Editing Talk:Timeline (RDM)/Archive4
Discussion page of Timeline (RDM)/Archive4
More actions
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
| Latest revision | Your text | ||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
: I disagree with the usage of these dates, particularly in lieu of [[:Image:Execution Order Signature.png|the document Baltar signed]] in "[[Precipice]]". -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]]</sup> 20:53, 19 November 2006 (CST) | : I disagree with the usage of these dates, particularly in lieu of [[:Image:Execution Order Signature.png|the document Baltar signed]] in "[[Precipice]]". -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]]</sup> 20:53, 19 November 2006 (CST) | ||
*Indeed, the document gives that particular day as "3454-91". -- [[User:Troyian|Troyian]] 21:23, 19 November 2006 (CST) | *Indeed, the document gives that particular day as "3454-91". -- [[User:Troyian|Troyian]] 21:23, 19 November 2006 (CST) | ||
::There's even a different (third) timekeeping system used on Adama's letter of resignation in "Hero". The Dossier is useful for pinning down relative dates, but I don't think we should read too much into the calendar system. --[[User: | ::There's even a different (third) timekeeping system used on Adama's letter of resignation in "Hero". The Dossier is useful for pinning down relative dates, but I don't think we should read too much into the calendar system. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 01:25, 20 November 2006 (CST) | ||
:::There's also a not-so-clear chart on Laura Roslin in "Epiphanies", which was located at the foot of her sickbay bed. We see this briefly and it is blurry enough not to make out specific numbers, but said document appears to be using a different dating structure as well. Also, given the [[Cimtar Peace Accords]] documents and [[Cylon Centurion Model 0005]] in the mini-series, the documents should be treated with a healthy skepticism. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]]</sup> 10:13, 20 November 2006 (CST) | :::There's also a not-so-clear chart on Laura Roslin in "Epiphanies", which was located at the foot of her sickbay bed. We see this briefly and it is blurry enough not to make out specific numbers, but said document appears to be using a different dating structure as well. Also, given the [[Cimtar Peace Accords]] documents and [[Cylon Centurion Model 0005]] in the mini-series, the documents should be treated with a healthy skepticism. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]]</sup> 10:13, 20 November 2006 (CST) | ||
| Line 62: | Line 62: | ||
--[[User:Jp Corkery|Jp Corkery]] 06:16, 7 December 2006 (CST) | --[[User:Jp Corkery|Jp Corkery]] 06:16, 7 December 2006 (CST) | ||
:Was it the groundbreaking for the colony of New Caprica City itself (which was already being settled) or for some building or structure there? --[[User: | :Was it the groundbreaking for the colony of New Caprica City itself (which was already being settled) or for some building or structure there? --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 19:10, 13 December 2006 (CST) | ||
:I too assumed it was the groundbreaking of some random building. However, the (unofficial) transcript says: | :I too assumed it was the groundbreaking of some random building. However, the (unofficial) transcript says: | ||
| Line 83: | Line 83: | ||
Incidentally I do disagree with the closeness of events in episodes as outlined after '''Collaborators'''. It seems that the original person who did it thinks the episodes happen within two or three days of one another. I don't think that is the case. As I just shown there is a five moth gap of time between '''Collaborators''' and [[Unfinished Business]], plenty of room to spread out the three episodes in between-[[Torn]], [[A Measure of Salvation]] and [[Hero]]. I think there is a need for a gap particularly between '''Hero''' and '''Unfinished Business'''. I don't think Adama would climb into a ring two days after being beaten so badly by Lt. Novacek. A gap of at the very least of a week should be there; more like two weeks. Even more so, I also think that there is a wide gap between '''Unfinished Business''' and [[The Passage]]. I don't think the Fleet would reach starvation levels within a month of the discovery of the contamination. They would need time to find a suitable planet as well. However, I did leave the two day gaps between episodes since I don't have any alternative time line regarding that, just common sense. [[User:Hunter2005|Hunter2005]] 10:13, 21 December 2006 (CST) | Incidentally I do disagree with the closeness of events in episodes as outlined after '''Collaborators'''. It seems that the original person who did it thinks the episodes happen within two or three days of one another. I don't think that is the case. As I just shown there is a five moth gap of time between '''Collaborators''' and [[Unfinished Business]], plenty of room to spread out the three episodes in between-[[Torn]], [[A Measure of Salvation]] and [[Hero]]. I think there is a need for a gap particularly between '''Hero''' and '''Unfinished Business'''. I don't think Adama would climb into a ring two days after being beaten so badly by Lt. Novacek. A gap of at the very least of a week should be there; more like two weeks. Even more so, I also think that there is a wide gap between '''Unfinished Business''' and [[The Passage]]. I don't think the Fleet would reach starvation levels within a month of the discovery of the contamination. They would need time to find a suitable planet as well. However, I did leave the two day gaps between episodes since I don't have any alternative time line regarding that, just common sense. [[User:Hunter2005|Hunter2005]] 10:13, 21 December 2006 (CST) | ||
:I'm sorry, I can't stand by this. The Day 385 date was better in the asbsence of any knowledge to the contrary, and "Unfinished Business" does not supply that. The groundbreaking was explicitly not for the colony, which Dualla even remarked had existed for at least a month prior. --[[User: | :I'm sorry, I can't stand by this. The Day 385 date was better in the asbsence of any knowledge to the contrary, and "Unfinished Business" does not supply that. The groundbreaking was explicitly not for the colony, which Dualla even remarked had existed for at least a month prior. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 05:22, 23 December 2006 (CST) | ||
::I happen to agree with you that New Caprica was being settled long before Baltar stuck his shovel in the ground. I thought I made that clear before, but I didn't so I am re-editing my previous post (the one you are answering). And while '''Unfinished Business''' doesn't supply an exact date as to when the first settlers landed, I think the Doral unit who answered Baltar when the Cylons arrived gave us a good idea. In '''Lay Down Your Burdens Part II''' A Doral said that they noticed the light of Gina's Nuclear blast just about then, which is why it took them a year to show up at New Caprica, given the speed of light. In other words the Cylons were about a light year away when Cloud 9 blew up. Since it is almost certain the settlement of New Caprica started soon after (the civilians were just itching to get out of the "boxes" that were the spaceships), and by settlement I mean putting up the first tents and huts with civilians living in them, that means the settlement started a year before the Cylon invasion. It took a year for the light of Gina's explosion to reach the Cylons. The ground breaking took place eight months before the Cylons came or roughly four months after the first settlers arrived. Again, I speculate that the ground breaking was for a '''''permanent''''' building in New Caprica City, perhaps the Administration/Detention Center? Maybe its original purpose was to be the New Caprica City city hall? [[User:Hunter2005|Hunter2005]] 03:29, 25 December 2006 (CST) | ::I happen to agree with you that New Caprica was being settled long before Baltar stuck his shovel in the ground. I thought I made that clear before, but I didn't so I am re-editing my previous post (the one you are answering). And while '''Unfinished Business''' doesn't supply an exact date as to when the first settlers landed, I think the Doral unit who answered Baltar when the Cylons arrived gave us a good idea. In '''Lay Down Your Burdens Part II''' A Doral said that they noticed the light of Gina's Nuclear blast just about then, which is why it took them a year to show up at New Caprica, given the speed of light. In other words the Cylons were about a light year away when Cloud 9 blew up. Since it is almost certain the settlement of New Caprica started soon after (the civilians were just itching to get out of the "boxes" that were the spaceships), and by settlement I mean putting up the first tents and huts with civilians living in them, that means the settlement started a year before the Cylon invasion. It took a year for the light of Gina's explosion to reach the Cylons. The ground breaking took place eight months before the Cylons came or roughly four months after the first settlers arrived. Again, I speculate that the ground breaking was for a '''''permanent''''' building in New Caprica City, perhaps the Administration/Detention Center? Maybe its original purpose was to be the New Caprica City city hall? [[User:Hunter2005|Hunter2005]] 03:29, 25 December 2006 (CST) | ||
| Line 90: | Line 90: | ||
I spread out the episode incidences between day 800 of [[Collaborators]] and day 950 of [[Unfinished Business]]. I left the small time gap between [[Torn]] and [[A Measure of Salvation]] sincethe latter does occur very shortly after the former. In fact, I narrowed the gap between them to only one day. Again, I am trying to use common sense to get a feel as to when the episodes happened. From this I believe there was a gap of about two weeks between [[Hero]] and Unfinished Business because it would take about two weeks for Admiral Adama to recover from the beating Lt. Novacek gave him, but I think that beating gave Adama the idea of a boxing match to get the bile out of the system of the crew, seeing how "therapeutic" it was for both Saul and Novacek. Conversely I think only a day would be needed between the events of "Torn" and "A Measure of Salvation" to access the Cylons and formulate and execute a plan to recon the disabled Baseship. They don't want to wait too long less the Cylons come back. [[User:Hunter2005|Hunter2005]] 13:08, 22 December 2006 (CST) | I spread out the episode incidences between day 800 of [[Collaborators]] and day 950 of [[Unfinished Business]]. I left the small time gap between [[Torn]] and [[A Measure of Salvation]] sincethe latter does occur very shortly after the former. In fact, I narrowed the gap between them to only one day. Again, I am trying to use common sense to get a feel as to when the episodes happened. From this I believe there was a gap of about two weeks between [[Hero]] and Unfinished Business because it would take about two weeks for Admiral Adama to recover from the beating Lt. Novacek gave him, but I think that beating gave Adama the idea of a boxing match to get the bile out of the system of the crew, seeing how "therapeutic" it was for both Saul and Novacek. Conversely I think only a day would be needed between the events of "Torn" and "A Measure of Salvation" to access the Cylons and formulate and execute a plan to recon the disabled Baseship. They don't want to wait too long less the Cylons come back. [[User:Hunter2005|Hunter2005]] 13:08, 22 December 2006 (CST) | ||
:Good in principle, but I generally don't like guessing dates when we have nothing to go on. --[[User: | :Good in principle, but I generally don't like guessing dates when we have nothing to go on. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 05:18, 23 December 2006 (CST) | ||
::I understand what your concerns are, but I think it is better than stacking them back to back to back. That is even more unrealistic IMHO. Having them back to back etc. is no more realistic a representation of when those events happened than spreading them out, in fact less so. At least some thought goes into it using common sense like my idea of not having Adama climb into a boxing ring in "Unfinished Business" allegedly two days after getting a beating from Novacek in "Hero". At least put a two weeks of daylight between the episodes to give the 60-odd year old Adm. Adama time to recover. And the five month gap between "Collaborators" and "Unfinished Business" is much more than guess work, it is using the on screen data available. Three episodes to spread out over five months leaves a lot of room (especially for those who write Battlestar Galactica novels) and if my guesstimate dates are wrong they can be moved when canon information is available. [[User:Hunter2005|Hunter2005]] 19:19, 24 December 2006 (CST) | ::I understand what your concerns are, but I think it is better than stacking them back to back to back. That is even more unrealistic IMHO. Having them back to back etc. is no more realistic a representation of when those events happened than spreading them out, in fact less so. At least some thought goes into it using common sense like my idea of not having Adama climb into a boxing ring in "Unfinished Business" allegedly two days after getting a beating from Novacek in "Hero". At least put a two weeks of daylight between the episodes to give the 60-odd year old Adm. Adama time to recover. And the five month gap between "Collaborators" and "Unfinished Business" is much more than guess work, it is using the on screen data available. Three episodes to spread out over five months leaves a lot of room (especially for those who write Battlestar Galactica novels) and if my guesstimate dates are wrong they can be moved when canon information is available. [[User:Hunter2005|Hunter2005]] 19:19, 24 December 2006 (CST) | ||
:::I wasn't responsible for any of the proposed dates for the third season content, so please don't read me as defending whatever was there before you made your contributions. My only concern is that it be clear to viewers that the third season dates are complete guesswork, as opposed to some of the second season dates which can at least be inferred from dialogue. --[[User: | :::I wasn't responsible for any of the proposed dates for the third season content, so please don't read me as defending whatever was there before you made your contributions. My only concern is that it be clear to viewers that the third season dates are complete guesswork, as opposed to some of the second season dates which can at least be inferred from dialogue. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 03:28, 26 December 2006 (CST) | ||
==Major Cleanup Needed== | ==Major Cleanup Needed== | ||
Despite the great work many of us have put into this article, it has become bloated, fraught with inconsistancy and has failed to cite sources within its own text. I think that each of these issues need to be addressed here, and promptly. I have created subsections below for important conversations I believe we need to have. --[[User: | Despite the great work many of us have put into this article, it has become bloated, fraught with inconsistancy and has failed to cite sources within its own text. I think that each of these issues need to be addressed here, and promptly. I have created subsections below for important conversations I believe we need to have. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 04:17, 26 December 2006 (CST) | ||
===Style Guidelines=== | ===Style Guidelines=== | ||
How should this timeline be styled? Things to consider: | How should this timeline be styled? Things to consider: | ||
*Header structure - do we want to continue using one header per episode? How do we deal with events seen in flashbacks, or alluded to in dialogue? Bear in mind that too many headers creates a cluttery table of contents, but that headers are needed for article structure. | *Header structure - do we want to continue using one header per episode? How do we deal with events seen in flashbacks, or alluded to in dialogue? Bear in mind that too many headers creates a cluttery table of contents, but that headers are needed for article structure. | ||
*Summary style - how detailed should episode summaries be? --[[User: | *Summary style - how detailed should episode summaries be? --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 04:17, 26 December 2006 (CST) | ||
:I've normally stayed clear of this article, but last week I was ready to tear this apart after trying to read it through. For one, the episode summaries should hardly exist, with only the barest mention of the timeline item and a source link for more information. With the slowness of the holidays I may still go in and start cleaning this up (we can always re-add from the archived revisions). | :I've normally stayed clear of this article, but last week I was ready to tear this apart after trying to read it through. For one, the episode summaries should hardly exist, with only the barest mention of the timeline item and a source link for more information. With the slowness of the holidays I may still go in and start cleaning this up (we can always re-add from the archived revisions). | ||
| Line 111: | Line 111: | ||
Timeline entries ''must'' cite their sources, or when no source is available, provide or link to concise argumentation that takes into account all reasonable viewpoints (excluding patent fanwankery). How should this be done? | Timeline entries ''must'' cite their sources, or when no source is available, provide or link to concise argumentation that takes into account all reasonable viewpoints (excluding patent fanwankery). How should this be done? | ||
*Using citation templates would create a very long and complicated "notes" section, but would have the advantage of making organization easier. | *Using citation templates would create a very long and complicated "notes" section, but would have the advantage of making organization easier. | ||
*Alternatively, we could link to small articles in the Sources namespace, such as "Sources:Dates for Exodus, Part II" or "Sources:Exodus, Part II (Timeline)". --[[User: | *Alternatively, we could link to small articles in the Sources namespace, such as "Sources:Dates for Exodus, Part II" or "Sources:Exodus, Part II (Timeline)". --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 04:17, 26 December 2006 (CST) | ||
:Reference notes are best handled here for extended notes, but usually an episode cite should be fine. --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 19:39, 26 December 2006 (CST) | :Reference notes are best handled here for extended notes, but usually an episode cite should be fine. --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 19:39, 26 December 2006 (CST) | ||
===Consistency=== | ===Consistency=== | ||
I believe that before we allow modification to existing rationalle, we should allow a reasonable window for debate (one week?) and that after modifications are made, they should be immediately promulgated to other articles which cite this one (including [[survivor count]], and the battle chronology). --[[User: | I believe that before we allow modification to existing rationalle, we should allow a reasonable window for debate (one week?) and that after modifications are made, they should be immediately promulgated to other articles which cite this one (including [[survivor count]], and the battle chronology). --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 04:17, 26 December 2006 (CST) | ||
:Question on consistency - why are some timeline entries italicized and others not? [[User:JubalHarshaw|JubalHarshaw]] 12:56, 26 December 2006 (CST) | :Question on consistency - why are some timeline entries italicized and others not? [[User:JubalHarshaw|JubalHarshaw]] 12:56, 26 December 2006 (CST) | ||
| Line 139: | Line 139: | ||
Why? Because I doubt very much that Sharon Agathon on losing her baby on day 270 (so she thought) and strongly suspecting Adama, Roslin, Cottle or all three of "killing" her she would be in any mood to help the colonials at that time no matter how much she wants to fit in. She may recover quickly physically for such a mission, we saw proof of that with her recovering very quickly after being bombarded with radiation in [[The Passage]], but psychologically I don't think she will bounce back as much. Indeed, in the Raptor on its way to Caprica she was still in morning. I would think that it would be at least a week for Helo to get her to agree to such a mission given her state of mind emotionally. Therefore I believe the anchor date of the mission starting should be day 280 and not day 270. This would give some realistic daylight and distance from the trauma of her loosing her baby and later agreeing to go on the mission. It will also still be in keeping with Tom Zarek's statement about the colonies being couped up in metal boxes for nine months. He may not be talking ''exactly'' nine months. If the elapsed time was really nine months and a fortnight it still would be within the human norm of estimation. Tyrol could start having his nightmares on day 266 instead of 256. Everything else can also be shifted over seven to ten days and not interfere with the beginning of settlement of New Caprica which is guesstimated to have started on day 300. Again the justification is that I doubt very much that Sharon Agathon would be in a state of mind to help the Colonials immediately after her baby dying and suspecting she was murdered. [[User:Hunter2005|Hunter2005]] 20:29, 2 January 2007 (CST) | Why? Because I doubt very much that Sharon Agathon on losing her baby on day 270 (so she thought) and strongly suspecting Adama, Roslin, Cottle or all three of "killing" her she would be in any mood to help the colonials at that time no matter how much she wants to fit in. She may recover quickly physically for such a mission, we saw proof of that with her recovering very quickly after being bombarded with radiation in [[The Passage]], but psychologically I don't think she will bounce back as much. Indeed, in the Raptor on its way to Caprica she was still in morning. I would think that it would be at least a week for Helo to get her to agree to such a mission given her state of mind emotionally. Therefore I believe the anchor date of the mission starting should be day 280 and not day 270. This would give some realistic daylight and distance from the trauma of her loosing her baby and later agreeing to go on the mission. It will also still be in keeping with Tom Zarek's statement about the colonies being couped up in metal boxes for nine months. He may not be talking ''exactly'' nine months. If the elapsed time was really nine months and a fortnight it still would be within the human norm of estimation. Tyrol could start having his nightmares on day 266 instead of 256. Everything else can also be shifted over seven to ten days and not interfere with the beginning of settlement of New Caprica which is guesstimated to have started on day 300. Again the justification is that I doubt very much that Sharon Agathon would be in a state of mind to help the Colonials immediately after her baby dying and suspecting she was murdered. [[User:Hunter2005|Hunter2005]] 20:29, 2 January 2007 (CST) | ||
:Some space is reasonable to assume here. I would only strive to ensure that all references to "nine months" fall within a +/-14 day span of the actual day 270. --[[User: | :Some space is reasonable to assume here. I would only strive to ensure that all references to "nine months" fall within a +/-14 day span of the actual day 270. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 06:32, 3 January 2007 (CST) | ||
==Another Colonial Date in "Precipice"== | ==Another Colonial Date in "Precipice"== | ||
| Line 158: | Line 158: | ||
::Has this page lost its way? Towards the beginning it seems to only catalog events that can be time indexed. Towards the end of it seems more like almost like high-level episode summary. This seems redundant (outside of helping to capture where flashback events take place in the overall timeline). Maybe it's just a matter of trimming down the later summaries to fewer bullets. I'm not exactly sure what bugs me about it... --[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 11:01, 14 February 2007 (CST) | ::Has this page lost its way? Towards the beginning it seems to only catalog events that can be time indexed. Towards the end of it seems more like almost like high-level episode summary. This seems redundant (outside of helping to capture where flashback events take place in the overall timeline). Maybe it's just a matter of trimming down the later summaries to fewer bullets. I'm not exactly sure what bugs me about it... --[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 11:01, 14 February 2007 (CST) | ||
:::I somewhat agree. The increasing level of detail in the summaries has been nagging me too. I just think it's unnecessary to repeat every tiny plot point --[[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 13:21, 14 February 2007 (CST) | :::I somewhat agree. The increasing level of detail in the summaries has been nagging me too. I just think it's unnecessary to repeat every tiny plot point --[[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 13:21, 14 February 2007 (CST) | ||
:::Absolutely agreed. When I was shepherding this article, I tried to keep summaries pithy and focused on relevant details, but later contributors have not followed suit. --[[User: | :::Absolutely agreed. When I was shepherding this article, I tried to keep summaries pithy and focused on relevant details, but later contributors have not followed suit. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 13:51, 14 February 2007 (CST) | ||
:So, is still split still going to happen? --[[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 19:03, 19 February 2007 (CST) | :So, is still split still going to happen? --[[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 19:03, 19 February 2007 (CST) | ||