Editing Talk:Laura Roslin/Archive 1

==Return as President?==

In his latest blog, Ron Moore says that Roslin's time on New Caprica will 'affect the way she views her role as president', or words to that effect.  Should a spoiler box be added indicating that Roslin will most likely become president again, based on Moore's statement?--[[User:Dallan007|Dallan007]] 21:31, 16 August 2006 (CDT)
:Nah, its kind of implied/part of the show.  --[[User:The Merovingian|The Merovingian]] <sup>([[Special:Contributions/The Merovingian|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/The Merovingian|E]])</sup> 21:32, 16 August 2006 (CDT)
:And, of course, we should wait to see ''how'' it will happen. Further, I would think there would be more interest on how Baltar will be viewed or treated. Leading 30,000 people to the hands of their enemy '''can't''' be something the populace will shrug off. If any die on New Caprica, they might want his head. --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 07:52, 17 August 2006 (CDT)

==Source for SkyOne?==
Where does this "SkyOne" information come from anyway?  I've tried the SkyOne website and can't find any of these "SkyOne" information things for Roslin, Starbuck, Baltar, etc.  Does anyone actually have a LINK to any of these things?  I'm confused.  If there's no links, we may have to delete these. --[[User:Ricimer|Ricimer]] 15:12, 23 January 2006 (EST)

:I generally concur with this. Like the unverified Zoic-sourced info on "other" battlestars in RDM, this source needs to be linked per the [[Battlestar Wiki:Citation Jihad]] or be deleted. Such information also appears on [[Kara Thrace]] and the [[Lee Adama]] articles. --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 15:15, 23 January 2006 (EST)

::And also Sharon.  Troyian seems to have been a busy little beaver.  I mean, I understand when people read articles in magaines that aren't online, etc., but if this SkyOne thing has a website, why has no one ever provided a link to ANY of this information? --[[User:Ricimer|Ricimer]] 15:26, 23 January 2006 (EST)

:::This is my fault. I found the SkyOne information on "[http://community.livejournal.com/thesecretcylon/ The Secret Cylon]" Livejournal community, in a pair of posts dated October 24th, 2005 – [http://community.livejournal.com/thesecretcylon/13190.html Part 1], [http://community.livejournal.com/thesecretcylon/13550.html Part 2]. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 19:06, 23 January 2006 (EST)

*Apparently the information was originally on the SkyOne site, but at some point it was removed for some reason. Luckily some fans wrote all the information on the characters down, so it was saved. -- [[User:Troyian|Troyian]] 23:29, 23 January 2006 (EST)

: "Apparentky" according to who? I mean--maybe, rather than saving this information from web page editors, they just made it up and ''said'' they were saving it. Or maybe the reason it was removed is because it will be shown on screen later to be wrong. Or something like that. Anyway... Just thought I'd point out how little we really know about the source of this. Of course, all of my post is moot if one of us actually read it on the SkyOne web site before it was taken down. --[[User:Day|Day]] 12:20, 24 January 2006 (EST)

==Succession Boxes==
What's up with the succession templates towards the bottom of this one? Are those templates to be? They're currently busted... --[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 15:30, 31 January 2006 (EST)
: Looking at the history, it appears Ricimer put them there yesterday. -- [[User:Joe.Beaudoin|Joe Beaudoin]] 15:36, 31 January 2006 (EST)

::History? Oh. THAT's what that button is for. (Actually, I just suggested another user look at the history on Lorne Greene, so my [[Radiological Alarm|hypocrite alarm]] just went off. My bad.) Oh, Joe... Did you get my email? Pia (of battlestarfanclub.de) responded, and I forwarded it to you. It sounds encouraging. --[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 15:40, 31 January 2006 (EST)


I put them in after seeing them on Roslin's Wikipedia article.  I have no idea why they aren't working here.  Can someone please try to get them to work?  If not, delete it if we can't fix it. --[[User:Ricimer|Ricimer]] 17:52, 31 January 2006 (EST)

:The wikipedia version has the benefit of all the breadth and depth of the countless Wikipedia:Templates at its disposal. I've started playing with creating equivalent templates, but the conditional templates appear to be acting a little funny. Since there's unlikely to be a huge string of presidents, it might be worthwhile to just manually create wikiboxes at the bottom that LOOK like the succession box, and copy and paste should the need arise to pass the torch. --[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 18:20, 31 January 2006 (EST)

:: I really don't see the need to make any succession templates. (Or for a succession box at all, to be honest.) It's not like we know each president that came before Adar anyway.  -- [[User:Joe.Beaudoin|Joe Beaudoin]] 18:26, 31 January 2006 (EST)


:::Well, this is one of those "for the sake of fun" things:  it makes the article look all shiny and "official"..."Just like a real-life President's article on Wikipedia!" hahah, etc. etc. --[[User:Ricimer|Ricimer]] 18:36, 31 January 2006 (EST)


'''''Um, we need at least two people to have a succesion box.''''' <-- Where is that in the Standards Pages? I put it there because it was a known fact that she was the secertary of education before she was the President. As Peter once told me, be sure to discuss your reasons for removing a change after someone made an edit. --[[User:Shane|Shane]] <sup>([[User_Talk:Shane|T]] - [[Special:Contributions/Shane|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/Shane|E]])</sup> 00:00, 26 March 2006 (CST)

Shane..."be sure to discuss your reasons"...er, you just '''quoted''' the reasons which I gave...in the reasons summary box...very clearly.  No, succession boxes have nothing to do with previous jobs or assignments.  No, it's not really justified to have a succession box if we have only one person, not even two.  I am going to go to Standards and Conventions and make this clear. --[[User:The Merovingian|The Merovingian]] <sup>([[Special:Contributions/The Merovingian|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/The Merovingian|E]])</sup> 00:11, 26 March 2006 (CST)

:I'd say it's okay to have an unfilled succession box where it helps to illustrate the career of a particularly character - that is, if they have completed succsession boxes, they could also have unfilled ones as appropriate (thus, for example, we can see Baltar's progression from Caprican delegate to VP to President without needing to know who preceded or succeeded him as the caprican delegate). --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 09:42, 26 March 2006 (CST)

: Any additions to the S&C need to be discussed prior to their addition to the S&C page itself. Additionally, I don't see the problem in adding the succession box for Roslin's being secretary of education; it is a valid cabinet-level position worthy of a succession box. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] 19:51, 26 March 2006 (CST)

== Deceased vs † ==
In the character templates, rather than using KIA or Deceased, should we switch to the cross? It's succinct, efficient, and I like the way it looks on the battle pages. I had thought about migrating it over to the TOS character data templates, but this was a good opportunity to bring it up --[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 15:14, 10 February 2006 (EST)

:First, readers might not understand that at first glance.  Second, "KIA" still seems fitting for military personnel.  Possibly † could be used for non-military civilians (no KIA), but I really think it would cause more confusion than good.  --[[User:The Merovingian|The Merovingian]] 15:26, 10 February 2006 (EST)

:Also, shouldn't we be using a Greek symbol of death, as opposed to a Christian one? :P --[[User:Redwall|Redwall]] 19:54, 10 February 2006 (EST)

::I actually got the symbol off of Wikipedia's Battle Pages.  Like for Admiral Horation Nelson at the Battle of Trafalgar.  So if it's Wikipedia's convention to use it (they even use it for Roman battles taking place before the Christian era), then I guess it is our policy too. --[[User:The Merovingian|The Merovingian]] 19:55, 10 February 2006 (EST)

:::I like the cross. Sure, the colonials don't have access to christian symbology, but this isn't supposed to be an "in-universe" document, and the meaning is transparent to the reader (and succinct). --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 22:58, 10 February 2006 (EST)

== Homeworld ==

The last episode seems to indicate she's from Geminon (Zarek: "You'd be surprised how many people want the cool assurances of a scientist as opposed to the religious madness of the Geminese"). [[User:Kuralyov|Kuralyov]] 15:00, 21 February 2006 (EST)
:I think Zarek was referring to how the Gemenese were railroading public opinion by supporting Roslin-as-Prophet.  Its an allegory to how politicians in modern times pander to the religious and how the religious in return strong-arm the politicians.  A good case in point of this is seen in [[The Captain's Hand]] with Sara Porter demanding Roslin outlaw abortions or she'll make sure she loses Gemenon's vote in the election.   If anything at all the series seems to be hinting that she's from Caprica but just hasn't come out and said it yet. -- [[User:Kahran|Kahran]] 17:32, 21 February 2006 (EST)
::I agree with Kahran. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 19:27, 21 February 2006 (EST)
::Didn't she serve under Adar when he was mayor (on Caprica)? --[[User:Redwall|Redwall]] 19:35, 21 February 2006 (EST)
:::No.  They were just explaining how the Gemonon population sees her as a prophet (see "[[Fragged]]") and thus really supports her.  She served with Adar even when he was Mayor, which has led us to ''assume'' based on the evidence that she is from Caprica (of course, they have never flat out said this, and they could say she's from someplace else later without contradicting themselves, but it's our running assumption). --[[User:The Merovingian|The Merovingian]] 00:53, 22 February 2006 (EST)
:::We know she served under Adar in the mayor's office, but our only confirmation that Adar was Mayor of Caprica City is from the less-than unofficial SkyOne blurbs. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 02:57, 22 February 2006 (EST)

== Major Pre-Season 3 Revision ==

I've heavily reduced and reorganized the content of this bio for length and brevity, removing data already in the larger episode summaries but leaving appropriate links. Someone had also changed the verb tense, which I also returned. The result should make it easy to add brief updates for season 3 without making extensive revisits to the character's past. --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 11:13, 22 September 2006 (CDT)

:I've reformatted and reconcised the content of this central character's article once more to match that of [[William Adama]] and [[Gaius Baltar]] in preperation for more data from season 3. --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 09:50, 4 October 2006 (CDT)

== Roslin to die by episode 3? ==

This is speculation, but in the TV Guide interview with David Eick, he notes a "very central character" will not live to see the end of episode 3. I hate to think it, because she's one of my favorites, but Roslin would be a logical choice. The thing hanging over her head is the [[Pythia|Pythian prophesy]] of the "dying leader," who leads the caravan towards Earth, but the leader will not live to the trip's end. Guess we have 2 weeks until we find out. --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 10:47, 6 October 2006 (CDT)
:Just to ease your mind, there are other official sources (one being a RDM blog 
{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="1" class="spoiltext_border"
! {{spoilerplate}}
|-
| id="spoil-text" class="spoiltext_box" | Roslin returns to the presidency
|}
), that is probably not the case. However, after the spoiler fiasco, I have a feeling there may be some "red herrings" swimming around. --[[User:Gougef|FrankieG]] 10:58, 6 October 2006 (CDT)
:[[Image:BSG WIKI Caution.png|20px]]Try not to make such Spoilerific titles in the future please... --[[User:Mercifull|Mercifull]] <sup>([[User talk:Mercifull|Talk]]/[[Special:Contributions/Mercifull|Contribs]])</sup> 11:01, 6 October 2006 (CDT)
::I had the same reaction over at Dualla. In this case, it's speculation (based on a vague spoiler from Eick). It is something people should keep in mind, but ultimately I end up avoiding the site on late Fridays until I've seen the show because some things tend to slip out anyway. --[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 11:05, 6 October 2006 (CDT)
::Talk pages are "neutral territory," guys, per [[Battlestar Wiki:Spoiler Policy]]. I'm sorry if I ruined any suspense, though. I'm just stating my guesses. --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 11:22, 6 October 2006 (CDT)

==A question on character article formatting==
Hello all. I was just [[Special:Random|rolling the dice]] when I noticed something. Please compare [[William Adama]] and/or [[Laura Roslin]] to [[Lee Adama]] and/or [[Tom Zarek]] .... I much prefer the articles where the content is written in paragraphs, not all bullet points. Which is the accepted format? Either? Bullet points until someone comes along and re-writes? Just curious. [[User:JubalHarshaw|JubalHarshaw]] 12:18, 28 February 2007 (CST)
:I like the [[Lee Adama]] format better as well. Admins, what's the official policy here? --[[User:Catrope|Catrope]] 12:27, 28 February 2007 (CST)
:I don't think there is really a policy, but I agree that points that belong together (by episode, or if short by theme) should be put into one paragraph. Such a huge list of bullet points doesn't look good. --[[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 12:32, 28 February 2007 (CST)
::The bullet points were an attempt to reduce the size of the article before Season 3 started, basically a summary of everything that had already occured. I prefer paragraphs myself. --[[User:Talos|Talos]] 13:05, 28 February 2007 (CST)
::Correct. Check the history on the articles. Basically, if the characters remained in paragraph format, even with concise paragraphs, they were beginning to approach or exceed the 32KB recommended size constraint. The trouble is that some of these major characters are involved in EVERY episode (or nearly every episode) for 3 seasons now. Plus we have to keep in mind that we've got at least one more season to go, with the possibility for more in the future. If somebody proposes a better solution, we're definitely receptive to new ideas. I think one suggestion was to have both a condensed version and a long (paragraph) version, but the worry there was that the redundancy would be a problem. (Having to update/correct things twice, and the ability for them to get out of sync, etc.) --[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 13:20, 28 February 2007 (CST)
:::Ah, I see. It has been suggested [http://en.battlestarwiki.org/wiki/Battlestar_Wiki_talk:Standards_and_Conventions#Wikipedia:Article_Size.2C_Part_2 here] to split long article into sub-pages. --[[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 13:28, 28 February 2007 (CST)
::::I spearheaded, at least with this and three or so other central character pages, the bullet point past season summaries, for what SV has already explained. The hardest part of the articles is to decide if they should '''document every dang thing the character does''' (journal the character) or attempt to concise their personality and motivations, noting key points of their development (a ''true'' character portrait). That's what the current format tries to do, letting the episode articles describe the specifics of any character actions. Hopefully that explains it. Otherwise, yes, the 32kb barrier, as well as being able to make sense of it all, come to a head. --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 14:46, 28 February 2007 (CST)
:::::In [[Lee Adama]] the 32KB barrier is no problem, as each of the individual sections is <32 KB. But I agree that it would be a good idea to have both a short summary and a longer story. --[[User:Catrope|Catrope]] 04:34, 1 March 2007 (CST)

=="unmarried"==
Does it seem odd to anyone else that Roslin's short blurb at the top of the article describes her as an unmarried woman? This may be accurate, but it is a stupid place to mention what seems like a minor detail about the character. I note that the marital status of other characters is not typically included in their initial blurb. Shouldn't this detail about Roslin be moved somewhere else? --[[User:Israi|Israi]] 13:16, 12 March 2007 (CDT)
:Part of the prominence may be due to the fact that that was an "unsolved mystery" for a while, but now we have a citable source regarding her marital status. As long as the citation is moved with it, I wouldn't have a problem seeing that moved out of the top blurb into the background somewhere. --[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 13:52, 12 March 2007 (CDT)
:Ditto. Anyway, the page may need to be rewritten should the [[BW:TANK|think tank]] proposal pass. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]]</sup> 14:24, 12 March 2007 (CDT)