Talk:Revelations/Archive2 - Revision history

ArchiveBot: Archiving 11 thread(s) (older than 14d) to Talk:Revelations/Archive1.

2009-11-02T16:55:33Z

Archiving 11 thread(s) (older than 14d) to Talk:Revelations/Archive1.

Fredmdbud: /* Biers? */

2008-12-23T18:26:56Z

Biers?

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:26, 23 December 2008
Line 176:		Line 176:
	Is there a reason why the Three in this episode is referred to as Biers? It seems like it would make more sense to refer to her as Number Three, but was she called that in the episode or something. I didn't want to just change it because it's been so long since I saw the episode.		Is there a reason why the Three in this episode is referred to as Biers? It seems like it would make more sense to refer to her as Number Three, but was she called that in the episode or something. I didn't want to just change it because it's been so long since I saw the episode.
	:She's often referred to as D'Anna, which is short for D'Anna Biers, although the reporter was almost certainly a different instance, so... -- [[User:Noneofyourbusiness\|Noneofyourbusiness]] 08:18, 23 December 2008 (UTC)		:She's often referred to as D'Anna, which is short for D'Anna Biers, although the reporter was almost certainly a different instance, so... -- [[User:Noneofyourbusiness\|Noneofyourbusiness]] 08:18, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
			::Also the fact that she is the only Number Three left in the universe, and a particular one at that.-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 18:26, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Noneofyourbusiness at 08:18, 23 December 2008

2008-12-23T08:18:44Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:18, 23 December 2008
Line 175:		Line 175:

	Is there a reason why the Three in this episode is referred to as Biers? It seems like it would make more sense to refer to her as Number Three, but was she called that in the episode or something. I didn't want to just change it because it's been so long since I saw the episode.		Is there a reason why the Three in this episode is referred to as Biers? It seems like it would make more sense to refer to her as Number Three, but was she called that in the episode or something. I didn't want to just change it because it's been so long since I saw the episode.
	:She's often referred to as D'Anna, which is short for D'Anna Biers, although the reporter was almost certainly a different instance, so... -- 08:18, 23 December 2008 (UTC)		:She's often referred to as D'Anna, which is short for D'Anna Biers, although the reporter was almost certainly a different instance, so... -- [[User:Noneofyourbusiness\|Noneofyourbusiness]] 08:18, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Noneofyourbusiness at 08:18, 23 December 2008

2008-12-23T08:18:26Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:18, 23 December 2008
Line 175:		Line 175:

	Is there a reason why the Three in this episode is referred to as Biers? It seems like it would make more sense to refer to her as Number Three, but was she called that in the episode or something. I didn't want to just change it because it's been so long since I saw the episode.		Is there a reason why the Three in this episode is referred to as Biers? It seems like it would make more sense to refer to her as Number Three, but was she called that in the episode or something. I didn't want to just change it because it's been so long since I saw the episode.
			:She's often referred to as D'Anna, which is short for D'Anna Biers, although the reporter was almost certainly a different instance, so... -- 08:18, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Wldkt1: /* Biers? */ new section

2008-12-23T08:07:55Z

Biers?: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:07, 23 December 2008
Line 171:		Line 171:
	ya'know, the sydney operahouse! -- [[User:Popon\|Popon]] 23:17, 3 September 2008 (UTC)		ya'know, the sydney operahouse! -- [[User:Popon\|Popon]] 23:17, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
	: Your speculation is about as valid at this point as anyone else's. And trying to pinpoint it to any one specific place would kind of take away from the basic visceral impact to each viewer — "That could be my city."-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 00:57, 4 September 2008 (UTC)		: Your speculation is about as valid at this point as anyone else's. And trying to pinpoint it to any one specific place would kind of take away from the basic visceral impact to each viewer — "That could be my city."-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 00:57, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

			== Biers? ==

			Is there a reason why the Three in this episode is referred to as Biers? It seems like it would make more sense to refer to her as Number Three, but was she called that in the episode or something. I didn't want to just change it because it's been so long since I saw the episode.

Fredmdbud at 00:59, 4 September 2008

2008-09-04T00:59:06Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:59, 4 September 2008
Line 9:		Line 9:

	{{newsection link}}		{{newsection link}}

			== Lt "Gonzo" Pike ==

	A "Lt. Gonzo Pike" is also listed on the [[:Image:GoBetween260607.jpg\|casting sheet]] for "[[The Ties That Bind]]" for what it's worth. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 06:01, 18 November 2007 (CST)		A "Lt. Gonzo Pike" is also listed on the [[:Image:GoBetween260607.jpg\|casting sheet]] for "[[The Ties That Bind]]" for what it's worth. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 06:01, 18 November 2007 (CST)

Fredmdbud: /* nyc? really? */

2008-09-04T00:57:14Z

nyc? really?

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:57, 4 September 2008
Line 168:		Line 168:
	that would make sense of the whole roslin/athena/hera/six/baltar operahouse vision.		that would make sense of the whole roslin/athena/hera/six/baltar operahouse vision.
	ya'know, the sydney operahouse! -- [[User:Popon\|Popon]] 23:17, 3 September 2008 (UTC)		ya'know, the sydney operahouse! -- [[User:Popon\|Popon]] 23:17, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
			: Your speculation is about as valid at this point as anyone else's. And trying to pinpoint it to any one specific place would kind of take away from the basic visceral impact to each viewer — "That could be my city."-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 00:57, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Fredmdbud: /* nyc? really? */

2008-09-04T00:48:13Z

nyc? really?

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:48, 4 September 2008
Line 167:		Line 167:
	i think the city shown at the end is sydney, look at pictures of it.		i think the city shown at the end is sydney, look at pictures of it.
	that would make sense of the whole roslin/athena/hera/six/baltar operahouse vision.		that would make sense of the whole roslin/athena/hera/six/baltar operahouse vision.
	ya'know, the sydney operahouse!		ya'know, the sydney operahouse! -- [[User:Popon\|Popon]] 23:17, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Popon: /* nyc? really? */ new section

2008-09-03T23:17:11Z

nyc? really?: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:17, 3 September 2008
Line 162:		Line 162:
	: Having rewatched my digital copy, I can see that you're correct. Lee does turn the page to what appears to be the structure on Earth in "Revelations", at least to an extent... What extent, I'm not entirely sure though, because, again, the picture that we see on closeup before panning upward towards Thrace is the exact same page used to depict the depiction of the Opera House on Kobol in Season 1 and 2. Which casts doubt on the intentions of that scene. It could be a simple editing mistake, or it could very well be an attempt to remove all reference to that page for some reason we don't yet know. While I'm up in Vancouver, I'll figure out what the frak is up with it, because that scene—and the sudden introduction of this so-called Temple—rankles my researching ass, personally. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [[bsp:\|Battlestar Pegasus]]</sup> 02:24, 4 August 2008 (UTC)		: Having rewatched my digital copy, I can see that you're correct. Lee does turn the page to what appears to be the structure on Earth in "Revelations", at least to an extent... What extent, I'm not entirely sure though, because, again, the picture that we see on closeup before panning upward towards Thrace is the exact same page used to depict the depiction of the Opera House on Kobol in Season 1 and 2. Which casts doubt on the intentions of that scene. It could be a simple editing mistake, or it could very well be an attempt to remove all reference to that page for some reason we don't yet know. While I'm up in Vancouver, I'll figure out what the frak is up with it, because that scene—and the sudden introduction of this so-called Temple—rankles my researching ass, personally. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [[bsp:\|Battlestar Pegasus]]</sup> 02:24, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
	:I changed the note on the Aurora page to make it more clear where the real picture is. And I uploaded the picture above to BSWiki. It's now linked to in the same note. -- [[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 13:22, 4 August 2008 (UTC)		:I changed the note on the Aurora page to make it more clear where the real picture is. And I uploaded the picture above to BSWiki. It's now linked to in the same note. -- [[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 13:22, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

			== nyc? really? ==

			i think the city shown at the end is sydney, look at pictures of it.
			that would make sense of the whole roslin/athena/hera/six/baltar operahouse vision.
			ya'know, the sydney operahouse!

Hexagon1: nevermind, i can't be bothered with this right now anyway

2008-08-10T05:46:54Z

nevermind, i can't be bothered with this right now anyway

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:46, 10 August 2008
Line 162:		Line 162:
	: Having rewatched my digital copy, I can see that you're correct. Lee does turn the page to what appears to be the structure on Earth in "Revelations", at least to an extent... What extent, I'm not entirely sure though, because, again, the picture that we see on closeup before panning upward towards Thrace is the exact same page used to depict the depiction of the Opera House on Kobol in Season 1 and 2. Which casts doubt on the intentions of that scene. It could be a simple editing mistake, or it could very well be an attempt to remove all reference to that page for some reason we don't yet know. While I'm up in Vancouver, I'll figure out what the frak is up with it, because that scene—and the sudden introduction of this so-called Temple—rankles my researching ass, personally. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [[bsp:\|Battlestar Pegasus]]</sup> 02:24, 4 August 2008 (UTC)		: Having rewatched my digital copy, I can see that you're correct. Lee does turn the page to what appears to be the structure on Earth in "Revelations", at least to an extent... What extent, I'm not entirely sure though, because, again, the picture that we see on closeup before panning upward towards Thrace is the exact same page used to depict the depiction of the Opera House on Kobol in Season 1 and 2. Which casts doubt on the intentions of that scene. It could be a simple editing mistake, or it could very well be an attempt to remove all reference to that page for some reason we don't yet know. While I'm up in Vancouver, I'll figure out what the frak is up with it, because that scene—and the sudden introduction of this so-called Temple—rankles my researching ass, personally. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [[bsp:\|Battlestar Pegasus]]</sup> 02:24, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
	:I changed the note on the Aurora page to make it more clear where the real picture is. And I uploaded the picture above to BSWiki. It's now linked to in the same note. -- [[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 13:22, 4 August 2008 (UTC)		:I changed the note on the Aurora page to make it more clear where the real picture is. And I uploaded the picture above to BSWiki. It's now linked to in the same note. -- [[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 13:22, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

	~~== Are you insane? ==~~

	Having just seen the ep I came here to read what 'the buzz' is on it, and I have to say I think you're all insane. Let's go point by point. Firstly, there are a number of paragraphs comparing the ruins to NYC, despite the fact that rivers and bays are quite numerous on Earth. A bit egoistical, no? And I don't know about you, but I never noticed a Temple of Aurora anywhere in Brooklyn. Secondly, you have an assertion that they look ''"clearly"'' like the ruins of a modern civilisation.. do they really? Who says? Thirdly, you have concluded that it is in the future or alt. reality. Clearly. It couldn't be anything else, I can't think of a million alternative explanations at all. Sigh, it's times like this that make me realise that despite its flaws Wikipedia has a number of things I've become accustomed to, like rationality. Well, now my rant is over, how do we get this article back on track? I would personally recommend a complete rewrite of the analysis section, or easier than that removal of the more ridiculous parts. I haven't done it yet since I thought I would gather consensus first. So, thoughts? PS: Sorry if I sound angry/hasty, wasn't intended, I just want to help improve the page. [[User:Hexagon1\|Hexagon1]] 05:37, 10 August 2008 (UTC)