Talk:Sacred Scrolls/Archive 1 - Revision history

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

2020-04-11T01:58:43Z

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

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:58, 11 April 2020
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Greetings, Jzanjani. I welcome you to the battlestar wiki and want you to know that I appreciate your desire to contribute here. However, your edits to this article baffle me. At present, it has been meticulously arranged to provide the most comprehensive information possible in an objective, well-cited manner with separate sections for interpretation and commentary. If you feel this layout is mistaken, or that there's information which needs to be incuded in this article which we've missed, I would like you to make your case here, on the talk page, before comitting another revision. Thank you for your consideration. --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 05:03, 5 October 2005 (EDT)		Greetings, Jzanjani. I welcome you to the battlestar wiki and want you to know that I appreciate your desire to contribute here. However, your edits to this article baffle me. At present, it has been meticulously arranged to provide the most comprehensive information possible in an objective, well-cited manner with separate sections for interpretation and commentary. If you feel this layout is mistaken, or that there's information which needs to be incuded in this article which we've missed, I would like you to make your case here, on the talk page, before comitting another revision. Thank you for your consideration. --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 05:03, 5 October 2005 (EDT)

	==On the Format of Character Quotes==		==On the Format of Character Quotes==
Line 13:		Line 13:
	I'm not sure if this comment should be somewhere else, but I think the Sacred Scrolls article in particular could definitely use some cleanup. [[User:Jzanjani\|Jzanjani]] 16:08, 5 October 2005 (EDT)		I'm not sure if this comment should be somewhere else, but I think the Sacred Scrolls article in particular could definitely use some cleanup. [[User:Jzanjani\|Jzanjani]] 16:08, 5 October 2005 (EDT)

	:See [[Battlestar Wiki talk:Standards and Conventions]]. --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 17:31, 5 October 2005 (EDT)		:See [[Battlestar Wiki talk:Standards and Conventions]]. --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 17:31, 5 October 2005 (EDT)

	:: I would be extatic if you'd post this comment for discussion on the [[Battlestar Wiki:Standards and Conventions\|Standards and Conventions]] project page. That's really the best place to discuss such sweeping things.		:: I would be extatic if you'd post this comment for discussion on the [[Battlestar Wiki:Standards and Conventions\|Standards and Conventions]] project page. That's really the best place to discuss such sweeping things.
Line 153:		Line 153:
	== Cleanup Required ==		== Cleanup Required ==

	I've found this article to be confusing to read, perhaps not just due to length, but from the mix of information, both derived, plausible and factual. I'm going to go "[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|Peter]]" on this article soon to clean up the threads and verify their basis on aired content, using the [[Battlestar Wiki:Citation Jihad#Derived Content\|Derived Content standards]] as a guideline. Knowing how so many have worked hard on this, however, I won't make outright deletions but will go nuts with the <nowiki>{{citation needed}}</nowiki> marker when I find items that don't fit the aired content or appears too much a stretch. Given that we know now that the virtual Six is NOT the actual [[Caprica Six]], much of what has been said by her alone may be in doubt. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 16:29, 19 September 2006 (CDT)		I've found this article to be confusing to read, perhaps not just due to length, but from the mix of information, both derived, plausible and factual. I'm going to go "[[User:April Arcus\|Peter]]" on this article soon to clean up the threads and verify their basis on aired content, using the [[Battlestar Wiki:Citation Jihad#Derived Content\|Derived Content standards]] as a guideline. Knowing how so many have worked hard on this, however, I won't make outright deletions but will go nuts with the <nowiki>{{citation needed}}</nowiki> marker when I find items that don't fit the aired content or appears too much a stretch. Given that we know now that the virtual Six is NOT the actual [[Caprica Six]], much of what has been said by her alone may be in doubt. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 16:29, 19 September 2006 (CDT)

	:In particular the "Three Exodii" theory could stand some revision. But to be honest, I can't be bothered to do it, since it's very complicared and I don't agree with it in the first place. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 07:35, 13 January 2007 (CST)		:In particular the "Three Exodii" theory could stand some revision. But to be honest, I can't be bothered to do it, since it's very complicared and I don't agree with it in the first place. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 07:35, 13 January 2007 (CST)

ManofTheAtom: /* Cycle of Time */

2009-03-23T01:56:35Z

Cycle of Time

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:56, 23 March 2009
Line 38:		Line 38:

	With the 12 colonies irradiated, which makes them unhabitable, and Earth... being how it is in Revelations, Kobol is the (only?) logical destination for the fleet, isn't it? --[[User:ManofTheAtom\|ManofTheAtom]] 03:26, 25 January 2009 (UTC)		With the 12 colonies irradiated, which makes them unhabitable, and Earth... being how it is in Revelations, Kobol is the (only?) logical destination for the fleet, isn't it? --[[User:ManofTheAtom\|ManofTheAtom]] 03:26, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

	~~:::::::I was close. They did all settle into one world together. --[[User:ManofTheAtom\|ManofTheAtom]] 01:55, 23 March 2009 (UTC)~~

	==Removed==		==Removed==

ManofTheAtom: /* Cycle of Time */

2009-03-23T01:56:05Z

Cycle of Time

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:56, 23 March 2009
Line 39:		Line 39:
	With the 12 colonies irradiated, which makes them unhabitable, and Earth... being how it is in Revelations, Kobol is the (only?) logical destination for the fleet, isn't it? --[[User:ManofTheAtom\|ManofTheAtom]] 03:26, 25 January 2009 (UTC)		With the 12 colonies irradiated, which makes them unhabitable, and Earth... being how it is in Revelations, Kobol is the (only?) logical destination for the fleet, isn't it? --[[User:ManofTheAtom\|ManofTheAtom]] 03:26, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

	:::::::I was close. They ~~did sort of go back in time from our perspective and they~~ did all settle into one world together. --[[User:ManofTheAtom\|ManofTheAtom]] 01:55, 23 March 2009 (UTC)		:::::::I was close. They did all settle into one world together. --[[User:ManofTheAtom\|ManofTheAtom]] 01:55, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

	==Removed==		==Removed==

ManofTheAtom: /* Cycle of Time */

2009-03-23T01:55:04Z

Cycle of Time

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:55, 23 March 2009
Line 37:		Line 37:
	What if the humans and Cylons decide to return to Kobol and settle there, thus starting the cycle of time again (12 colonies of man + one Cylon colony)? Like, Adama, Roslin, Baltar, maybe even Zarek just for the irony, Six, Boomer, Starbuck, Lee, etc become that cycle's Lords of Kobol.		What if the humans and Cylons decide to return to Kobol and settle there, thus starting the cycle of time again (12 colonies of man + one Cylon colony)? Like, Adama, Roslin, Baltar, maybe even Zarek just for the irony, Six, Boomer, Starbuck, Lee, etc become that cycle's Lords of Kobol.

	With the 12 colonies irradiated, which makes them ~~inhabitable~~, and Earth... being how it is in Revelations, Kobol is the (only?) logical destination for the fleet, isn't it? --[[User:ManofTheAtom\|ManofTheAtom]] 03:26, 25 January 2009 (UTC)		With the 12 colonies irradiated, which makes them unhabitable, and Earth... being how it is in Revelations, Kobol is the (only?) logical destination for the fleet, isn't it? --[[User:ManofTheAtom\|ManofTheAtom]] 03:26, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

			:::::::I was close. They did sort of go back in time from our perspective and they did all settle into one world together. --[[User:ManofTheAtom\|ManofTheAtom]] 01:55, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

	==Removed==		==Removed==

ManofTheAtom at 03:26, 25 January 2009

2009-01-25T03:26:26Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:26, 25 January 2009
Line 32:		Line 32:

	:::::That's no "Cycle of Time" in the sense of history repeating itself, though, but rather a singular cyclical event that happens time and again to different people until someone finds a way to end it. The circumstances are quite different every time. It's not any different from solar activity cycles or cyclical weather patterns. --[[User:OliverH.\|OliverH.]] 05:21, 26 February 2006 (EST)		:::::That's no "Cycle of Time" in the sense of history repeating itself, though, but rather a singular cyclical event that happens time and again to different people until someone finds a way to end it. The circumstances are quite different every time. It's not any different from solar activity cycles or cyclical weather patterns. --[[User:OliverH.\|OliverH.]] 05:21, 26 February 2006 (EST)

			::::::I was thinking about how the series might end.

			What if the humans and Cylons decide to return to Kobol and settle there, thus starting the cycle of time again (12 colonies of man + one Cylon colony)? Like, Adama, Roslin, Baltar, maybe even Zarek just for the irony, Six, Boomer, Starbuck, Lee, etc become that cycle's Lords of Kobol.

			With the 12 colonies irradiated, which makes them inhabitable, and Earth... being how it is in Revelations, Kobol is the (only?) logical destination for the fleet, isn't it? --[[User:ManofTheAtom\|ManofTheAtom]] 03:26, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

	==Removed==		==Removed==

Joe Beaudoin Jr.: /* Some theological notes */ + unsigned template

2008-04-10T02:56:18Z

Some theological notes: + unsigned template

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:56, 10 April 2008
Line 184:		Line 184:
	B) The concept of God sending angles to lead select humans in the right direction occurs many times in Christianity. (Messengers of the Lord do appear a few times in the old testament but they are not codified as the beings we know as angles til the new one, making the apparitions use of the word "angel" in BSG that much more striking.)		B) The concept of God sending angles to lead select humans in the right direction occurs many times in Christianity. (Messengers of the Lord do appear a few times in the old testament but they are not codified as the beings we know as angles til the new one, making the apparitions use of the word "angel" in BSG that much more striking.)

	C) The idea that man is fallen and his soul must be "saved" is entirely Christian. (And said a couple of times to Baltar by his apparition of Caprica 6.)		C) The idea that man is fallen and his soul must be "saved" is entirely Christian. (And said a couple of times to Baltar by his apparition of Caprica 6.) {{unsigned\|Cyberqat}}
	C)

Cyberqat at 02:51, 10 April 2008

2008-04-10T02:51:29Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:51, 10 April 2008
Line 176:		Line 176:
	:Nearly all of the out-of-universe stuff is contained in that one note and in "Form of the Scrolls". The note is interesting, but the latter information could be deleted, as it doesn't enhance the points being made there. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 07:32, 17 May 2007 (CDT)		:Nearly all of the out-of-universe stuff is contained in that one note and in "Form of the Scrolls". The note is interesting, but the latter information could be deleted, as it doesn't enhance the points being made there. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 07:32, 17 May 2007 (CDT)
	::This article was peculiar recently in that there were ''questions'' added in what should be an ''encyclopedic'' article. While questions are allowed in episode summaries, the wiki has frowned on asking questions in other articles. It appears awkward by twisting the voice and point-of-view of the article, and weakens the authoritative nature of an article. It's up to readers to form the big questions in their minds (not in the article) and for our editors to add the relevant links in the article for the reader to click for more "clues" in their own interpretation and exploration. The talk page can ask specific questions if desired (but not to get into a deep discussion...take it to our new [http://www.battlestarforum.com bulletin board for that]). --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 02:29, 25 July 2007 (CDT)		::This article was peculiar recently in that there were ''questions'' added in what should be an ''encyclopedic'' article. While questions are allowed in episode summaries, the wiki has frowned on asking questions in other articles. It appears awkward by twisting the voice and point-of-view of the article, and weakens the authoritative nature of an article. It's up to readers to form the big questions in their minds (not in the article) and for our editors to add the relevant links in the article for the reader to click for more "clues" in their own interpretation and exploration. The talk page can ask specific questions if desired (but not to get into a deep discussion...take it to our new [http://www.battlestarforum.com bulletin board for that]). --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 02:29, 25 July 2007 (CDT)

			== Some theological notes ==
			Whether its just because writers write what they know, or a deeper meaning (perhaps having to do with history repeating itself) there is a lot fo real world theology mixed into the theology of BSG that I'm surprised you do not pull out in your theology footnotes. Off the top of my head...

			A) The exodus. The 12 tribes of Isreal were led across the hostile desert to the promised land by a leader who was destined to lead them to it but never enter it himself. Laura is clearly a Moses figure and the journey of the 12 colonies clearly the same.

			B) The concept of God sending angles to lead select humans in the right direction occurs many times in Christianity. (Messengers of the Lord do appear a few times in the old testament but they are not codified as the beings we know as angles til the new one, making the apparitions use of the word "angel" in BSG that much more striking.)

			C) The idea that man is fallen and his soul must be "saved" is entirely Christian. (And said a couple of times to Baltar by his apparition of Caprica 6.)
			C)

Spencerian: /* More Cleanup */ +about the weird questions in this article

2007-07-25T07:29:54Z

More Cleanup: +about the weird questions in this article

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:29, 25 July 2007
Line 175:		Line 175:
	I was going through this again, and found it a hard mix of in-universe assessments and out-of-universe notes. Both are needed (an earlier cleanup improved that) but the reading is odd. Maybe the article could withstand some adjustments to put the out-of-universe analysis in footnotes, or redo the article to out-of-universe analysis. I'm looking for the article to look or read like [[Computers]] does. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 07:25, 17 May 2007 (CDT)		I was going through this again, and found it a hard mix of in-universe assessments and out-of-universe notes. Both are needed (an earlier cleanup improved that) but the reading is odd. Maybe the article could withstand some adjustments to put the out-of-universe analysis in footnotes, or redo the article to out-of-universe analysis. I'm looking for the article to look or read like [[Computers]] does. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 07:25, 17 May 2007 (CDT)
	:Nearly all of the out-of-universe stuff is contained in that one note and in "Form of the Scrolls". The note is interesting, but the latter information could be deleted, as it doesn't enhance the points being made there. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 07:32, 17 May 2007 (CDT)		:Nearly all of the out-of-universe stuff is contained in that one note and in "Form of the Scrolls". The note is interesting, but the latter information could be deleted, as it doesn't enhance the points being made there. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 07:32, 17 May 2007 (CDT)
			::This article was peculiar recently in that there were ''questions'' added in what should be an ''encyclopedic'' article. While questions are allowed in episode summaries, the wiki has frowned on asking questions in other articles. It appears awkward by twisting the voice and point-of-view of the article, and weakens the authoritative nature of an article. It's up to readers to form the big questions in their minds (not in the article) and for our editors to add the relevant links in the article for the reader to click for more "clues" in their own interpretation and exploration. The talk page can ask specific questions if desired (but not to get into a deep discussion...take it to our new [http://www.battlestarforum.com bulletin board for that]). --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 02:29, 25 July 2007 (CDT)

Serenity: /* More Cleanup */

2007-05-17T12:32:01Z

More Cleanup

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:32, 17 May 2007
Line 174:		Line 174:

	I was going through this again, and found it a hard mix of in-universe assessments and out-of-universe notes. Both are needed (an earlier cleanup improved that) but the reading is odd. Maybe the article could withstand some adjustments to put the out-of-universe analysis in footnotes, or redo the article to out-of-universe analysis. I'm looking for the article to look or read like [[Computers]] does. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 07:25, 17 May 2007 (CDT)		I was going through this again, and found it a hard mix of in-universe assessments and out-of-universe notes. Both are needed (an earlier cleanup improved that) but the reading is odd. Maybe the article could withstand some adjustments to put the out-of-universe analysis in footnotes, or redo the article to out-of-universe analysis. I'm looking for the article to look or read like [[Computers]] does. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 07:25, 17 May 2007 (CDT)
			:Nearly all of the out-of-universe stuff is contained in that one note and in "Form of the Scrolls". The note is interesting, but the latter information could be deleted, as it doesn't enhance the points being made there. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 07:32, 17 May 2007 (CDT)

Spencerian: More Cleanup

2007-05-17T12:25:58Z

More Cleanup

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:25, 17 May 2007
Line 170:		Line 170:
	::::There we go :) --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 06:56, 1 February 2007 (CST)		::::There we go :) --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 06:56, 1 February 2007 (CST)
	:::::Looks much better. Simple, informative and brief. Needs a few typo and conventionizing tweaks... --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 08:13, 1 February 2007 (CST)		:::::Looks much better. Simple, informative and brief. Needs a few typo and conventionizing tweaks... --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 08:13, 1 February 2007 (CST)

			== More Cleanup ==

			I was going through this again, and found it a hard mix of in-universe assessments and out-of-universe notes. Both are needed (an earlier cleanup improved that) but the reading is odd. Maybe the article could withstand some adjustments to put the out-of-universe analysis in footnotes, or redo the article to out-of-universe analysis. I'm looking for the article to look or read like [[Computers]] does. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 07:25, 17 May 2007 (CDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:29, 25 July 2007
Line 175:		Line 175:
	I was going through this again, and found it a hard mix of in-universe assessments and out-of-universe notes. Both are needed (an earlier cleanup improved that) but the reading is odd. Maybe the article could withstand some adjustments to put the out-of-universe analysis in footnotes, or redo the article to out-of-universe analysis. I'm looking for the article to look or read like [[Computers]] does. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 07:25, 17 May 2007 (CDT)		I was going through this again, and found it a hard mix of in-universe assessments and out-of-universe notes. Both are needed (an earlier cleanup improved that) but the reading is odd. Maybe the article could withstand some adjustments to put the out-of-universe analysis in footnotes, or redo the article to out-of-universe analysis. I'm looking for the article to look or read like [[Computers]] does. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 07:25, 17 May 2007 (CDT)
	:Nearly all of the out-of-universe stuff is contained in that one note and in "Form of the Scrolls". The note is interesting, but the latter information could be deleted, as it doesn't enhance the points being made there. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 07:32, 17 May 2007 (CDT)		:Nearly all of the out-of-universe stuff is contained in that one note and in "Form of the Scrolls". The note is interesting, but the latter information could be deleted, as it doesn't enhance the points being made there. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 07:32, 17 May 2007 (CDT)
			::This article was peculiar recently in that there were ''questions'' added in what should be an ''encyclopedic'' article. While questions are allowed in episode summaries, the wiki has frowned on asking questions in other articles. It appears awkward by twisting the voice and point-of-view of the article, and weakens the authoritative nature of an article. It's up to readers to form the big questions in their minds (not in the article) and for our editors to add the relevant links in the article for the reader to click for more "clues" in their own interpretation and exploration. The talk page can ask specific questions if desired (but not to get into a deep discussion...take it to our new [http://www.battlestarforum.com bulletin board for that]). --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 02:29, 25 July 2007 (CDT)