| Latest revision |
Your text |
| Line 25: |
Line 25: |
|
| |
|
| Frylock86, I reverted the changes you made today claiming that ''Osiris'' is a battlestar based only on a uniform patch. If only the word "battlestar" can be made out on the patch and nothing else is legible (particularly the word "Osiris"), then it's only circumstantial evidence at best. It's just as likely that the producers recycled uniform patches from the TV series as a cost-cutting measure, assuming that very few viewers would notice such a tiny detail on screen. Throughout BSG, battlestars always had a distinctive basic design: elongated flight pods on the port and starboard sides of the ship. ''Osiris'' does not have these. Even though it seems to be capable of doing many of the things battlestars can do, that doesn't make it a battlestar. If you can upload a screen capture of a patch that clearly shows the words "battlestar" and "Osiris," then it would be safe to make the change. -- [[User:BlueResistance|BlueResistance]] 15:47, 19 November 2012 (EST) | | Frylock86, I reverted the changes you made today claiming that ''Osiris'' is a battlestar based only on a uniform patch. If only the word "battlestar" can be made out on the patch and nothing else is legible (particularly the word "Osiris"), then it's only circumstantial evidence at best. It's just as likely that the producers recycled uniform patches from the TV series as a cost-cutting measure, assuming that very few viewers would notice such a tiny detail on screen. Throughout BSG, battlestars always had a distinctive basic design: elongated flight pods on the port and starboard sides of the ship. ''Osiris'' does not have these. Even though it seems to be capable of doing many of the things battlestars can do, that doesn't make it a battlestar. If you can upload a screen capture of a patch that clearly shows the words "battlestar" and "Osiris," then it would be safe to make the change. -- [[User:BlueResistance|BlueResistance]] 15:47, 19 November 2012 (EST) |
|
| |
| == ''Galactica Type Battlestar'' revision ==
| |
|
| |
| Frylock86, a few things that don't seem clear to me in your revision of the overview section, or comes over as conjecture:
| |
|
| |
| " with 12 ships initially being built by, and representing, each of the Colonies "
| |
|
| |
| To me, this seems to mean that each colony built its own battlestar. But likely not all the colonies had the means to construct ships the size of Galactica. Aquaria, Libran, and perhaps Sagittaron come to mind.
| |
|
| |
| " They formed the lead ships of period Battlestar Groups, "
| |
|
| |
| What do you mean by "period" Battlestar Groups? Battlestar Groups during the Cylon War period? If so, it seems badly phrased.
| |
|
| |
| " Unfortunately, the class didn't hold up well to the Cylon threat, [snip], [8] quite possibly due to the corners that were cut in their construction - a similar fate Galactica would suffer nearly 45 years later. "
| |
|
| |
| This is conjecture. The majority of the 12 original battlestars could as well have been destroyed due to the severity of which the war was fought. A decade of heavy action isn't the best way to keep a class of ships in good shape. And just because Galactica was seemingly build cutting corners, that doesn't mean shipyards around other colonies use similar practices.
| |
|
| |
| " but their main show of force came from the multiple Viper stacks housed in the flight pods. "
| |
|
| |
| Personally, I'd use the word "squadrons" here instead of "stacks", and rephrase the text afterwards a bit to explain the stack system. [[User:Geo|Geo]] 14:26, 20 January 2013 (EST)
| |
|
| |
| ===Revisions===
| |
|
| |
| ** "To me, this seems to mean that each colony built its own battlestar. But likely not all the colonies had the means to construct ships the size of Galactica. Aquaria, Libran, and perhaps Sagittaron come to mind."
| |
|
| |
| - Yes. From what I understand the Colonies initially built 12 battlestars, with each one representing each Colony. ''Galactica'' represented [[Caprica (RDM)|Caprica]], for example.
| |
|
| |
| ** "What do you mean by "period" Battlestar Groups? Battlestar Groups during the Cylon War period? If so, it seems badly phrased."
| |
|
| |
| - Yes. Cylon War period groups, since we have no idea what "modern" groups looked like.
| |
|
| |
| ** "This is conjecture. The majority of the 12 original battlestars could as well have been destroyed due to the severity of which the war was fought. A decade of heavy action isn't the best way to keep a class of ships in good shape. And just because Galactica was seemingly build cutting corners, that doesn't mean shipyards around other colonies use similar practices."
| |
|
| |
| - True. We could remove that if people would like.
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| - Fry.
| |
|
| |
| " - Yes. From what I understand the Colonies initially built 12 battlestars, with each one representing each Colony. ''Galactica'' represented [[Caprica (RDM)|Caprica]], for example. "
| |
|
| |
| Yes, but what I meant was your phrasing indicates each colony built its own Galactica-style battlestar. But some colonies likely didn't have the means to do so on their own for a variety of reasons. Be it either too low a population level, planetary poverty, lack of a proper shipyard, submission to another colony,...
| |
|
| |
| Not inclined to have a go at the "stack" description? ;) -- [[User:Geo|Geo]] 10:49, 22 January 2013 (EST)
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| == Basestar ==
| |
|
| |
| Hello. I have seen, that you have changed the Infobox from the Basestars. Wher comes your Info of the "Flak" from? A quote from the Article: "...a basestar does not appear to have point-defense batteries,..." --[[User:Enabran|Enabran]] 08:29, 18 September 2013 (EDT)
| |
|
| |
| Hi, the battle of the Resurrection hub had Flak in use. Unless it is a VFX error, I included it in the basestar's defenses. If the general consensus doesn't like it, it can be removed. [[User:Frylock86|Frylock86]] 18:04, 18 September 2013 (EDT)[[User:Frylock86|Frylock86]] 18:04, 18 September 2013 (EDT)
| |
