Hybrid Hera (she's the messiah) was a momentous event in the BSG universe. But they don't warrant their own pages. This is an online encyclopedia. We make up some special pages for terminology, battles, Cylon speculation, etc. but we're not writing a chapter book. None of the other "momentous" events are receiving their own page and neither should this one. We've already established that it's not a battle, but it appears that the consensus is in agreement that it's just restating things which should be said on "New Caprica". --[[User:The Merovingian\|The Merovingian]] 15:00, 15 March 2006 (CST)

	:::::::::::::Momentous, yes, but not discrete or truly amenable to separate description/designation. "New Caprica" is a (theoretically) large subset of things, and encompasses every physical 'fact' about the planet as well as everything that happens on or in relation to it. Take this logic to its logical end, and there should only be one article on this entire wiki, entitled "Battlestar Galactica," containing absolutely all the information about the show. It makes perfect sense to segregate the fall of New Caprica, at least partially, into its own article because it is a major event. Adama having been shot and the birth of Hera are important events....they are also solely involve major (or potentially major) characters in the series, and are distinguishable on that basis alone. Major discrete '''happenings''' about which we have appreciable information (individual battles, the election, and yes, the fall of New Caprica) do deserve their own articles. See ~~Peter Farago~~'s comments below, I think he hit the nail on the head. --[[User:Felix Culpa\|Felix Culpa]] 20:22, 15 March 2006 (CST)		:::::::::::::Momentous, yes, but not discrete or truly amenable to separate description/designation. "New Caprica" is a (theoretically) large subset of things, and encompasses every physical 'fact' about the planet as well as everything that happens on or in relation to it. Take this logic to its logical end, and there should only be one article on this entire wiki, entitled "Battlestar Galactica," containing absolutely all the information about the show. It makes perfect sense to segregate the fall of New Caprica, at least partially, into its own article because it is a major event. Adama having been shot and the birth of Hera are important events....they are also solely involve major (or potentially major) characters in the series, and are distinguishable on that basis alone. Major discrete '''happenings''' about which we have appreciable information (individual battles, the election, and yes, the fall of New Caprica) do deserve their own articles. See April Arcus's comments below, I think he hit the nail on the head. --[[User:Felix Culpa\|Felix Culpa]] 20:22, 15 March 2006 (CST)

	::I've found that a large portion of this information was already contained within the [[New Caprica]] article. Very little of this information can be considered unique in comparison to [[New Caprica]]. If you read the two articles you find nearly the same information. Therefore, the little information that is especially significant should be added to the New Caprica article and this article should be eliminated.--Zareck Rocks 13:57, 15 March 2006 (CST)		::I've found that a large portion of this information was already contained within the [[New Caprica]] article. Very little of this information can be considered unique in comparison to [[New Caprica]]. If you read the two articles you find nearly the same information. Therefore, the little information that is especially significant should be added to the New Caprica article and this article should be eliminated.--Zareck Rocks 13:57, 15 March 2006 (CST)
Line 40:		Line 40:
	:::I agree that the information is mostly duplicative of the New Caprica article, but I still think it shoul dhave an abbreviated entry in its own right. See my comments above to The Merovingian. --[[User:Felix Culpa\|Felix Culpa]] 14:54, 15 March 2006 (CST)		:::I agree that the information is mostly duplicative of the New Caprica article, but I still think it shoul dhave an abbreviated entry in its own right. See my comments above to The Merovingian. --[[User:Felix Culpa\|Felix Culpa]] 14:54, 15 March 2006 (CST)

	This does not seem to be a popular opinion, but I believe that the occupation of New Caprica does deserve a position in the military timeline, especially since it features Baltar's surrender of the colonies to Cylon forces, and will probably form the backdrop for much of season 3. The [[Wikipedia:Occupation of Czechoslovakia\|Occupation of Czechoslovakia]] was also initiated in a bloodless manner, but it would be foolish to argue that it wasn't a military event. --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 17:20, 15 March 2006 (CST)		This does not seem to be a popular opinion, but I believe that the occupation of New Caprica does deserve a position in the military timeline, especially since it features Baltar's surrender of the colonies to Cylon forces, and will probably form the backdrop for much of season 3. The [[Wikipedia:Occupation of Czechoslovakia\|Occupation of Czechoslovakia]] was also initiated in a bloodless manner, but it would be foolish to argue that it wasn't a military event. --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 17:20, 15 March 2006 (CST)

	: Nicely put, I concur absolutely. --[[User:Felix Culpa\|Felix Culpa]] 20:22, 15 March 2006 (CST)		: Nicely put, I concur absolutely. --[[User:Felix Culpa\|Felix Culpa]] 20:22, 15 March 2006 (CST)
Line 54:		Line 54:
	By the way, while we are all arguing the definition of 'battle,' 'military event,' and general semantics, has anyone noticed that not a single person has referenced anything in the deletion standards page, and arged why this page should be deleted pursuant to those policies? It seems to me a bit silly to be arguing for deletion...without arguing for deletion. No one has made the case for deletion, at best some people have advanced an argument for modification. --[[User:Felix Culpa\|Felix Culpa]] 20:52, 16 March 2006 (CST)		By the way, while we are all arguing the definition of 'battle,' 'military event,' and general semantics, has anyone noticed that not a single person has referenced anything in the deletion standards page, and arged why this page should be deleted pursuant to those policies? It seems to me a bit silly to be arguing for deletion...without arguing for deletion. No one has made the case for deletion, at best some people have advanced an argument for modification. --[[User:Felix Culpa\|Felix Culpa]] 20:52, 16 March 2006 (CST)

	:We haven't really worked on such a thing, to be honest. --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 21:01, 16 March 2006 (CST)		:We haven't really worked on such a thing, to be honest. --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 21:01, 16 March 2006 (CST)
	::Well, there is [[Battlestar Wiki:Candidates for deletion]]. If someone is going to put the deletion tag on an article and argue for it to be done, the relevant section should be referenced/argued. (Sorry, it's the lawyer in me talking.). --[[User:Felix Culpa\|Felix Culpa]] 21:17, 16 March 2006 (CST)		::Well, there is [[Battlestar Wiki:Candidates for deletion]]. If someone is going to put the deletion tag on an article and argue for it to be done, the relevant section should be referenced/argued. (Sorry, it's the lawyer in me talking.). --[[User:Felix Culpa\|Felix Culpa]] 21:17, 16 March 2006 (CST)
	:::Hmmm, it doesn't meet any of those criteria as far as I can see.--[[User:Noneofyourbusiness\|Noneofyourbusiness]] 23:05, 16 March 2006 (EST)		:::Hmmm, it doesn't meet any of those criteria as far as I can see.--[[User:Noneofyourbusiness\|Noneofyourbusiness]] 23:05, 16 March 2006 (EST)

Mercifull: "Battle" status

2006-07-10T23:39:05Z

"Battle" status

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:39, 10 July 2006
Line 74:		Line 74:

	With no further arguments and the article's content and format generally agreed to per the discussion here, I have removed the delete tag and updated the article. Until or unless more data comes from Season 3 events, this will remain a general article and not a battle page. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 17:25, 24 June 2006 (CDT)		With no further arguments and the article's content and format generally agreed to per the discussion here, I have removed the delete tag and updated the article. Until or unless more data comes from Season 3 events, this will remain a general article and not a battle page. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 17:25, 24 June 2006 (CDT)

			==Battle status==
			Apoligies for making the changes to this article into a [http://www.battlestarwiki.org/en/index.php?title=Fall_of_New_Caprica&oldid=63547 battle style] earlier. I got a bit carried away when I was editing all these pages. That said, I still think it should have a battle template but nvm, that discussion is long past ^_^ --[[User:Mercifull\|Mercifull]] <sup>([[User talk:Mercifull\|Talk]]/[[Special:Contributions/Mercifull\|Contribs]])</sup> 18:39, 10 July 2006 (CDT)

Spencerian: Updated.

2006-06-24T22:25:02Z

Updated.

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:25, 24 June 2006
Line 70:		Line 70:

	The "Battle" pages do require standardization. See the Standards and Guidelines talk for my proposal. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 17:51, 10 May 2006 (CDT)		The "Battle" pages do require standardization. See the Standards and Guidelines talk for my proposal. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 17:51, 10 May 2006 (CDT)

			== Consensus Reached ==

			With no further arguments and the article's content and format generally agreed to per the discussion here, I have removed the delete tag and updated the article. Until or unless more data comes from Season 3 events, this will remain a general article and not a battle page. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 17:25, 24 June 2006 (CDT)

The Merovingian at 01:04, 31 May 2006

2006-05-31T01:04:11Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:04, 31 May 2006
Line 62:		Line 62:
	:::::A "Battle" is defined as "An encounter between opposing forces". The Fall was certainly that. I think the article should be cleaned up, have redundant information removed, and should focus on the military situation at the end of the episode, but it needs to keep its 'battle' format.[[User:Werrf\|Werrf]] 13:50, 17 March 2006 (GMT)		:::::A "Battle" is defined as "An encounter between opposing forces". The Fall was certainly that. I think the article should be cleaned up, have redundant information removed, and should focus on the military situation at the end of the episode, but it needs to keep its 'battle' format.[[User:Werrf\|Werrf]] 13:50, 17 March 2006 (GMT)

	I'm cleaning this up. I'm looked it over, and while the "Occupation of Czechoslovakia" is a military-political event, it is not a "battle", and wikipedia doesn't include it in a string of battles linked together in succession. I'm going to clean this up along SteelViper's suggestion of the Fall of Saigon, and after that we'll see if it's worth keeping this article.		I'm cleaning this up. I'm looked it over, and while the "Occupation of Czechoslovakia" is a military-political event, it is not a "battle", and wikipedia doesn't include it in a string of battles linked together in succession. I'm going to clean this up along SteelViper's suggestion of the Fall of Saigon, and after that we'll see if it's worth keeping this article. --[[User:The Merovingian\|The Merovingian]] <sup>([[Special:Contributions/The Merovingian\|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/The Merovingian\|E]])</sup> 20:04, 30 May 2006 (CDT)

	:Maybe a change of name.. [[Takeover of New Caprica]] --[[User:Shane\|Shane]] <sup>([[User_Talk:Shane\|T]] - [[Special:Contributions/Shane\|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/Shane\|E]])</sup> 19:43, 30 May 2006 (CDT)		:Maybe a change of name.. [[Takeover of New Caprica]] --[[User:Shane\|Shane]] <sup>([[User_Talk:Shane\|T]] - [[Special:Contributions/Shane\|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/Shane\|E]])</sup> 19:43, 30 May 2006 (CDT)

The Merovingian at 01:03, 31 May 2006

2006-05-31T01:03:36Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:03, 31 May 2006
Line 65:		Line 65:

	:Maybe a change of name.. [[Takeover of New Caprica]] --[[User:Shane\|Shane]] <sup>([[User_Talk:Shane\|T]] - [[Special:Contributions/Shane\|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/Shane\|E]])</sup> 19:43, 30 May 2006 (CDT)		:Maybe a change of name.. [[Takeover of New Caprica]] --[[User:Shane\|Shane]] <sup>([[User_Talk:Shane\|T]] - [[Special:Contributions/Shane\|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/Shane\|E]])</sup> 19:43, 30 May 2006 (CDT)
			::Shane that doesn't really justify an article: Memory Alpha doesn't really have articles like that. It's realy pushed beyond the limits.--[[User:The Merovingian\|The Merovingian]] <sup>([[Special:Contributions/The Merovingian\|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/The Merovingian\|E]])</sup> 20:03, 30 May 2006 (CDT)

	== Updated Article ==		== Updated Article ==

	The "Battle" pages do require standardization. See the Standards and Guidelines talk for my proposal. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 17:51, 10 May 2006 (CDT)		The "Battle" pages do require standardization. See the Standards and Guidelines talk for my proposal. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 17:51, 10 May 2006 (CDT)

Shane: merge to a new name?

2006-05-31T00:43:45Z

merge to a new name?

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:43, 31 May 2006
Line 64:		Line 64:
	I'm cleaning this up. I'm looked it over, and while the "Occupation of Czechoslovakia" is a military-political event, it is not a "battle", and wikipedia doesn't include it in a string of battles linked together in succession. I'm going to clean this up along SteelViper's suggestion of the Fall of Saigon, and after that we'll see if it's worth keeping this article.		I'm cleaning this up. I'm looked it over, and while the "Occupation of Czechoslovakia" is a military-political event, it is not a "battle", and wikipedia doesn't include it in a string of battles linked together in succession. I'm going to clean this up along SteelViper's suggestion of the Fall of Saigon, and after that we'll see if it's worth keeping this article.

			:Maybe a change of name.. [[Takeover of New Caprica]] --[[User:Shane\|Shane]] <sup>([[User_Talk:Shane\|T]] - [[Special:Contributions/Shane\|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/Shane\|E]])</sup> 19:43, 30 May 2006 (CDT)
	== Updated Article ==		== Updated Article ==

	The "Battle" pages do require standardization. See the Standards and Guidelines talk for my proposal. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 17:51, 10 May 2006 (CDT)		The "Battle" pages do require standardization. See the Standards and Guidelines talk for my proposal. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 17:51, 10 May 2006 (CDT)

The Merovingian at 00:30, 31 May 2006

2006-05-31T00:30:09Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:30, 31 May 2006
Line 61:		Line 61:
	I agree that this should be kept as a military event. [[User:Philwelch\|Philwelch]] 02:10, 17 March 2006 (CST)		I agree that this should be kept as a military event. [[User:Philwelch\|Philwelch]] 02:10, 17 March 2006 (CST)
	:::::A "Battle" is defined as "An encounter between opposing forces". The Fall was certainly that. I think the article should be cleaned up, have redundant information removed, and should focus on the military situation at the end of the episode, but it needs to keep its 'battle' format.[[User:Werrf\|Werrf]] 13:50, 17 March 2006 (GMT)		:::::A "Battle" is defined as "An encounter between opposing forces". The Fall was certainly that. I think the article should be cleaned up, have redundant information removed, and should focus on the military situation at the end of the episode, but it needs to keep its 'battle' format.[[User:Werrf\|Werrf]] 13:50, 17 March 2006 (GMT)

			I'm cleaning this up. I'm looked it over, and while the "Occupation of Czechoslovakia" is a military-political event, it is not a "battle", and wikipedia doesn't include it in a string of battles linked together in succession. I'm going to clean this up along SteelViper's suggestion of the Fall of Saigon, and after that we'll see if it's worth keeping this article.

	== Updated Article ==		== Updated Article ==

	The "Battle" pages do require standardization. See the Standards and Guidelines talk for my proposal. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 17:51, 10 May 2006 (CDT)		The "Battle" pages do require standardization. See the Standards and Guidelines talk for my proposal. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 17:51, 10 May 2006 (CDT)

Spencerian: Updated Article

2006-05-10T22:51:01Z

Updated Article

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:51, 10 May 2006
Line 61:		Line 61:
	I agree that this should be kept as a military event. [[User:Philwelch\|Philwelch]] 02:10, 17 March 2006 (CST)		I agree that this should be kept as a military event. [[User:Philwelch\|Philwelch]] 02:10, 17 March 2006 (CST)
	:::::A "Battle" is defined as "An encounter between opposing forces". The Fall was certainly that. I think the article should be cleaned up, have redundant information removed, and should focus on the military situation at the end of the episode, but it needs to keep its 'battle' format.[[User:Werrf\|Werrf]] 13:50, 17 March 2006 (GMT)		:::::A "Battle" is defined as "An encounter between opposing forces". The Fall was certainly that. I think the article should be cleaned up, have redundant information removed, and should focus on the military situation at the end of the episode, but it needs to keep its 'battle' format.[[User:Werrf\|Werrf]] 13:50, 17 March 2006 (GMT)

			== Updated Article ==

			The "Battle" pages do require standardization. See the Standards and Guidelines talk for my proposal. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 17:51, 10 May 2006 (CDT)

Steelviper: + tag switch explanation

2006-03-17T13:44:42Z

+ tag switch explanation

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:44, 17 March 2006
Line 58:		Line 58:
	:::Hmmm, it doesn't meet any of those criteria as far as I can see.--[[User:Noneofyourbusiness\|Noneofyourbusiness]] 23:05, 16 March 2006 (EST)		:::Hmmm, it doesn't meet any of those criteria as far as I can see.--[[User:Noneofyourbusiness\|Noneofyourbusiness]] 23:05, 16 March 2006 (EST)
	::::Precisely my point. There is no good reason for the deletion of this page, at best people have (highly debatable) problems with its content/presentation. --[[User:Felix Culpa\|Felix Culpa]] 21:45, 16 March 2006 (CST)		::::Precisely my point. There is no good reason for the deletion of this page, at best people have (highly debatable) problems with its content/presentation. --[[User:Felix Culpa\|Felix Culpa]] 21:45, 16 March 2006 (CST)
			:::::I replaced the delete tag with a cleanup tag. Sometime articles around here will get tagged with a delete tag, and it ends up functioning more like a cleanup tag (since the content ends up being reworked, or merged, or something other than deleted). We are slow to delete anything that might have merit. --[[User:Steelviper\|Steelviper]] 07:44, 17 March 2006 (CST)
	I agree that this should be kept as a military event. [[User:Philwelch\|Philwelch]] 02:10, 17 March 2006 (CST)		I agree that this should be kept as a military event. [[User:Philwelch\|Philwelch]] 02:10, 17 March 2006 (CST)
	:::::A "Battle" is defined as "An encounter between opposing forces". The Fall was certainly that. I think the article should be cleaned up, have redundant information removed, and should focus on the military situation at the end of the episode, but it needs to keep its 'battle' format.[[User:Werrf\|Werrf]] 13:50, 17 March 2006 (GMT)		:::::A "Battle" is defined as "An encounter between opposing forces". The Fall was certainly that. I think the article should be cleaned up, have redundant information removed, and should focus on the military situation at the end of the episode, but it needs to keep its 'battle' format.[[User:Werrf\|Werrf]] 13:50, 17 March 2006 (GMT)

Werrf at 13:27, 17 March 2006

2006-03-17T13:27:25Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:27, 17 March 2006
Line 60:		Line 60:

	I agree that this should be kept as a military event. [[User:Philwelch\|Philwelch]] 02:10, 17 March 2006 (CST)		I agree that this should be kept as a military event. [[User:Philwelch\|Philwelch]] 02:10, 17 March 2006 (CST)
	:::::A "Battle" is defined as "An encounter between opposing forces". The Fall was certainly that. I think the article should be cleaned up, have redundant information removed, and should focus on the military situation at the end of the episode, but it needs to keep its 'battle' format.		:::::A "Battle" is defined as "An encounter between opposing forces". The Fall was certainly that. I think the article should be cleaned up, have redundant information removed, and should focus on the military situation at the end of the episode, but it needs to keep its 'battle' format.[[User:Werrf\|Werrf]] 13:50, 17 March 2006 (GMT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:53, 11 April 2020
Line 34:		Line 34:
	:::::::::::Adama getting shot was also a "momentous" event in the BSG universe. Finding the Tomb of Athena was a momentous event in the BSG universe. The birth of the Cylon/Human Hybrid Hera (she's the messiah) was a momentous event in the BSG universe. But they don't warrant their own pages. This is an online encyclopedia. We make up some special pages for terminology, battles, Cylon speculation, etc. but we're not writing a chapter book. None of the other "momentous" events are receiving their own page and neither should this one. We've already established that it's not a battle, but it appears that the consensus is in agreement that it's just restating things which should be said on "New Caprica". --[[User:The Merovingian\|The Merovingian]] 15:00, 15 March 2006 (CST)		:::::::::::Adama getting shot was also a "momentous" event in the BSG universe. Finding the Tomb of Athena was a momentous event in the BSG universe. The birth of the Cylon/Human Hybrid Hera (she's the messiah) was a momentous event in the BSG universe. But they don't warrant their own pages. This is an online encyclopedia. We make up some special pages for terminology, battles, Cylon speculation, etc. but we're not writing a chapter book. None of the other "momentous" events are receiving their own page and neither should this one. We've already established that it's not a battle, but it appears that the consensus is in agreement that it's just restating things which should be said on "New Caprica". --[[User:The Merovingian\|The Merovingian]] 15:00, 15 March 2006 (CST)

	:::::::::::::Momentous, yes, but not discrete or truly amenable to separate description/designation. "New Caprica" is a (theoretically) large subset of things, and encompasses every physical 'fact' about the planet as well as everything that happens on or in relation to it. Take this logic to its logical end, and there should only be one article on this entire wiki, entitled "Battlestar Galactica," containing absolutely all the information about the show. It makes perfect sense to segregate the fall of New Caprica, at least partially, into its own article because it is a major event. Adama having been shot and the birth of Hera are important events....they are also solely involve major (or potentially major) characters in the series, and are distinguishable on that basis alone. Major discrete '''happenings''' about which we have appreciable information (individual battles, the election, and yes, the fall of New Caprica) do deserve their own articles. See ~~Peter Farago~~'s comments below, I think he hit the nail on the head. --[[User:Felix Culpa\|Felix Culpa]] 20:22, 15 March 2006 (CST)		:::::::::::::Momentous, yes, but not discrete or truly amenable to separate description/designation. "New Caprica" is a (theoretically) large subset of things, and encompasses every physical 'fact' about the planet as well as everything that happens on or in relation to it. Take this logic to its logical end, and there should only be one article on this entire wiki, entitled "Battlestar Galactica," containing absolutely all the information about the show. It makes perfect sense to segregate the fall of New Caprica, at least partially, into its own article because it is a major event. Adama having been shot and the birth of Hera are important events....they are also solely involve major (or potentially major) characters in the series, and are distinguishable on that basis alone. Major discrete '''happenings''' about which we have appreciable information (individual battles, the election, and yes, the fall of New Caprica) do deserve their own articles. See April Arcus's comments below, I think he hit the nail on the head. --[[User:Felix Culpa\|Felix Culpa]] 20:22, 15 March 2006 (CST)

	::I've found that a large portion of this information was already contained within the [[New Caprica]] article. Very little of this information can be considered unique in comparison to [[New Caprica]]. If you read the two articles you find nearly the same information. Therefore, the little information that is especially significant should be added to the New Caprica article and this article should be eliminated.--Zareck Rocks 13:57, 15 March 2006 (CST)		::I've found that a large portion of this information was already contained within the [[New Caprica]] article. Very little of this information can be considered unique in comparison to [[New Caprica]]. If you read the two articles you find nearly the same information. Therefore, the little information that is especially significant should be added to the New Caprica article and this article should be eliminated.--Zareck Rocks 13:57, 15 March 2006 (CST)
Line 40:		Line 40:
	:::I agree that the information is mostly duplicative of the New Caprica article, but I still think it shoul dhave an abbreviated entry in its own right. See my comments above to The Merovingian. --[[User:Felix Culpa\|Felix Culpa]] 14:54, 15 March 2006 (CST)		:::I agree that the information is mostly duplicative of the New Caprica article, but I still think it shoul dhave an abbreviated entry in its own right. See my comments above to The Merovingian. --[[User:Felix Culpa\|Felix Culpa]] 14:54, 15 March 2006 (CST)

	This does not seem to be a popular opinion, but I believe that the occupation of New Caprica does deserve a position in the military timeline, especially since it features Baltar's surrender of the colonies to Cylon forces, and will probably form the backdrop for much of season 3. The [[Wikipedia:Occupation of Czechoslovakia\|Occupation of Czechoslovakia]] was also initiated in a bloodless manner, but it would be foolish to argue that it wasn't a military event. --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 17:20, 15 March 2006 (CST)		This does not seem to be a popular opinion, but I believe that the occupation of New Caprica does deserve a position in the military timeline, especially since it features Baltar's surrender of the colonies to Cylon forces, and will probably form the backdrop for much of season 3. The [[Wikipedia:Occupation of Czechoslovakia\|Occupation of Czechoslovakia]] was also initiated in a bloodless manner, but it would be foolish to argue that it wasn't a military event. --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 17:20, 15 March 2006 (CST)

	: Nicely put, I concur absolutely. --[[User:Felix Culpa\|Felix Culpa]] 20:22, 15 March 2006 (CST)		: Nicely put, I concur absolutely. --[[User:Felix Culpa\|Felix Culpa]] 20:22, 15 March 2006 (CST)
Line 54:		Line 54:
	By the way, while we are all arguing the definition of 'battle,' 'military event,' and general semantics, has anyone noticed that not a single person has referenced anything in the deletion standards page, and arged why this page should be deleted pursuant to those policies? It seems to me a bit silly to be arguing for deletion...without arguing for deletion. No one has made the case for deletion, at best some people have advanced an argument for modification. --[[User:Felix Culpa\|Felix Culpa]] 20:52, 16 March 2006 (CST)		By the way, while we are all arguing the definition of 'battle,' 'military event,' and general semantics, has anyone noticed that not a single person has referenced anything in the deletion standards page, and arged why this page should be deleted pursuant to those policies? It seems to me a bit silly to be arguing for deletion...without arguing for deletion. No one has made the case for deletion, at best some people have advanced an argument for modification. --[[User:Felix Culpa\|Felix Culpa]] 20:52, 16 March 2006 (CST)

	:We haven't really worked on such a thing, to be honest. --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 21:01, 16 March 2006 (CST)		:We haven't really worked on such a thing, to be honest. --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 21:01, 16 March 2006 (CST)
	::Well, there is [[Battlestar Wiki:Candidates for deletion]]. If someone is going to put the deletion tag on an article and argue for it to be done, the relevant section should be referenced/argued. (Sorry, it's the lawyer in me talking.). --[[User:Felix Culpa\|Felix Culpa]] 21:17, 16 March 2006 (CST)		::Well, there is [[Battlestar Wiki:Candidates for deletion]]. If someone is going to put the deletion tag on an article and argue for it to be done, the relevant section should be referenced/argued. (Sorry, it's the lawyer in me talking.). --[[User:Felix Culpa\|Felix Culpa]] 21:17, 16 March 2006 (CST)
	:::Hmmm, it doesn't meet any of those criteria as far as I can see.--[[User:Noneofyourbusiness\|Noneofyourbusiness]] 23:05, 16 March 2006 (EST)		:::Hmmm, it doesn't meet any of those criteria as far as I can see.--[[User:Noneofyourbusiness\|Noneofyourbusiness]] 23:05, 16 March 2006 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:44, 17 March 2006
Line 58:		Line 58:
	:::Hmmm, it doesn't meet any of those criteria as far as I can see.--[[User:Noneofyourbusiness\|Noneofyourbusiness]] 23:05, 16 March 2006 (EST)		:::Hmmm, it doesn't meet any of those criteria as far as I can see.--[[User:Noneofyourbusiness\|Noneofyourbusiness]] 23:05, 16 March 2006 (EST)
	::::Precisely my point. There is no good reason for the deletion of this page, at best people have (highly debatable) problems with its content/presentation. --[[User:Felix Culpa\|Felix Culpa]] 21:45, 16 March 2006 (CST)		::::Precisely my point. There is no good reason for the deletion of this page, at best people have (highly debatable) problems with its content/presentation. --[[User:Felix Culpa\|Felix Culpa]] 21:45, 16 March 2006 (CST)
			:::::I replaced the delete tag with a cleanup tag. Sometime articles around here will get tagged with a delete tag, and it ends up functioning more like a cleanup tag (since the content ends up being reworked, or merged, or something other than deleted). We are slow to delete anything that might have merit. --[[User:Steelviper\|Steelviper]] 07:44, 17 March 2006 (CST)
	I agree that this should be kept as a military event. [[User:Philwelch\|Philwelch]] 02:10, 17 March 2006 (CST)		I agree that this should be kept as a military event. [[User:Philwelch\|Philwelch]] 02:10, 17 March 2006 (CST)
	:::::A "Battle" is defined as "An encounter between opposing forces". The Fall was certainly that. I think the article should be cleaned up, have redundant information removed, and should focus on the military situation at the end of the episode, but it needs to keep its 'battle' format.[[User:Werrf\|Werrf]] 13:50, 17 March 2006 (GMT)		:::::A "Battle" is defined as "An encounter between opposing forces". The Fall was certainly that. I think the article should be cleaned up, have redundant information removed, and should focus on the military situation at the end of the episode, but it needs to keep its 'battle' format.[[User:Werrf\|Werrf]] 13:50, 17 March 2006 (GMT)