Talk:Life Forms of the Twelve Colonies/Archive 1 - Revision history

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

2020-04-11T01:53:56Z

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

Serenity: Jake and the cat are NOT the only animals seen. Proof inside

2007-03-30T15:58:16Z

Jake and the cat are NOT the only animals seen. Proof inside

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:58, 30 March 2007
Line 44:		Line 44:

	::Thanks for the clarification. Sorry for the rollback's effects; as you might learn yourself, rollbacks take away all recent consecutive contributions by a user, a side-effect I sometimes forget. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 11:54, 3 January 2007 (CST)		::Thanks for the clarification. Sorry for the rollback's effects; as you might learn yourself, rollbacks take away all recent consecutive contributions by a user, a side-effect I sometimes forget. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 11:54, 3 January 2007 (CST)

			[http://galacticastation.com/Screencaps/s1/103/bscap152.htm Here] you can see a rat from "Bastille Day" and [http://galacticastation.com/Screencaps/s1/106/bscap512.htm here] are bats from "Litmus". So Jake and Lampkin's cat are '''not''' the only live animals in the show. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 10:58, 30 March 2007 (CDT)

Spencerian: /* Native Colonial Animals seen in the Series */

2007-01-03T17:54:11Z

Native Colonial Animals seen in the Series

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:54, 3 January 2007
Line 42:		Line 42:
	:Bats can been seen in Litmus flying out of a building (see talk point above. Doesn't seem to have been added to the article). I think rats - or one at least - can be seen in that scene where Helo and Sharon find a dead body; they shoot one. Although it's non-Colonial, a bird is seen on Kobol.		:Bats can been seen in Litmus flying out of a building (see talk point above. Doesn't seem to have been added to the article). I think rats - or one at least - can be seen in that scene where Helo and Sharon find a dead body; they shoot one. Although it's non-Colonial, a bird is seen on Kobol.
	:You shouldn't have just reverted everything though. I added some bulletpoints for clarity and a tense fix too --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 10:35, 3 January 2007 (CST)		:You shouldn't have just reverted everything though. I added some bulletpoints for clarity and a tense fix too --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 10:35, 3 January 2007 (CST)

			::Thanks for the clarification. Sorry for the rollback's effects; as you might learn yourself, rollbacks take away all recent consecutive contributions by a user, a side-effect I sometimes forget. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 11:54, 3 January 2007 (CST)

Serenity: /* Native Colonial Animals seen in the Series */

2007-01-03T16:35:33Z

Native Colonial Animals seen in the Series

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:35, 3 January 2007
Line 39:		Line 39:

	I rolled back Serenity's recent removal of a comment that the dog, Jake, is the only Colonial-native animal actually seen in the series, but without a documented source for the removal. Has there been any other live animal from the Colonies that has been seen (not just mentioned) prior to Jake? If so, please name the source(s) and add them to the article, whereby the notation on Jake the Dog can be removed. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 10:30, 3 January 2007 (CST)		I rolled back Serenity's recent removal of a comment that the dog, Jake, is the only Colonial-native animal actually seen in the series, but without a documented source for the removal. Has there been any other live animal from the Colonies that has been seen (not just mentioned) prior to Jake? If so, please name the source(s) and add them to the article, whereby the notation on Jake the Dog can be removed. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 10:30, 3 January 2007 (CST)

			:Bats can been seen in Litmus flying out of a building (see talk point above. Doesn't seem to have been added to the article). I think rats - or one at least - can be seen in that scene where Helo and Sharon find a dead body; they shoot one. Although it's non-Colonial, a bird is seen on Kobol.
			:You shouldn't have just reverted everything though. I added some bulletpoints for clarity and a tense fix too --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 10:35, 3 January 2007 (CST)

Spencerian: Native Colonial Animals seen in the Series

2007-01-03T16:30:45Z

Native Colonial Animals seen in the Series

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:30, 3 January 2007
Line 35:		Line 35:

	Bats were seen in [[Litmus]] flying out of that warehouse in the unnamed Caprican city that Helo rescued G-Sharon. --[[User:Homeworld616\|Homeworld616]] 14:16, 3 July 2006 (CDT)		Bats were seen in [[Litmus]] flying out of that warehouse in the unnamed Caprican city that Helo rescued G-Sharon. --[[User:Homeworld616\|Homeworld616]] 14:16, 3 July 2006 (CDT)

			== Native Colonial Animals seen in the Series ==

			I rolled back Serenity's recent removal of a comment that the dog, Jake, is the only Colonial-native animal actually seen in the series, but without a documented source for the removal. Has there been any other live animal from the Colonies that has been seen (not just mentioned) prior to Jake? If so, please name the source(s) and add them to the article, whereby the notation on Jake the Dog can be removed. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 10:30, 3 January 2007 (CST)

Homeworld: New animal

2006-07-03T19:16:46Z

New animal

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:16, 3 July 2006
Line 31:		Line 31:

	::::I suppose, in the end, it's an interesting anecdote, but not conclusive about any particular life form, merely indicative of how those life forms can be served as meals. --[[User:MASON\|Mason]] 12:42, 22 November 2005 (EST)		::::I suppose, in the end, it's an interesting anecdote, but not conclusive about any particular life form, merely indicative of how those life forms can be served as meals. --[[User:MASON\|Mason]] 12:42, 22 November 2005 (EST)

			== Bats ==

			Bats were seen in [[Litmus]] flying out of that warehouse in the unnamed Caprican city that Helo rescued G-Sharon. --[[User:Homeworld616\|Homeworld616]] 14:16, 3 July 2006 (CDT)

CalculatinAvatar: /* Coffea */

2005-12-29T21:25:56Z

Coffea

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:25, 29 December 2005
Line 16:		Line 16:
	::Well, I'd argue Wikipedia is not authoritative as a source; while I read it a great deal, it values consensus over credentials far more than is healthy for a reference of anything but convenience. Anyway, that page seems to be named for the genus, as "coffea" is used only to refer to the genus in the body of the article. It is never used to mean "coffee plant," which ''is'' used several times; additionally, "coffea" appears in italics with the exception of a single caption; although there are several reasons it might be italicized, the most reasonable is that it is italicized as a foreign language (Latin) word. [[Wikipedia:Coffee_plant\|Coffee plant]] is a redirect to a particular species on Wikipedia, so Wikipedia behaves rather incosistently on the matter. Besides, I'd consider a dictionary a more authoritative source on an issue of spelling. --[[User:CalculatinAvatar\|CalculatinAvatar]] 02:39, 29 December 2005 (EST)		::Well, I'd argue Wikipedia is not authoritative as a source; while I read it a great deal, it values consensus over credentials far more than is healthy for a reference of anything but convenience. Anyway, that page seems to be named for the genus, as "coffea" is used only to refer to the genus in the body of the article. It is never used to mean "coffee plant," which ''is'' used several times; additionally, "coffea" appears in italics with the exception of a single caption; although there are several reasons it might be italicized, the most reasonable is that it is italicized as a foreign language (Latin) word. [[Wikipedia:Coffee_plant\|Coffee plant]] is a redirect to a particular species on Wikipedia, so Wikipedia behaves rather incosistently on the matter. Besides, I'd consider a dictionary a more authoritative source on an issue of spelling. --[[User:CalculatinAvatar\|CalculatinAvatar]] 02:39, 29 December 2005 (EST)
	:::Okay. "Coffee plant" with a pipe to wikipedia's "Coffea" entry? --[[User:Peter Farago\|Peter Farago]] 11:40, 29 December 2005 (EST)		:::Okay. "Coffee plant" with a pipe to wikipedia's "Coffea" entry? --[[User:Peter Farago\|Peter Farago]] 11:40, 29 December 2005 (EST)
			::::That sounds perfect; I'll change it. --[[User:CalculatinAvatar\|CalculatinAvatar]] 16:25, 29 December 2005 (EST)

	==Beef, Pork, and Fish Products==		==Beef, Pork, and Fish Products==

April Arcus: /* Coffea */

2005-12-29T16:40:23Z

Coffea

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:40, 29 December 2005
Line 15:		Line 15:
	:It's been "Coffea" at wikipedia since last March without any comments. --[[User:Peter Farago\|Peter Farago]] 02:23, 29 December 2005 (EST)		:It's been "Coffea" at wikipedia since last March without any comments. --[[User:Peter Farago\|Peter Farago]] 02:23, 29 December 2005 (EST)
	::Well, I'd argue Wikipedia is not authoritative as a source; while I read it a great deal, it values consensus over credentials far more than is healthy for a reference of anything but convenience. Anyway, that page seems to be named for the genus, as "coffea" is used only to refer to the genus in the body of the article. It is never used to mean "coffee plant," which ''is'' used several times; additionally, "coffea" appears in italics with the exception of a single caption; although there are several reasons it might be italicized, the most reasonable is that it is italicized as a foreign language (Latin) word. [[Wikipedia:Coffee_plant\|Coffee plant]] is a redirect to a particular species on Wikipedia, so Wikipedia behaves rather incosistently on the matter. Besides, I'd consider a dictionary a more authoritative source on an issue of spelling. --[[User:CalculatinAvatar\|CalculatinAvatar]] 02:39, 29 December 2005 (EST)		::Well, I'd argue Wikipedia is not authoritative as a source; while I read it a great deal, it values consensus over credentials far more than is healthy for a reference of anything but convenience. Anyway, that page seems to be named for the genus, as "coffea" is used only to refer to the genus in the body of the article. It is never used to mean "coffee plant," which ''is'' used several times; additionally, "coffea" appears in italics with the exception of a single caption; although there are several reasons it might be italicized, the most reasonable is that it is italicized as a foreign language (Latin) word. [[Wikipedia:Coffee_plant\|Coffee plant]] is a redirect to a particular species on Wikipedia, so Wikipedia behaves rather incosistently on the matter. Besides, I'd consider a dictionary a more authoritative source on an issue of spelling. --[[User:CalculatinAvatar\|CalculatinAvatar]] 02:39, 29 December 2005 (EST)
			:::Okay. "Coffee plant" with a pipe to wikipedia's "Coffea" entry? --[[User:Peter Farago\|Peter Farago]] 11:40, 29 December 2005 (EST)

	==Beef, Pork, and Fish Products==		==Beef, Pork, and Fish Products==

CalculatinAvatar: /* Coffea */

2005-12-29T07:39:47Z

Coffea

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:39, 29 December 2005
Line 14:		Line 14:
	''Coffea'' is a genus name, not an English-language name for a variety of plant. --[[User:CalculatinAvatar\|CalculatinAvatar]] 01:59, 29 December 2005 (EST)		''Coffea'' is a genus name, not an English-language name for a variety of plant. --[[User:CalculatinAvatar\|CalculatinAvatar]] 01:59, 29 December 2005 (EST)
	:It's been "Coffea" at wikipedia since last March without any comments. --[[User:Peter Farago\|Peter Farago]] 02:23, 29 December 2005 (EST)		:It's been "Coffea" at wikipedia since last March without any comments. --[[User:Peter Farago\|Peter Farago]] 02:23, 29 December 2005 (EST)
			::Well, I'd argue Wikipedia is not authoritative as a source; while I read it a great deal, it values consensus over credentials far more than is healthy for a reference of anything but convenience. Anyway, that page seems to be named for the genus, as "coffea" is used only to refer to the genus in the body of the article. It is never used to mean "coffee plant," which ''is'' used several times; additionally, "coffea" appears in italics with the exception of a single caption; although there are several reasons it might be italicized, the most reasonable is that it is italicized as a foreign language (Latin) word. [[Wikipedia:Coffee_plant\|Coffee plant]] is a redirect to a particular species on Wikipedia, so Wikipedia behaves rather incosistently on the matter. Besides, I'd consider a dictionary a more authoritative source on an issue of spelling. --[[User:CalculatinAvatar\|CalculatinAvatar]] 02:39, 29 December 2005 (EST)

	==Beef, Pork, and Fish Products==		==Beef, Pork, and Fish Products==

April Arcus: /* Coffea */

2005-12-29T07:23:09Z

Coffea

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:23, 29 December 2005
Line 13:		Line 13:
	http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/c/c0457400.html		http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/c/c0457400.html
	''Coffea'' is a genus name, not an English-language name for a variety of plant. --[[User:CalculatinAvatar\|CalculatinAvatar]] 01:59, 29 December 2005 (EST)		''Coffea'' is a genus name, not an English-language name for a variety of plant. --[[User:CalculatinAvatar\|CalculatinAvatar]] 01:59, 29 December 2005 (EST)
			:It's been "Coffea" at wikipedia since last March without any comments. --[[User:Peter Farago\|Peter Farago]] 02:23, 29 December 2005 (EST)

	==Beef, Pork, and Fish Products==		==Beef, Pork, and Fish Products==

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:53, 11 April 2020
Line 1:		Line 1:
	I remember cats from Starbuck's nonsense dialogue with Adama and rats from a scene on Caprica, but when were dogs, horses and goats mentioned? --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 23:15, 11 Aug 2005 (EDT)		I remember cats from Starbuck's nonsense dialogue with Adama and rats from a scene on Caprica, but when were dogs, horses and goats mentioned? --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 23:15, 11 Aug 2005 (EDT)
	:Okay, that's resolved. What about Tobacco? Does that exist in this universe, or is it replaced by the Fumarella plant? --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 16:38, 12 Aug 2005 (EDT)		:Okay, that's resolved. What about Tobacco? Does that exist in this universe, or is it replaced by the Fumarella plant? --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 16:38, 12 Aug 2005 (EDT)

	== Tiger ==		== Tiger ==
	Now why exactly is Gaeta's full name and a link to his page included? We didn't do that for anybody else. I think his name is as instantly recognizable as anyone else's. [[User:Rocky8311\|Rocky8311]] 02:20, October 19, 2005 (EDT)		Now why exactly is Gaeta's full name and a link to his page included? We didn't do that for anybody else. I think his name is as instantly recognizable as anyone else's. [[User:Rocky8311\|Rocky8311]] 02:20, October 19, 2005 (EDT)
	:Changed it since it bothers you. This page could use some love from [[Battlestar wiki:Standards and Conventions]] - after we figure out quote formats, anyway. --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 02:24, 19 October 2005 (EDT)		:Changed it since it bothers you. This page could use some love from [[Battlestar wiki:Standards and Conventions]] - after we figure out quote formats, anyway. --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 02:24, 19 October 2005 (EDT)


	==Coffea==		==Coffea==
	[[Wikipedia:Coffea\|Coffea]] is a plant. [[Wikipedia:Coffee\|Coffee]] is a drink. --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 19:39, 27 October 2005 (EDT)		[[Wikipedia:Coffea\|Coffea]] is a plant. [[Wikipedia:Coffee\|Coffee]] is a drink. --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 19:39, 27 October 2005 (EDT)

	http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/search?p=coffea&searchmode=normal&x=0&y=0		http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/search?p=coffea&searchmode=normal&x=0&y=0
	http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/c/c0457400.html		http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/c/c0457400.html
	''Coffea'' is a genus name, not an English-language name for a variety of plant. --[[User:CalculatinAvatar\|CalculatinAvatar]] 01:59, 29 December 2005 (EST)		''Coffea'' is a genus name, not an English-language name for a variety of plant. --[[User:CalculatinAvatar\|CalculatinAvatar]] 01:59, 29 December 2005 (EST)
	:It's been "Coffea" at wikipedia since last March without any comments. --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 02:23, 29 December 2005 (EST)		:It's been "Coffea" at wikipedia since last March without any comments. --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 02:23, 29 December 2005 (EST)
	::Well, I'd argue Wikipedia is not authoritative as a source; while I read it a great deal, it values consensus over credentials far more than is healthy for a reference of anything but convenience. Anyway, that page seems to be named for the genus, as "coffea" is used only to refer to the genus in the body of the article. It is never used to mean "coffee plant," which ''is'' used several times; additionally, "coffea" appears in italics with the exception of a single caption; although there are several reasons it might be italicized, the most reasonable is that it is italicized as a foreign language (Latin) word. [[Wikipedia:Coffee_plant\|Coffee plant]] is a redirect to a particular species on Wikipedia, so Wikipedia behaves rather incosistently on the matter. Besides, I'd consider a dictionary a more authoritative source on an issue of spelling. --[[User:CalculatinAvatar\|CalculatinAvatar]] 02:39, 29 December 2005 (EST)		::Well, I'd argue Wikipedia is not authoritative as a source; while I read it a great deal, it values consensus over credentials far more than is healthy for a reference of anything but convenience. Anyway, that page seems to be named for the genus, as "coffea" is used only to refer to the genus in the body of the article. It is never used to mean "coffee plant," which ''is'' used several times; additionally, "coffea" appears in italics with the exception of a single caption; although there are several reasons it might be italicized, the most reasonable is that it is italicized as a foreign language (Latin) word. [[Wikipedia:Coffee_plant\|Coffee plant]] is a redirect to a particular species on Wikipedia, so Wikipedia behaves rather incosistently on the matter. Besides, I'd consider a dictionary a more authoritative source on an issue of spelling. --[[User:CalculatinAvatar\|CalculatinAvatar]] 02:39, 29 December 2005 (EST)
	:::Okay. "Coffee plant" with a pipe to wikipedia's "Coffea" entry? --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 11:40, 29 December 2005 (EST)		:::Okay. "Coffee plant" with a pipe to wikipedia's "Coffea" entry? --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 11:40, 29 December 2005 (EST)
	::::That sounds perfect; I'll change it. --[[User:CalculatinAvatar\|CalculatinAvatar]] 16:25, 29 December 2005 (EST)		::::That sounds perfect; I'll change it. --[[User:CalculatinAvatar\|CalculatinAvatar]] 16:25, 29 December 2005 (EST)

Line 24:		Line 24:
	Can this be included in the wiki even though it's from a deleted scene (not exactly canon). --[[User:MASON\|Mason]] 00:19, 22 November 2005 (EST)		Can this be included in the wiki even though it's from a deleted scene (not exactly canon). --[[User:MASON\|Mason]] 00:19, 22 November 2005 (EST)

	:If it were an actual deleted scene posted to scifi.com, as was the case for several cut scenes from season 1, I wouldn't hesitate. As it is, all we have is Moore's paraphrase of cut dialogue to go on, so I'm a little hesitant. --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 00:51, 22 November 2005 (EST)		:If it were an actual deleted scene posted to scifi.com, as was the case for several cut scenes from season 1, I wouldn't hesitate. As it is, all we have is Moore's paraphrase of cut dialogue to go on, so I'm a little hesitant. --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 00:51, 22 November 2005 (EST)

	::No, it was posted up on the official site; all of the delightful deleted scenes for season 2....except ANY from Pegasus; guess the extra 15 minutes was so long we'll have to wait for the Extended DVD Director's Cut. -->There's quite a bit of info in these deleted scenes, many of which were only deleted for time and pacing reasons, but get stuff from series bible, etc. We're going to have to figure out our policy on this (sometimes we say "in a deleted scene this was said" and other times we just put deleted scene material in as a given, but we're going to have to spend some time sorting this out. That said, I don't think we should assume there are cows and pigs because "steaks and fillets" are just cuts of meat and could conceivably come off of any kind of animal. --[[User:Ricimer\|Ricimer]] 01:29, 22 November 2005 (EST)		::No, it was posted up on the official site; all of the delightful deleted scenes for season 2....except ANY from Pegasus; guess the extra 15 minutes was so long we'll have to wait for the Extended DVD Director's Cut. -->There's quite a bit of info in these deleted scenes, many of which were only deleted for time and pacing reasons, but get stuff from series bible, etc. We're going to have to figure out our policy on this (sometimes we say "in a deleted scene this was said" and other times we just put deleted scene material in as a given, but we're going to have to spend some time sorting this out. That said, I don't think we should assume there are cows and pigs because "steaks and fillets" are just cuts of meat and could conceivably come off of any kind of animal. --[[User:Ricimer\|Ricimer]] 01:29, 22 November 2005 (EST)

	:::Gah. How did I miss this? --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 11:57, 22 November 2005 (EST)		:::Gah. How did I miss this? --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 11:57, 22 November 2005 (EST)

	::::I suppose, in the end, it's an interesting anecdote, but not conclusive about any particular life form, merely indicative of how those life forms can be served as meals. --[[User:MASON\|Mason]] 12:42, 22 November 2005 (EST)		::::I suppose, in the end, it's an interesting anecdote, but not conclusive about any particular life form, merely indicative of how those life forms can be served as meals. --[[User:MASON\|Mason]] 12:42, 22 November 2005 (EST)