Editing Talk:Scattered/Archive 1

== Concern Regarding the Quote from "BSG Insider" ==

Can we have a source URL (or two) for the following:

:''"So much for all the hype about Alonzo's acting convincing Ron Moore to "resurrect" Socinus from the Pilot Movie, only to kill him off at the start of the 2nd season. Guess they're trimming the fat to account for those main cast salary increases, huh?" - Anonymous BSG Insider, April 18th, 2005.''

Otherwise, I don't feel that it should be added to this page, unless there are other people out there who would like to vote for its amendment to the [[Scattered]] page. -- [[User:Joe.Beaudoin|Joe Beaudoin]] 00:01, 1 Jun 2005 (EDT)
::Well, I usually like to see evidence of this. I don't suppose that there is place for a rumors section with regards to these yet unseen episodes?--[[User:67.136.143.139|67.136.143.139]] 23:04, 10 Jun 2005 (EDT)
::: I would add it to the regular page, except that I need a source URL (such as a news report from some place like GateWorld, etc.) with this quote. Otherwise, I have no problem with it. -- [[User:Joe.Beaudoin|Joe Beaudoin]] 08:38, 11 Jun 2005 (EDT)


----
Shouldn't season openers be somewhat interesting?  Like, say, spend for that 5 minutes TOTAL on every single major plot point left open from the previous season?
  This felt like a filler episode to me.  Don't filler episodes usually wait till mid season or something?

== Questionable Questions ==
We saw Captain Kelly in the mini-series, but yeah, not much of anywhere else. Still, he was around before. Gaius also did Boomer's test before he ever began testing on a large scale. I doubt he would've released his info based on his behavior in Tigh Me Up, Tigh Me Down. Also, I just think Tigh hate Baltar for being flirtatious with his wife in that same episode. All speculation...but y'know...makes sense stuff. Oh yes, and in the podcast, RDM says that they didn't check out the ship wreckage in the flight pod because they were too busy and the flight pod was unused. He also says that they speculated that the ship was destroye don impact because there was no fire. -- [[User:yenguyen|YeNguyen]] 21:17, 16 July 2005 (EST)
:I think the reason Kelly wasn't seen in season 1 was due to the fact that by the time they decided to have a season 1, the actor was unavailable at the time.[[User:Kuralyov|Kuralyov]] 22:18, 16 Jul 2005 (EDT)
:: Well, realistically, we know that... but obviously, in the BSG universe, there's got to be a reason why we haven't seen him before.  Also, quick question, did we actually ''see'' Cylons firing from behind the foliage?  -- [[User:Joe.Beaudoin|Joe Beaudoin]] 23:14, 16 Jul 2005 (EDT)
:: No we don't. All they saw was muzzle flash, but the audience can recognize the sound of the Centurions' arm cannons. Though, that could be turned against us. Perfect example of the use of non-dramatic irony in this show that makes it so good. -- [[User:yenguyen|YeNguyen]] 0:31, 17 July 2005 (EST)
=== The Significance of "3" ===
As for the "three" question, you may want to see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3_%28number%29#In_human_culture . I'm thinking that it has something to do with the holy trinity... (or maybe a family unit, such as one created by Helo and Valerii -- or Baltar and Six). -- [[User:Joe.Beaudoin|Joe Beaudoin]] 23:14, 16 Jul 2005 (EDT)

: RDM just said that the door with the "3" on it was just a motif for that ep. We never saw what was behind it until the final act and seeing Tigh about to kill himself. The door is the one that leads into his quarters and where his death was prevented by Adam's actions. -- [[User:yenguyen|YeNguyen]] 0:33, 17 July 2005 (EST)

== Medic guest star? ==

RDM mentioned on the podcast that the medic who performed surgery on Commander Adama in this episode was portrayed by Jamie Bamber's wife.  AFAIK she is not mentioned under Guest Stars nor anywhere else on this page.  Anyone know what her name is?  Should we add some mention here?
--[[User:Laven|Laven]] 01:52, 1 Aug 2005 (EDT)

==Episode Screen Capture==
While the current screen capture is quite visually appealing, the episode guide template guidelines promote the use of a 16:9 (or 4:3) ratio shot. If a good shot of that aspect ratio could be found, ideally we would replace this one. --[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 15:13, 19 January 2006 (EST)
:Is it ok now? --[[User:DrBat|DrBat]] 07:33, 20 January 2006 (EST)
::Fine by me! --[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 08:26, 20 January 2006 (EST)

== New Analysis Format Thoughts ==
Bold. ('''Bold?''') I like it, but my only reservation is that I doubt the analysis section would be able to unfold in that format. What we may have is a format that people use around the time the show airs, and then a later format imposed later that categorizes/sorts/etc. the analysis that has been left. Which is sort of how the "Questions" thing looks to have sorted itself out as well. --[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 15:56, 4 April 2006 (CDT)

I disagree with your whole attempt to change the Questions and Analysis sections.  Some concision and minor editing tweaks to streamline it are always a plus, but a change in the format itself I oppose.  More on this as I get to it.  --[[User:The Merovingian|The Merovingian]] <sup>([[Special:Contributions/The Merovingian|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/The Merovingian|E]])</sup> 15:58, 4 April 2006 (CDT)
: -->***However, upon further examination (I'm "much to hasty"), I have no problem with what you specifically just did here:  I don't have any real concern with shifting things around from Questions to Analysis, as long as nothing gets actually removed.  This page seems like a good change, and I'd hold this up as an example of "good" concision:  not destroying any of the detailed analysis and stuff we've been doing, just shifting it around for formatting, etc.  Btw, minor quibble, does everyone think that they should be bolded like that?  I don't care one way or the other.  --->As for the computers issue....yes I actually think that the networking was responsible for this and I never had a problem with that.  In it's current form, this sounds POV.  Perhaps you could heavily edit it around to include interlinks to our discussions on Computers and Science in the Re-Imagines Series? (I'd erase it if I did it).--[[User:The Merovingian|The Merovingian]] <sup>([[Special:Contributions/The Merovingian|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/The Merovingian|E]])</sup>

::If you're OK with this page, then you and I are really much closer in our opinions of this reform than you have seemed to think. My aim in all of this is not to lose real information or analysis from the pages, but to edit out the forum-like bickering, crosstalk, and speculation and keep things focused on providing that information in an encyclopedic format. 
::The section on the networked computers was original to the article and is mostly unchanged, but could use some cleanup/revision. Actually, being a born and bred geek, I find most of that section unnecessary and redundant. The simple answer would be: "If any component that receives '''any''' external input -- including, say, DRADIS -- were made part of the network, then the resulting network is vunerable. The annals of real-world networked computing abound with tales of vunerabilities exploited through unexpected means."--[[User:UncleMikey|Uncle Mikey]] 17:41, 4 April 2006 (CDT)
@@ Line 36: / Line 36: @@
 == New Analysis Format Thoughts ==
 Bold. ('''Bold?''') I like it, but my only reservation is that I doubt the analysis section would be able to unfold in that format. What we may have is a format that people use around the time the show airs, and then a later format imposed later that categorizes/sorts/etc. the analysis that has been left. Which is sort of how the "Questions" thing looks to have sorted itself out as well. --[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 15:56, 4 April 2006 (CDT)
-:Exactly so -- I'm not expecting all users to fall into this pattern, and I don't expect the Questions section to stop collecting initial speculations and analysis. The purpose behind this project is basically post-filtering. This page is a good example of why allowing user questions (as opposed to dangling-thread questions) to initially be answered is not entirely evil. The result was several good analysis points, once it was boiled down. At some point, I may rephrase the section on the Standards page to suggest that using Questions for Q&A/speculation is OK '''initially''' but that it '''will''' eventually get cleaned up to follow the guidlines.--[[User:UncleMikey|Uncle Mikey]] 17:47, 4 April 2006 (CDT)
 I disagree with your whole attempt to change the Questions and Analysis sections.  Some concision and minor editing tweaks to streamline it are always a plus, but a change in the format itself I oppose.  More on this as I get to it.  --[[User:The Merovingian|The Merovingian]] <sup>([[Special:Contributions/The Merovingian|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/The Merovingian|E]])</sup> 15:58, 4 April 2006 (CDT)
@@ Line 43: / Line 42: @@
 ::If you're OK with this page, then you and I are really much closer in our opinions of this reform than you have seemed to think. My aim in all of this is not to lose real information or analysis from the pages, but to edit out the forum-like bickering, crosstalk, and speculation and keep things focused on providing that information in an encyclopedic format.
 ::The section on the networked computers was original to the article and is mostly unchanged, but could use some cleanup/revision. Actually, being a born and bred geek, I find most of that section unnecessary and redundant. The simple answer would be: "If any component that receives '''any''' external input -- including, say, DRADIS -- were made part of the network, then the resulting network is vunerable. The annals of real-world networked computing abound with tales of vunerabilities exploited through unexpected means."--[[User:UncleMikey|Uncle Mikey]] 17:41, 4 April 2006 (CDT)
-:::Please put that in, it sounds good.  I'll get to toying around with what might be done with LDYB II when I have time.  --[[User:The Merovingian|The Merovingian]] <sup>([[Special:Contributions/The Merovingian|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/The Merovingian|E]])</sup> 19:54, 4 April 2006 (CDT)
-== Who/what attacked Tyrol's group ==
-I got the impression from how this was shot that it wasn't cylons that attacked Tyrol and his group, but rather the other survivors, who under the poor leadership of Crashdown began to fire on their own men.  This is why (to me) the cylons are never shown.  Furthermore, the weapons fire comming from the other side seems to be very colonial.  Centurions don't seem to take cover lik ehumans do, they usually stand out in the open and rely on their superior firepower and armor, but the enemies we see attacking tyrol are clearly taking cover so as not to be noticed.  I think that Crashdown fired on Tyrol, and then fell back, believing it was a Cylon attack force, with Tyrol later finding them.  Am I totally off the ball here? --[[User:Antagonist|Antagonist]] 12:38, 8 April 2006 (CDT)
-::Are you in Britain or something?    Later episodes make this clear, I guess you might not have been able to see them yet. There are no other survivors.  It is definately the Cylons, it's just scarier when you can't see them, like in a real war.  We actually see Centurions taking advantage of cover and stuff in LDYB II.--[[User:The Merovingian|The
-Merovingian]] <sup>([[Special:Contributions/The Merovingian|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/The Merovingian|E]])</sup> 12:41, 8 April 2006 (CDT)
-::: No I'm not in Britain or something, what I was trying to say wasnt that they were being attacked by some other survivors, but the other people from their group (crashdown, the medic, etc.)  It doesn't matter anyway, I went and watched the scene (on DVD) and lisitned to the commentary also.  RDM definently says that they are being attacked by cylons.  I was wrong  --[[User:Antagonist|Antagonist]] 01:10, 9 April 2006 (CDT)
-:::Yeah, although I initially thought this as well, all the survivors from Raptor 1 are accounted for. There were no other humans on the planet at that time. --[[User:April Arcus|April Arcus]] 14:17, 8 April 2006 (CDT)
-==Blooper... or not==
-* During the scene on Caprica, Helo exclaims "for God Sakes" instead of the more Colonial "for Gods' Sakes" or Cylon "for God's Sake".
-**This i'm sure has happened a few times in other episodes and I always thought of it as the person exclaiming to their favourite or relivant god rather than as a blooper. The ancient aztects woudlnt have said "oh my gods" when it rained, they would only exclaim it to Tlaloc --[[User:Mercifull|Mercifull]] <sup>([[User talk:Mercifull|Talk]]/[[Special:Contributions/Mercifull|Contribs]])</sup> 04:23, 11 July 2006 (CDT)
-==My recent edits==
-I just cleaned up and fixed some errors --[[User:BklynBruzer|BklynBruzer]] 11:22, 8 September 2006 (CDT)