Battlestar Wiki - User contributions [en]

Battlestar Wiki talk:Citation Jihad

2006-05-06T04:50:16Z

Jasonbondshow: /* Support */

*[[Battlestar Wiki talk:Citation Jihad/Archive01|Archive 1 (September 29th, 2005 to Present)]]:

:[[Battlestar Wiki talk:Citation Jihad/Archive01#Citation Consistency|Citation Consistency]], [[Battlestar Wiki talk:Citation Jihad/Archive01#Request for name change|Request for name change]], [[Battlestar Wiki talk:Citation Jihad/Archive01#BSG: The Magazine|BSG: The Magazine]], [[Battlestar Wiki talk:Citation Jihad/Archive01#Citation Format|Citation Format]], [[Battlestar Wiki talk:Citation Jihad/Archive01#Character Ages|Character Ages]], [[Battlestar Wiki talk:Citation Jihad/Archive01#Railguns|Railguns]], [[Battlestar Wiki talk:Citation Jihad/Archive01#Twelve Lords of Kobol|Twelve Lords of Kobol]], [[Battlestar Wiki talk:Citation Jihad/Archive01#Magazine Content|Magazine Content]], [[Battlestar Wiki talk:Citation Jihad/Archive01#To Do|To Do]], [[Battlestar Wiki talk:Citation Jihad/Archive01#BSG Books|BSG Books]], [[Battlestar Wiki talk:Citation Jihad/Archive01#Sources namespace|Sources namespace]]


==Koenigrules / Hollywood North Report==
"Koenigrules" (KR) is the alias of Jim Iaccino, a popular reporter of BSG spoilers, whose reports are often cited and reposted by other sources. [http://lvpodcasts.autopodcaster.com/download.php?filename=Subject_2_Discussion_04_11_2006.mp3/Subject_2_Discussion_04_11_2006.mp3 Recent comments] made on the "[http://www.subject2discussion.com/ Subject 2 Discussion]" segment of the "[http://www.lvrocks.com/ LV Rocks]" radio program (transcribed at [[Sources:Subject 2 Discussion, 11 April 2006]]) raised the possibility that KR is merely re-reporting publically available information, and does not appear to be a credible primary source.

[[User:The Merovingian|The Merovingian]] investigated this possibility, and posted his findings to [[Talk:Precipice#Question about Koenigrules]]. [[User:Peter Farago|I]] raised the possibility of instating a policy against citing KR's reports as credible sources on Battlestar Wiki, which was seconded by [[User:CalculatinAvatar|CalculatinAvatar]].

Consequently, I am opening a formal vote here on the matter. Please review [[Sources:Subject 2 Discussion, 11 April 2006]], its putative [http://www.nowcasting.com/sides/Episodic/BATTLESTAR%20GALACTICA/301%20Occupation/Selloi_Dedona_4pgs.pdf source material], and The Merovingian's comments on [[Talk:Precipice#Question about Koenigrules]] prior to casting your vote, and feel free to raise any questions below. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 01:18, 20 April 2006 (CDT)

'''Update:''' Koenigrules has responded to a number of our concerns via e-mail. You can read my correspondence with him at [[Sources:Correspondence with Jim Iaccino]]. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 12:36, 23 April 2006 (CDT)

'''Update 2:''' I will be transcribing KR's appearance on tonight's Subject 2 Discussion either later tonight or early tomorrow, and offer my considered opinion afterwards. I may request that the current "blacklist" vote be closed and recast as a more general discussion on the appropriateness of anonymous sources at battlestar wiki. Rebuttals will be welcome. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 19:05, 25 April 2006 (CDT)

'''Update 3:''' KR's latest appearance has been transcribed to [[Sources:Subject 2 Discussion, 25 April 2006]]. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 12:45, 26 April 2006 (CDT)

'''Update 4:''' My final opinion is available at [[Battlestar Wiki talk:Citation Jihad#From Peter]]. I have changed my vote to "Oppose" and have supported Joe's suggestion of closing this vote and moving the topic of discussion to the appropriateness of anonymous sources. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 13:25, 26 April 2006 (CDT)

'''Update 5:''' This poll was closed by Joe on May 2, 2006, in favor of "The Rumor Vote" below. --[[User:The Merovingian|The Merovingian]] ([[Special:Contributions/The Merovingian|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/The Merovingian|E]]) 01:27, 3 May 2006 (CDT)

===Blacklist Vote===

====In favor of a policy against citing KR as a primary source====
*<del>[[User:The Merovingian|The Merovingian]] ([[Special:Contributions/The Merovingian|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/The Merovingian|E]]) 23:36, 19 April 2006 (CDT) - I feel like this guy betrayed us. And it's getting worse; 4-5 news sites report things he says as fact; he is not helping at all. Dogger said: "''He often fails to differentiate what he is reporting from his own speculation, an oversight compounded by the fact that his speculation is hampered by a lack of attention to detail.''"-->He put that more clearly than I could. Way to go Dogger. :)</del>
*<del>[[User:CalculatinAvatar|CalculatinAvatar]] 01:11, 20 April 2006 (CDT) If he originates nothing, we lose nothing by not citing him.</del>
*<strike>[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 07:34, 20 April 2006 (CDT) - We do NOT claim to be a primary source here, and everything that is stated as fact should be citable elsewhere. Our sources are therefore our foundation, so they should be held to a high standard.</strike>
#[[User:Talos|Talos]] 10:30, 20 April 2006 (CDT)
#[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 11:21, 20 April 2006 (CDT)
#[[User:Grafix|Grafix]] 03:16, 21 April 2006 (CDT) I'm against the publication of anything except the facts.
# [[User:Mazzy|Mazzy]] 17:12, 21 April 2006 (CDT) This is site is a reference, it would be misleading to publish anything other than citable information. I would vote the same no matter who we were talking about and spoilers without a named source seem to be a chance of forever cataloging misinformation. If this were a vote about sources and not a person I would be more comfortable but as it stands, I don't feel I can change my vote in good faith. I think spoilers except ones coming directly from writers or cast should be left off all together. If there is a more appropriate way for me to express this than this vote, I will consider changing it if not this is my input.-- [[User:Mazzy|Mazzy]] 12:00, 2 May 2006 (CDT)
#[[User:AerynSun44|AerynSun44]] 17:15, 21 April 2006 (CDT) I must concur. Too much flotsam.
#*[[User:Dogger|Dogger]] 20:38, 21 April 2006 (CDT) <del>I've never heard KR 'reveal' anything that I haven't already seen from another source. I have always seen him as just somebody who reads the same things I read and then repeats them in another venue, but with an extra helping of certainty.</del> He often fails to differentiate what he is reporting from his own speculation, an oversight compounded by the fact that his speculation is hampered by a lack of attention to detail. <del>Perhaps what he does might have some value as a 'digest' of what is being talked about, but I don't see why anyone but the most naive listener would consider him as a primary source.</del>
#*I have struck out parts of my comments that seem to have been proven wrong by some of the history presented in the thread on Skiffy. However, I cannot in good conscience change my vote because of the simple fact that I don't think that anyone claiming an anonymous source should really be considered a primary source, even if that source is genuine. Perhaps 'blacklist' is the wrong word. I simply see this as a test case for what is the appropriate kind of evidence that should be cited as authoritative. Singling out KR is probably unfair, but that doesn't change what I honestly think to be not an appropriate primary source for a wiki. If there were a vote to have a policy against citing any anonymous source as a primary source, then I would be in favour of that too. I consider this vote to be just an example of what I think should be an overall principle. For example, if KR were to name his source, then I don't see any reason not to consider citing that information. The problem I have is not with KR's honesty in particular -- it's with the idea of citing a source without giving the reader the benefit of evaluating its reliability, and that includes anonymity as well as the mixing of facts with speculation.--[[User:Dogger|Dogger]] 19:36, 23 April 2006 (CDT)
#*<del>[[User:Gouge|Frankie Gouge]] 02:20, 22 April 2006 (EDT) Credibility is too hard to earn to risk needlessly. Plenty of other sites to get speculative spoilers. </del>
#[[User:Bowersj8|Bowersj8]] 14:31, 22 April 2006 (EDT)
#[[User:Shane|Shane]] ([[User_Talk:Shane|T]] - [[Special:Contributions/Shane|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/Shane|E]]) 22:40, 25 April 2006 (CDT) I listened enough to the radio show. (All Annoymous Sources too...)

====Opposed====
#[[User:Kuralyov|Kuralyov]] 22:21, 23 April 2006 (CDT)
#[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 13:41, 26 April 2006 (CDT) Individual blacklisting is not appropriate for this case.
#[[User:CalculatinAvatar|CalculatinAvatar]] 13:49, 26 April 2006 (CDT) It seems he does originate things after all.
#[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 14:09, 26 April 2006 (CDT) Let's not single out KR on the issue, but we do need to address the issue of anonymous sources (see below).
#[[User:Adedward|Adedward]] 23:28, 28 April 2006 (CDT)
#[[User:The Merovingian|The Merovingian]] ([[Special:Contributions/The Merovingian|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/The Merovingian|E]]) 12:06, 2 May 2006 (CDT) - This discussion kind of evolved into the more generic discussion about anonymous sources in general, and I no longer support a ban on KR specifically. I think we already said it had changed and stuff last week, but I forgot to formally change my vote.

====Abstain====
#[[User:Mercifull|Mercifull]] 07:33, 23 April 2006 (CDT) Changed to abstain because I don't feel I know enough about this issue to choose either way.
#[[User:Quig|Quig]] 10:09, 23 April 2006 (CDT)
#[[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] [[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]] 08:53, 20 April 2006 (CDT) After reading the unfortunate thread on the Skiffy board and the dialgoue established between Peter and KR, I will abstain until I determine whether or not this whole thing was worth the heartache for all concerned.
#[[User:Gouge|Frankie Gouge]] 16:05, 24 April 2006 (EDT)
#[[User:Noneofyourbusiness|Noneofyourbusiness]] 20:58, 26 April 2006 (EST)

===Motion by The Merovingian===
While KoenigRules and several of his collleagues insist that he does indeed have access to some sort of spoilers, all of them still will not confirm the veracity of these sources. Seeing as this is what they would do both if they were REAL and if they were NOT REAL sources, we thus arrive at an impasse. Therefore, I want to find some civil compromise over this: I'm a Uniter, not a Divider, and if we start turning on each other Rick Berman's new crackpot scheme to make Star Trek XI: Starfleet Academy will eat us BSG fans alive. '''Proposal''': If KoenigRules promises to be more careful in the future in his interviews, to *'''make it clear'''* when he is giving away '''direct information from his source(s)''', and when he is making a '''speculation''' ''based'' on either this purported source material, ''or'' just his own personal '''opinion''', we will reverse our decision to hold a vote to reject him as a reliable source. For example, if KoenigRules says in an interview "I think Baltar is a Cylon", he should really make it clear that that is just his opinion and not supported by any spoiler source information that he might have, as news sites might miscontrue his comments and lead to a world of trouble. However, the matter of HollyWoodNorthReport itself, which has come under frequent attack from many sites for improperly forgetting to use citations when they source material from other fansites, should be considered a separate matter.

I hope we can all agree to this.

:I don't think this subissue needs a vote. Koenigrules has indicated to me that he'll be able to reply here by monday. If he can adequately address the concerns we've raised, then naturally, the above discussion will be re-evaluated in light of that. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 02:21, 23 April 2006 (CDT)

====Support====
#--[[User:The Merovingian|The Merovingian]] ([[Special:Contributions/The Merovingian|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/The Merovingian|E]]) 22:48, 22 April 2006 (CDT)

====Oppose====

== On anonymous sources ==

In lieu of all this, I am thinking of further clarifying the section defining what sources we should and should not use on the wiki. In particular, sources that are anonymous should not be referenced (this is fairly common sense, but isn't explicitly stated0. Also, for reference, we should probably add a definitive list of sources, grouped by categories from "uses anonymous source" to "trusted primary sources". (We have a list such as this already on the Citation page, though it could be better defined in my mind. ) Thoughts? -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] [[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]] 19:49, 23 April 2006 (CDT)
:I agree (though I don't know how to set that up using wiki code).--[[User:The Merovingian|The Merovingian]] ([[Special:Contributions/The Merovingian|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/The Merovingian|E]]) 20:46, 23 April 2006 (CDT)
::We would set it up just like the "Image tagging policy" page. The only question is how do we define what is legit and what is not? If we consider how big the internet and how vast information can be found, anyone who reports on infomration at a regular basis could be considered legit, as long as the information is true. (i.e. Gateworld vs. HNR). This would also not benifit the little people. So I am not really a fan of this, but in light of the problem with spoilers vs. fact, this might be needed. --[[User:Shane|Shane]] ([[User_Talk:Shane|T]] - [[Special:Contributions/Shane|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/Shane|E]]) 21:02, 23 April 2006 (CDT)
:::Well it now seems likely that KR does indeed have a source: he's been heavily involved since the Miniseries, and was on the original nuBSG fan page. What threw me in all of this is that that site **no longer exists**, so when I was trying to fact check his credibility it didn't come up. He still cannot reveal his source without compromising it, so I think Joe's "annonymous source" spoiler tag idea might be best. --[[User:The Merovingian|The Merovingian]] ([[Special:Contributions/The Merovingian|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/The Merovingian|E]]) 21:41, 23 April 2006 (CDT)

::::I think anytime something can be better defined, it is a plus to the accuracy of the project. =)-- [[User:Mazzy|Mazzy]] 12:02, 24 April 2006 (CDT)

Everyone I think this has been resolved after our contact with KoenigRules, and we should bring down the site notice on the Main Page that there's a vote going on regarding KR, as I think things have been resolved already and this would only confuse newcomers. KR seems entirely on the level to me now, and we should put this past and move on to other work. --[[User:The Merovingian|The Merovingian]] ([[Special:Contributions/The Merovingian|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/The Merovingian|E]]) 22:40, 24 April 2006 (CDT)

:Absolutely not. This remains an important issue. Tomorrow night, I will transcribe his appearance on S2D and offer my final opinion. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 01:13, 25 April 2006 (CDT)

===From Peter===

Alright then. Having spoken with KR and listened to his latest podcast, the following is now clear to me:
*KR is not merely re-reporting information gleaned from other sources available to the public. The overlap between the information in the Selloi Dedona casting side and the report made on the 11th is remarkable, but the information he supplied on the 25th cannot be accounted for in light of other publicly available material.
*KR asserts that he has a single, anonymous source for all his reports.
*KR has complied with every request we've made of him, clearly separating his personal speculation from information supplied by his source.

It is therefore my opinion that he has done everything we can reasonably expect him to do, considering the anonymity of his source. I therefore believe that singling him out for blacklisting is inappropriate. I am changing my opinion on the above vote to "oppose", and I support Joe's desire to let the matter drop and refocus the discussion on the nature of our sources.

The [[Battlestar Wiki:Spoiler Policy|Spoiler Policy]], arrived at by grudging compromise last autumn, makes the following statement:

<blockquote>All spoiler information must have a source, whether in the form of a [[Wikipedia:URL|URL]] or a printed publication text, on the ''talk page'' of the spoilerific article. For printed publication text, a copy must be scanned and uploaded to the wiki in the form of a [[Wikipedia:JPG|JPG]] or [[Wikipedia:PNG|PNG]], and posted on the talk page of the article containing the spoilerific content.</blockquote>

Naturally, this arises from a desire for Battlestar Wiki to be a reliable source. The nature of a wiki allows anybody to contribute news and information, which must be checked by a policy such as this. It would obviously be unacceptable to allow anybody to pass off ungrounded speculation as reported fact, bolstered in reputation by dint of its presence on the wiki.

However, the very nature of spoiler reporting renders impossible the goal of maintaining perfect accuracy while reporting on episodes not scheduled to air for months to come. Even the very best sources we can hope to come by - legitimate casting sides and call sheets, for example - may refer to script elements that end up being cut from the final broadcast. Set reports may refer to scenes which are filmed but not included, or be reported out of context.

This is an inevitability to which we must resign ourselves if we intend to report on spoilers at all. However, it can be mitigated by requiring attribution to individual reporters. The real problem with KR's reports is the anonymity of his source. Casting sides and call sheets which arrive in their original format are unlikely to be forged, and set reports substantiated by photographic evidence, but all we have to go on with regard to KR is his good reputation.

I find it awkward to judge submissions here based on such a nebulous concept as the reporter's reputation, which is why my personal preference leans to reporting only information which can be backed up by tangible evidence or sourced to individuals involved in production. However, it should be acknowledged that by excluding anonymous reports such as KR's, we will be depriving ourselves of a prolific source of timely and apparently reasonably accurate information.

Because I consider this a real and important dilemma, I want to solicit comment form other users on the issue of anonymous sources. Particularly relevant questions:
*Should they be allowed at all?
*If so, should we discriminate between different sources on the basis of reputation?
*If so, how should reputation be determined, and who should be responsible for determining it?
--[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 13:22, 26 April 2006 (CDT)

: '''(Intro)''' First of all, I listened to the podcast live. There was quite a number of people in the chat channel inclduing myself. Along with KR, was merv, Ribby, and a few other people that were in the orginal flame war on SciFi.com.
: '''(Question 1)''' anonymous Spoliers are the worest. First of all, they are considered [[Wikipedia:Hearsay]] which means the context of the spolier or information can change and exaserations can be made by the reporter. '''(From the Podcast on Question #1)''' When I listened last night he said he took through notes on what his source said, to make sure he kept the information straight. Usually I have pretty good ears, but I didn't hear any paper's or him lean away from the phone.
: '''(Question 2)''' If gateworld to report this as a spolier, and like this podcast OR link even us as the source with US sourceing it as an annoymous source, [http://gateworld.net/galactica/news/2006/04/secondandthirdepisodetitle.shtml Gateworld] did not list this current radio cast as the source for them knowning the new title. This page was posted a good few hours before the radio show. They have yet to cite or deem these current spoliers on the website.
: '''(Question 3)''' I can not answer this, because I think offical sites, offical news orginzations, are the best place. If this came from Katte's website, or Apollo's then I would be OMG, but it didn't. It came from a source that can not even verify if the spoliers are correct. Teasers are '''offical spoliers''', you can choose to watch them or not, but they are offical. RDM podcasts are offical, RDM blog. etc... etc..
: '''(Conclustion)''' If he was to go on the show stright till october, we would know all of Season 3 BEFORE it happened. For this, I voted to not allow KR be a source, even if another "anonymous" soruce, and only allow '''offical spoliers''' to be reported. --[[User:Shane|Shane]] ([[User_Talk:Shane|T]] - [[Special:Contributions/Shane|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/Shane|E]]) 13:45, 26 April 2006 (CDT)

:I'm not that keen on using anonymous sources at all. I don't think it's realistic for us to be everything to everyone, and would rather see us strive to be the concise, accurate, organized repository of BSG knowledge (and let the new sites and forums handle the spoiler info). I could see maybe having a "news" pages with links to such spoilers, but actually putting content into the article that we have no way of verifying (and could prove to be false) seems like a stretch.
:Maybe there's a way for us to be able to "report" the information, without compromising our accuracy. We could, for example, limit spoiler postings to spoiler news areas (which nobody updates anyway), and obvious spoiler pages (like the next season, and upcoming episodes). People reading those pages '''expect''' spoiler information, as there is no canon information available yet. The important thing to keep in mind would be making sure that once the page passes out of the realm of spoilers into to normal article space (by having an airdate, etc), all normal citation requirements must apply. It is a double standard, but there's a clearly demarcated line that could be observed/enforced, and if the spoilers end up being false it only ends up affecting the temporal accuracy of that particular spoiler page, and not the long-term accuracy of the page once aired. I would still prefer not seeing any anonymous sources in the regular article space, though, as the maintenance issues involved would potentially leave false spoiler information in place after the event occurs.
:Also, I'd like to see the above vote closed (since the context since it's opening has changed quite dramatically). I'd rather not change my vote, I'd vote that way again given the same information, but "re-voting" based on the new information seems a bit of the Monday-morning quarterbacking ("I'd a double bagged it.")--[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 13:47, 26 April 2006 (CDT)

::Spoilers are already quarantined into the episode guide pages; quarantining anonymous spoilers somewhere else seems excessive to me. I think we just need to decide one way or another. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 13:55, 26 April 2006 (CDT)

:::I didn't realize that was the case. I think I was remembering character pages like [http://www.battlestarwiki.org/en/index.php?title=Helena_Cain&oldid=23108 this] that had spoiler boxes, and it's hard to edit them without running into the spoilers. --[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 14:00, 26 April 2006 (CDT)
::::I'm mistaken. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 14:02, 26 April 2006 (CDT)

Having read everything you guys said and listening to the last show, here's my thoughts:
I entirely agree with the three points about KR Peter said; he met our requests and was careful about saying "I guess" "that's what I think", etc., and he incorporated it into his interview smoothly (didn't stop in his tracks and say "everyone be warned this is just what I think, websites shouldn't etc etc etc) which was good for him, not affecting his interview drastically. I think that worked out well for everyone. Nextly, I am actually now quite possitive that '''he does indeed have some sort of spoiler source''', the exact nature of which is of course unknown, but still it is now clear to me that he isn't just basing all of his information on casting sides and public information, but has a source no one else does. The real problem, then, has changed: how do we address spoilers which are based on a reporter who has a ''reputation'' of providing on the whole accurate spoilers ''in the past'', and uses an ''anonymous source'' which nonetheless seems to be a "real" source?
:"Should they be allowed at all? If so, should we discriminate between different sources on the basis of reputation? If so, how should reputation be determined, and who should be responsible for determining it?"
This was an important set of questions Peter, and I think that a new subsection on our sources policy page should be openned up to discuss these questions raised in more detail. '''Further, I agree entirely with you and Joe's feelings that this vote here should be "wiped", singling out a single person would be inappropriate, that we should "let the matter drop and refocus the discussion on the nature of our sources."'''

KR's sources thus seem to ''generally'' be real and he's not just making things up, but that raises all sorts of questions; as said above, these sources tend to be based on early ideas or scripts and are subject to change even if the reports on them were truthfully saying what the production team ''thought'' they were going to do, or might be scenes that even get filmed, but ultimately deleted and possibly becoming deleted scenes that are in fact contradicted by scenes that appear in the final episode rendering them totally non-canonical; i.e. what if someone was on the set and saw the alternate cut of "Pegasus" where Boomer ''actually'' gets raped, then left the set and did not see that ''another'' take of this was filmed where she gets saved at the last minute?...this spoiler source would honestly report that they saw a scene where Boomer gets raped...however even though this scene was filmed, another scene was filmed which completely contradicted it and it is no longer real (as opposed to like, the deleted scenes such as when Roslin gets "Lest We Forget" from Billy in "33", which it appears CAN be thought of as more or less canonical and RDM said was only deleted for time reasons). So, the thing we really need to do is open '''another, more generic discussion on what to do about sources and spoilers'''.

My thoughts on the subject: Generally, we should keep spoiler information confined to news and season 3 pages; by it's very nature the season 3 page is right now filled with spoilers, and people going there are looking for them, and can see the spoiler sign on top. Also, *individual episode entries* for episodes that have not aired yet, such as "Occupation", are obviously going to contain spoilers and people go there to look for them, although even then *gigantic* spoilers should be in a highlighted spoiler-text box so you have to highlight ''specific'' plot information to see it. Once and a while there will be some exceptions where we ''can'' keep spoiler info on a character page, i.e. {{spoiltext|Number Three where Lucy Lawless says she'll be a character like God, and do this for a MAJOR 10 episode arc.}}

We should be very sparing about allowing spoiler info like this off of the upcoming season and news pages. ***Still, '''I think our current spoiler warning policy is more or less okay in turns of placement'''.

What we need to really focus on is tagging our sources.

{{spoiltext|I mean, Lucy Lawless said the above thing in ''an interview'' and thus it is okay to add to a page. However, KR's recent comments about what Starbuck is doing in various season 3 episodes should '''definately not be added to the Starbuck page until they are confirmed by production photos''', but still will appear on season 3, news, and season 3 episode pages. }}

Ultimately, I think we actually have to run KoenigRules' spoilers: Gateworld, Galaticastation, and most other Battlestar Galactica news sites all tend to run them within a few days. We'd be seen as less reliable about our info if someone could get better info from somewhere else. ***I think the best idea would be to '''run these annonymous source spoilers only *after* an official news site like Gateworld or Galacticastation has already run them''', like the day after they run them, we report that "Gateworld reported this story, it came from a radio interview which gave news from an anonymous source".

Sort of like the "Citation needed" tag, which appears in the article but as a little super-script? I think we need a new one of those which says "Information from an anonymous source, not confirmed" or something to that effect. Well those are just my early thoughts on the subject. Bottom line: ESSENTIALLY, KR does seem to have a real spoiler source, though he won't reveal it. We need to figure out how to handle anonymous sources like this. We should remove this vote as new information we've gotten has shed more light on the matter, and we should refocus this onto a more ''generic'' "who do we handle anonymous spoilers" discussion on our sources page. I agree with Farago and SteelViper. --[[User:The Merovingian|The Merovingian]] ([[Special:Contributions/The Merovingian|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/The Merovingian|E]]) 14:49, 26 April 2006 (CDT)
:Maybe you should wrap the actual spoiler content in the above in spoiler tags. I hadn't read some of that yet (and try to avoid it).--[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 15:04, 26 April 2006 (CDT)

:Merv writes: ''I think that a new subsection on our sources policy page should be openned up to discuss these questions raised in more detail.''
:The Citation Jihad ''is'' our sources policy page, and we're having that discussion right now. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 15:14, 26 April 2006 (CDT)

::I meant a new subheading. (I will find those spoiltexts SV...)--[[User:The Merovingian|The Merovingian]] ([[Special:Contributions/The Merovingian|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/The Merovingian|E]]) 15:19, 26 April 2006 (CDT)
:::If we allow a spolier to be listed like this it would be moot to what we are. This is not even offical. Spoliers with cast memebers are offical. We become something we are not supposed to be. If I reported annoymously that I heard BSG Wiki was closing and it was annoymous source, it could be anyone, however int his case, Joe is the only one. So a reported would ask joe is BSG closing, or joe would see it and he would look to see who spread that rumor because the fact is not true. Just put yourself in RDM shoes. What would he say to the production staff. Please do not leak spoliers. Actors are bound by the [[Wikipedia:SAG]] contracts in which they why can't reveal sources otherwise they can be seriously fined. They do comment on the show and what their characeter does, but not the spolt details itself. --[[User:Shane|Shane]] ([[User_Talk:Shane|T]] - [[Special:Contributions/Shane|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/Shane|E]]) 15:31, 26 April 2006 (CDT)

:::All spoilers should be sourced. If that source is anonymous, that should probably be specifically, explicitly noted, but I cannot see how it would hurt to include them if they are so marked. Each reader can then judge how much stock to put in an anonymous source individually, since it's a point on which reasonable people can differ. --[[User:CalculatinAvatar|CalculatinAvatar]] 15:53, 26 April 2006 (CDT)

:::: If you don't mind spoiler's read the two reports. One is from The [[Season 3 (2006-07)]] page and the other is from the new discussion.

{{spoiltext|According to Ron D. Moore's podcast of the Captain's Hand, Apollo will continue to be the Commander of the Pegasus well into Season 3.}}
This goes totally against
{{spoiltext|

KR: It's not— I don't think you're going to have a Galactica spinoff

SO: Uh oh. Well, I mean, they could've done a spinoff with the Pegasus if they'd wanted to, they could've done some other things, but I mean even that as fan fiction—

KR: Did you say "Pegasus"?

SO: Uh oh.

KR: Did you say "Pegasus"? Episode 303.

SO: Uh oh.

KR: Pegasus is destroyed.

SO: Oh no, you're kidding me! Who's on it when it gets destroyed?

KR: Don't know. But it is sent— my source says it is sent on a collision course to a Cylon base ship so that the Galactica can get away.

}}
Goes totally against an offical spoiler. --[[User:Shane|Shane]] ([[User_Talk:Shane|T]] - [[Special:Contributions/Shane|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/Shane|E]]) 16:13, 26 April 2006 (CDT)
:Possiblities: (1) Plans have changed since RDM made that podcast, (2) Plans have not changed, the producers feel that three episodes are enough to show Lee's ups and downs of command, (3) Keonigrules' source is flatly mistaken or (4) didn't get the details right (it's a Pegasus Viper that is sacrificed, or something like that). --[[User:Noneofyourbusiness|Noneofyourbusiness]] 20:58, 26 April 2006 (EST)

=== From Joe ===

Well, I've created {{tl|spoileranony}} with the following wording:

{{spoileranony}}

Basically, I feel that as long as we can cite a source for the rumor, we should report it as such. Care must be taken to ensure that we inform our readers that this information is rumor and speculation. Here are the criteria I'd prefer we use:

# As so long as it is reported on a valid news source (Gateworld, HNR, S2D), we can report it as well.
# We must take care to indicate that these are rumors. Therefore they may or may not be accurate. (Templates such as {{tl|spoileranony}} reflect this view.)
# We must make sure that we are not the primary source for these rumors -- we aren't a news and rumors site. We're a reference. We summarize and scrutinized what's been reported, nothing more, nothing less. (I guess I'm repeating point 1, but I don't think I can emphasize this enough.)

I think we may have to create a page specifically dealing with rumors, such as [[Battlestar Wiki:Rumor Policy]]. Thoughts?

So that's what I have to say on that subject... Unless anything else comes to mind. :-) -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] [[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]] 16:34, 26 April 2006 (CDT)

:Page takes a second to create... :) --[[User:Shane|Shane]] ([[User_Talk:Shane|T]] - [[Special:Contributions/Shane|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/Shane|E]]) 16:41, 26 April 2006 (CDT)
::{{tl|Episode List}} - needs to be updated. I posted a suggestion to split up the three seasons because spoliers and title names should be inclduded. --[[User:Shane|Shane]] ([[User_Talk:Shane|T]] - [[Special:Contributions/Shane|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/Shane|E]]) 16:46, 26 April 2006 (CDT)

:::I agree with the three points Joe has listed here. I'm unsure on precise implementation though but we'll be hammering that out for a while. --[[User:The Merovingian|The Merovingian]] ([[Special:Contributions/The Merovingian|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/The Merovingian|E]]) 16:50, 26 April 2006 (CDT)

:First, let me address some of your points above:
:#What the heck is a valid news source? Anyone can start a blog and be a "valid news source". This goes back to the credibility/reputation problem.
:#If we do decide to permit anonymous spoilers, an ostentatious warning banner is the last thing we need. This is alread taken care of by the spoiler and spoiltext tags we already have. The anonymity of the source should simply be noted in the citation.
:I'm afraid I'm still against anonymous sources. If we report anonymous spoilers, we ''must'' take into account the reputation of the poster. Since we ''cannot'' do this in an objective and non-arbitrary manner, we therefore cannot report anonymous spoilers.
:Lastly, there is nothing that we would cover in a "Rumor" policy that we couldn't cover here. Let's not spread ourselves thin. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 19:09, 26 April 2006 (CDT)

: "What the heck is a valid news source?" A very good question indeed. In fact, you do raise many interesting points above and I believe we should consider very carefully whether or not we cite spoilers. I'm starting to reconsider that. Anyone else want to chime in? -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] [[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]] 20:19, 26 April 2006 (CDT)

:: I dislike spoilers and only read them because it's an effective necessity to edit here; they don't add anything that wouldn't be there after the episode anyway. My opinion on anonymous sources for them (under the assumption that spoilers in general will be cited) is above. --[[User:CalculatinAvatar|CalculatinAvatar]] 20:43, 26 April 2006 (CDT)

Joe, I think it's time to wrap this thing up. Let's formally close the blacklist vote and come to a conclusion about our policy on anonymous sources. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 01:57, 2 May 2006 (CDT)

== The Rumor Vote ==

I am calling a vote on this issue; the '''blacklist vote is closed'''. Since it seems to be the consensus that we will not blacklist anyone, I am calling for a different vote, so as to make thing clear.

Here's the text of what we are voting on:

: Battlestar Wiki's primary goals do not include discerning which unofficial sources have valid information. Our primary goal is to report valid information in an encyclopedic medium. Due to this, we will not be citing rumors from any sources other than official channels (SCI-FI Channel, Ronald D. Moore, and current cast and crew). Any information from sources other than those in the list will be immediately removed from the wiki; actions which lead to the repeated reintroduction of said unofficial and unverifiable material will be dealt accordingly by an on-duty administrator.

Voting will end '''May 9, 2006 at 23:00 UTC'''.

=== Support ===

# [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] [[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]] 22:13, 2 May 2006 (CDT)
# [[User:Shane|Shane]] ([[User_Talk:Shane|T]] - [[Special:Contributions/Shane|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/Shane|E]]) 23:04, 2 May 2006 (CDT) Could not agree more.
# [[User:The Merovingian|The Merovingian]] ([[Special:Contributions/The Merovingian|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/The Merovingian|E]]) 23:24, 2 May 2006 (CDT)
# [[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 00:52, 3 May 2006 (CDT)
# --[[User:Day|Day]] ([[User talk:Day|Talk]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Administrators' noticeboard|Admin]]) 00:53, 3 May 2006 (CDT) (If I'm understanding this right, we won't be ''reporting'' the rumors, let alone citing them?)
#*Well, that's my understanding Day, though I could be wrong. BTW, what if something like TVGuide gets word of such super-spoilers or from a different source entirely, then runs a story with them that has anonymous sources? I think that if a major publication runs it, the lid on such a spoiler would be blown so wide open that we can't contain it as its common knowledge. I mean they ran a story that Apollo would kiss Starbuck in "Home, Part I" a week before it happened, with a picture and everything. --[[User:The Merovingian|The Merovingian]] ([[Special:Contributions/The Merovingian|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/The Merovingian|E]]) 01:25, 3 May 2006 (CDT)
#**A picture would be pretty incontrovertible. I'm less inclined to take their word for it in the absence of corroborating evidence. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 01:39, 3 May 2006 (CDT)
#***Agreed. --[[User:The Merovingian|The Merovingian]] ([[Special:Contributions/The Merovingian|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/The Merovingian|E]]) 01:47, 3 May 2006 (CDT)
#**Even in that case, unless it was corroborated by RDM or someone close to the production, then we wouldn't quote it. It's safer that way anyway. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] [[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]] 10:20, 3 May 2006 (CDT)
# Absolutely! -- [[User:Mazzy|Mazzy]] 09:44, 3 May 2006 (CDT)
# [[User:Gougef|Frankie Gouge]] 11:44, 3 May 2006 (EDT)
# [[User:Mercifull|Mercifull]] 11:48, 3 May 2006 (CDT) ditto
# [[User:CalculatinAvatar|CalculatinAvatar]] 11:50, 3 May 2006 (CDT) This should make life easier, as it's a nice, sharp delineation.
# [[User:Geckomind|Geckomind]] 13:13, 3 May 2006 (CDT) BTW, am I right in assuming that the "Purple! Green!" at the top comes from the B5 Episode "Geometry Of Shadows"?
#: Yep. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] [[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]] 21:50, 4 May 2006 (CDT)
# [[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 14:25, 3 May 2006 (CDT)
# [[User:Brecchie|Brecchie]] 21:05, 4 May 2006 (CDT)
# [[User:Noneofyourbusiness|Noneofourbusiness]] 19:15, 5 May 2006 (EST)
# [[User:Jasonbondshow|Jasonbondshow]] 01:18, 6 May 2006 (EST)

=== Oppose ===

=== Neutral ===

Louanne Katraine

2006-02-04T04:22:29Z

Jasonbondshow: /* Biography */

{{Character Data|
|photo= [[Image:bsg-kat-1.jpg|200px]]
|age=
|colony=
|birthname= Louanne Katraine
|callsign= Kat
|death=
|parents=
|siblings=
|children=
|marital status= Single
|role= Viper Pilot, ''[[Battlestar (RDM)|Battlestar]] [[Galactica (RDM)|Galactica]]''
|rank= Lieutenant
|actor= [http://us.imdb.com/M/person-exact?+Luciana+Carro Luciana Carro]
|cylon=
}}

'''Louanne "Kat" Katraine''' is a young woman with some flying experience. She was selected as a candidate pilot ("[[nugget]]") for Viper training under the command of Lieutenant [[Kara Thrace|Kara "Starbuck" Thrace]] ([[Act of Contrition]]). While she may still be a new pilot, she has a taste for fighting, and is often on the front lines when ''[[Galactica]]'' engages [[Cylon]] forces.

== Biography ==

Katraine is selected from relative obscurity to become one of ''[[Galactica|Galactica's]]'' first intake of trainee pilots after 13 experienced pilots were killed in a freak accident ([[Act of Contrition]]).

Described as a "boonie jumper", she is placed under the instruction of [[Kara Thrace]], alongside nugget pilots [[Brendan Constanza]] and [[Perry]], with whom she formed a friendship.

Thrown in at the deep end - flying [[Viper (RDM)|Vipers]] on their very first day of training, none of the nuggets perform particularly well - Kat in particular fails to make a [[Combat Landing|combat landing]] on ''Galactica''. Thrace washes out the entire group of candidates before she is forced to reinstate them on the orders of Commander [[William Adama]].

Katraine's training continues until she is selected to fly with [[Lee Adama]] during a raid to secure [[tylium]] desposits from the Cylons ([[The Hand of God]]). Her fellow nuggets [[Perry]] and [[Stepchild]] are killed in this action, but she and [[Brendan Constanza|Hot Dog]] survive and are greeted as heroes on their return to ''Galactica''.

Kat participates in the defense of ''Galactica'' when the battlestar becomes separated from [[The Fleet (RDM)|the Fleet]], and has to face down a Cylon [[Basestar (RDM)|basestar]] in order to relocate it ([[Scattered]]).

After Lee Adama's defection to the [[Laura Roslin faction]], his replacement, the newly promoted Captain [[George Birch]] negligently endangers Katraine during a training exercise. She is almost killed when Birch incorrectly directs her to attack an asteroid target as [[Brendan Constanza|Hot Dog]] fires a missile at the target. Katraine's immproving piloting skills save her from a dangerous collision with debris ([[Home, Part I]]).

Kat is later promoted from cadet to the rank of Lieutenant. She becomes increasingly exhausted with the mounting pressures of service in the Fleet with long hours, constant danger, and no possiblity of reinforcement. While trying to combat her fatigue, Kat becomes dependent on [[stims]], of which the effects of their overuse make her emotionally unstable. She "moons" a documentary crew for her "buddies" on [[Freighter 212]], berates Chief [[Galen Tyrol|Tyrol]] for mechanical failures that are beyond his control, and later crashes her Viper into the [[landing bay]], totalling the vehicle ([[Final Cut]]", "[[Flight of the Phoenix]]"). She is pulled from flight status for some time, but is reinstated by the time that the advanced battlestar ''Pegasus'' joins the Fleet , when she flies wingman to [[Lee Adama|Apollo]] on [[CAP]] when first contact is made with ''[[Pegasus (RDM)|Pegasus]]''.

In the wake of Admiral Cain's integration of ''Galactica'' and ''Pegasus''' officers, Kat appears to have been made the acting-CAG of the ''Galactica'' flight team. With Starbuck and Apollo both transferred to ''Pegasus'' and the failure of Cpt. [[George Birch]] as [[CAG]] during Lee Adama's absence, Katraine appears to be the most likely choice to fill the command vacuum. She is flight leader of the Viper wing that stands off against the ''Pegasus'' Vipers. In spite of making repeated requests for firing clearance, she manages to keep the situation from degenerating into a fire fight, and avoids several collision attempts in the fighters' deadly "chicken" game, each attempting to force the other side to fire first ([[Resurrection Ship, Part I]]).

On day 189 of the human exodus, Kat is assigned CAP with [[Kara Thrace|Starbuck]]. Kat's maturity and past insensitivity shows growth when Starbuck orders her to stop her small talk about Starbuck's off-hours behavior, which Kat does so without skipping a beat and returns to business by requesting permission to do a weapons check. As Kat test-fires her Viper's guns, an ammo misfire destroys Kat's port gun and sends debris at Starbuck's Viper, cracking her cockpit window. The two declare an emergency and safely return to ''Galactica.'' The cause of the malfunction was soon determined to be sabotage later blamed on a civiilan ammunition worker that is part of the "[[Demand Peace]]" movement ([[Epiphanies]]).

==Notes==
*Katraine's first name, Louanne, was revealed in the episode "[[Final Cut]]" during her inteview with [[D'anna Biers]].

*Some of Kat's family may also have survived the [[Fall of the Twelve Colonies]] - Kat shouted "Hi, Mom!" while waving into the camera in "[[Final Cut]]". However, she may have been speaking facetiously.

{{Characters}}

[[Category:A to Z|Katraine, Louanne]]
[[Category:Characters|Katraine, Louanne]]
[[Category:RDM|Katraine, Louanne]]

Talk:Epiphanies/Archive 1

2006-01-25T21:03:12Z

Jasonbondshow:

I got the title of episode 2.12 from: [http://www.galacticastation.com/Galactica%20Station/episodes/Ep%20header%20img/S2/s2guide.htm Galactica Station]. I'd put the info in an Episode Guide Template but have yet to figure it out. Please if anyone doesn't mind teaching me how to use templates I'd like to know. Please leave the advice on my talk page.--Zareck Rocks 01:40, 18 September 2005 (EDT)
:Looks fascinating, Z. I was wondering if they would really let Roslin's character just die off when she's hitting her stride...at the same time, I was hoping they wouldn't, since cancer is cancer and, when as nasty as hers, is a fatal thing. But, the Cylons are good at bioengineering, so I can swallow this--to a point. Baltar's fix would have to rebuild damaged areas with good cells as well as destroying bad cells. Hey, I'm no doctor, but that's gotta hurt somehow. [[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 10:59, 22 September 2005 (EDT)
::Current speculation is that her disease is delayed, not cured, and that she'll again be near death by the end of the season. I don't have any source on that though. The notion of the amazing Dr. Baltar discovering a ''cure for cancer'' under the circumstances of the fleet is faintly ridiculous to me. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 13:23, 22 September 2005 (EDT)
:: I wouldn't be surprised if there were some nasty side effects from whatever treatment Baltar (or whomever) devised. The whole "we have a cure for cancer" thing would go outside the boundaries of believability and realism, which Moore and crew are aiming for. -- [[User:Joe.Beaudoin|Joe Beaudoin]] 22:11, 22 September 2005 (EDT)

:: I'll agree that an outright cure for cancer is very implausible considering all the conditions the fleet is under. It would also undermine the whole prophecy that it seems that the fleet is following. Yes Cylon biotech is advanced, but the colonials barely understand it at all. I could accept them finding a treatment that buys Roslin more time, but only as long as it's clear that it isn't a permament cure. --[[User:Wingsandsword|Wingsandsword]] 12:32, 25 September 2005 (EDT)

::: I'd say that was resolved, although it was a bit of a stretch...[[User:Joemc72|Joemc72]] 23:18, 20 January 2006 (EST)

:::: Rather eloquently stretched, at that. Seems like Cylon blood is a rather hardcore Chemo series, killing off the currently detectable malignancies. The root cause of the cancer is most likely still there, and working to re-proliferate through Roslin's system. As soon as the Cylon blood is processed and removed from her bloodstream, it should more than likely come back in full force (Which, unless I'm mistaken, takes roughly 120 days). --[[User:Durandal|Durandal]] 23:48, 20 January 2006 (EST)

:: I put removed from her system, and not a cure on the page.--[[User:Shane|Shane]] 23:32, 20 January 2006 (EST)

:: After listening to Ron Moore's blog, he is mentioning that Laura's character is too important for him to put on the sidelines for an illness. His initial plan was that she got weaker throughout the whole series, but felt that he didn't want her stuck in a hospital chair or whatnot. Granted the whole religious thing they say, "is that a dying leader will lead the people to salvation" is still up in the air, and I'm interested in seeing where they take it, if anywhere. --[[User:Bane Grievver|Bane Grievver]] 14:20, 21 January 2006 (EST)

::: I haven't listened to the blog yet, but is it conceivable that the Cylon blood treatment itself might sicken/kill Roslin again in the long run? Perhaps the cancer is permanently gone, as was suggested by Doc Cottle. --[[User:BlueResistance|BlueResistance]] 14:46, 21 January 2006 (EST)

:::: I think that Ron Moore panicked with the whole cancer thing. My grandmother had cancer for 10 years before it finally took her life and it was only in the last 6 months that she became seriously incapacitated, and that was because it did go to her brain. Prior, she had it in both breasts and her lungs but with surgery and treatment was able to function normally. Now, I understand that Roslin doesn't have the benefit of treatment and surgery due to the circumstances, but this could have played out a lot longer without what he feared of her being invalid. But consequently, because cancer is not a virus but a deformation inherent to the individual, I can definitely see complications later on as a result of the cylon blood. Additionally, another issue I have is how they make Baltar to be a "General" Scientist when it was obvious that he was a computer scientist who wrote highly elaborate computer programs. Now they have him curing cancer. --[[User:straycat0|straycat0]] 10:46, 22 January 2006 (EST)

::::: I don't have so much of a problem with Baltar knowing so much about science. It's true that it would lean somewhat towards a reviled science-fiction stereotype for him to be able to solve a problem about anything, but it's been established since very early on in the first season that Baltar is the resident Cylon expert, and this episode is simply a continuation of that role. He may have written computer programs too, but lots of scientists I know are adept at many forms of science--besides, it's all sort of interconnected. We also don't really see him talking much about physics (except that comment about enthalpy when blowing up the tylium refinery in "Hand of God," but every biochemist worth his salt would probably understand enthalpy anyway), so he seems confined to bio. And so long as he's not reconfiguring the plasma manifolds to increase the range of the FTL jumps or anything like that, I'll be okay. [[User:Drumstick|Drumstick]] 15:23, 22 January 2006 (EST)

::::::Well, he's had six months to brush up on his cylon biology. I seriously doubt anyone's been needing him to write computer programs lately. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 15:36, 22 January 2006 (EST)

When Roslin wakes up after being injected with the Cylon blood, she points to Baltar and mumbles something. What did she say? Was it "You're the father."? I didn't quite catch it, because my neighbours decided to test their new sound system with "The Ace of Spades" at that exact moment! (May they rot in hell!) --Axminster 23 January 2006

:I wondered about that myself, so when it replayed again later that night, I muted it and let the closed caption run. All she said was "Dr. Baltar?". It could be wrong, though. --Jasonbondshow 25 January 2006

==Starbuck's Viper==
Can anyone get a look at the tail number on Starbuck's viper in the opening? It looks like 8757 to me, but it could also be the previously identified [[Viper 8737]]. She identifies herself with the three digit number 049. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 14:32, 21 January 2006 (EST)
:I'll check, I need to get back to my Viper Cataloguing project. First, though, I need to go through all the edits made while I couldn't access the page. --[[User:Talos|Talos]] 20:58, 21 January 2006 (EST)

==And By the Way==
I know this isn't really a discussion forum, but am I the only one who thought that this episode ''really sucked''? --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 16:45, 21 January 2006 (EST)
:I haven't watched it yet; have it on tape. --[[User:Ricimer|Ricimer]] 18:20, 21 January 2006 (EST)

:Thanks mostly to Roslin's miracle cure, but also to Helo and Tyrol back to work without even a whisper of a lesser charge/punishment against them, plus the sudden jump to six months after the Attack, I agree with you, Peter Farago. The only time I ever voted 2/10 on the offical website bulletin board. --[[User:BlueResistance|BlueResistance]] 18:35, 21 January 2006 (EST).

:It certainly had some bad ''plot'' points, all of which have been stated. And I still think it would have been possible to do a cure without making it so contrived--of course it had to happen, but I don't know if it should have been the centerpiece of an episode, or at the very least needed to be resolved in the last five minutes of one. But the stuff with Baltar running around on Cloud 9 and drawing cell diagrams in his crazy notepad was pretty cool, and I loved the bit with Adar in Roslin's flashbacks. Besides, the episode was well written overall, especially the scene with Helo and Adama in the hallway. Does this excuse bad plot points that fly in the face of continuity and practically insult our intelligence? Certainly not. But I don't know if it ''sucked''. [[User:Drumstick|Drumstick]] 20:07, 21 January 2006 (EST)

:''THANK YOU!'' Somebody finally said it. Yes, Peter. This was bad. A big part of BG's allure is it's deft sidestepping of expected plot devices and its commitment to fashion realistic situations. This thing (Uatu shakes his head) was drenched in deus et machina. I, for one, don't believe Roslin should have been cured -- ''ever''. I like the character but I liked my real life friend who died also. I'm also getting a little tired of the Colonials winning so many battles against a supposedly superior enemy. It's high time, in my opinion, for the fleet to get one good, solid a** kicking. --[[User:Watcher|Watcher]] 22:48, 21 January 2006 (EST)

: I think there was a lot of hooplah over this episode, mainly because people claimed we would get to meet the person Six was talking to after Baltar left. However, yes, this episode was a downer. It wasn't a bad 45 minutes of television -- in comparison to wha t is out there in the cesspool of American television -- but it wasn't the best. Actually, I think much of the Cylon peace group plot line just happened far too quickly for my taste. Also, why was Sharon stupid enough to smash her head into the glass in her cell? (Also, what is the idea of putting glass inside the cell and putting the bars on the side of the observation corridor? Gee, must be a Jammer design...) Hopefully we don't see the like of ''Epiphanies'' again... Battlestar is just too good to go down to that level. -- [[User:Joe.Beaudoin|Joe Beaudoin]] 22:57, 21 January 2006 (EST)

:I had to go one step further and detail ''why'' the show sucked in the Analysis section. Do add anything else you saw as well. The Helo/Tyrol punishment didn't bother me (else, Tigh would be in irons, too ([[Resistance]])). Things were wrapped up far too quickly. And there's NO WAY that Gina can hide on that ship or be supported like that. At least, I can hardly believe it. And here she was with glasses on. For what? So her "secret identity" would be hidden? Gods...and since I was late to see it aired, I actually ''bought'' this one from iTunes. Oh, well. As Joe, said, the worst of "Battlestar" is better than other show's supposed best. Still, to take a joke from Emo Phillips: If we watched this episode while flying on an airliner, we would have to open a window to equalize the suckage. --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 23:21, 21 January 2006 (EST)

:LOL! Oh the pain! --[[User:Watcher|Watcher]] 03:17, 22 January 2006 (EST)

:Guys, other than the six months issue (which actually ''started'' in Resurrection Ship, Part I), From what I've heard this isn't all that bad. Good points though Farago. I'm going to see the episode monday night when it reruns, I'd just like to point out that '''I am a genetics major''', and I'm going to pause on all of Baltar's notes to do a full write up of what exactly he's talking about, whether it's feasible/coherent with current works, etc. etc. More to follow. --[[User:Ricimer|Ricimer]] 11:03, 22 January 2006 (EST)
::I only caught acts II & III of the episode, and yes, it's a pretty incredible "cure". As a Medical Technology graduate, I'm also going to be reviewing how the cylon cells are able to remove the cells so efficiently. I'm also curious after her seizure and stoppage how Laura was able to start back up again (without assistance). Curiouser and curiouser... --[[User:Sgtpayne|Sgtpayne]] 15:41, 22 January 2006 (EST)
::While admittedly good, none of the above points were mine. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 16:12, 22 January 2006 (EST)

:After the wonderful Resurrection Ship series, it is almost impossible to follow up with equal quality. I think some of the essential premises of this episode were good - militant peace movement, Roslin's rash decisions in the face of death and subsequent resurgence by cylon blood, Baltar being the consummate scientist always doodingly and 'tinkering', Gina finding a hiding place among the peace movement - I think this episode failed more in the execution of these plot premises. Ron Moore sometimes gets too much "Oh, nobody cares about the tech talk. Let's just tell the story" which does make BSG sooo much better than any other scifi, but here he went too far. It is obvious this episode was designed purely to move the story along and pave the way for future episodes, so I enjoyed watching it for that even while I was growning from the inconsistencies. --[[User:StrayCat0|StrayCat0]] 11:10, 22 January 2006 (EST)
:I enjoyed it, but that could be because I was so happy to have a new episode of BSG on my birthday (1/20 btw). --[[User:Talos|Talos]] 12:21, 22 January 2006 (EST)
:Yeah I agree it wasn't the best episode, but it could have been worse, especially if it was another series trying to do the same thing. Although Ron Moore didn't mention it, do you think the episode was one of those ones made to save on budget due to Ressurrection and later episodes? I just think the episode was trying to cover too much in too little time and so things, in this case being Roslin's cancer, ended up being rushed. --[[User:Bane Grievver|Bane Grievver]] 18:41, 22 January 2006 (EST)
:Oh, and I got to say that one upside neat thing of this episode was the machine shop scene because it was so very...un-scifi and very real-world.[[User:StrayCat0|StrayCat0]] 16:25, 23 January 2006 (EST)

==Cancer Therapy==
I've studied some immunology, so I'm just going to talk briefly about this Cylon Blood business.

*There are two ways to attack a cancer cell.
**Chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and nucleoside analogues specifically target cells that are dividing very quickly. This will generally include cancerous growths, but will also target cells that are rapidly dividing by nature, such as hair.
**The body also maintains a set of [[Wikipedia:Cytotoxic T cell|Cytotoxic T cell]]s. These are basically trained to recognize what the antigens of a "normal" body cell looks like, and, if it finds those normal antigens in combination with foreign antigens (either viral or cancerous in nature), signal the cell to commit [[Wikipedia:Apoptosis|Apoptosis]]

*Presumably, the Cylon fetus's blood's lack of "antigens" meant that it could be given to Roslin without inducing [[Wikipedia:Transplant rejection|Transplant rejection]].
**It should be noted that normal, O-type human blood shares this quality (at least as far as red blood cells are concerned).
**Complete lack of antigens on a cell, however, is a biological absurdity.

*Therefore, it seems as though Baltar made two assumptions: That the cylon immune system was more "robust" than a normal human's, and that (based on the lack of antigens) it could be transplanted or donated to Roslin, where the cylon immune cells would root out her disease.
**However, for the reasons above, immune cells which specifically target cancer must be "trained" by exposure to non-cancerous body cells. The Cylon cells would have no knowlege of what Roslin's non-cancerous cells were supposed to look like, so it wouldn't be able to distinguish them from the cancerous ones.
**Alternatively, if it identified cancer cells based on their replication rate, she should suffer side effects comparable to a severe round of chemotherapy or radiation therapy immediately afterwards.

--[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 15:55, 22 January 2006 (EST)

:Do add your knowledge to the renamed [[Science in the Re-imagined Series]] page..it will help my layman's knowledge a lot. --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 16:51, 22 January 2006 (EST)

==Guest Stars==
I don't remember Hot Dog being in this episode. What did he do? --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 00:20, 24 January 2006 (EST)

*I have a tape so I copied the credits from the episode into the article. It's what they said on screen. I was a little confused, but the way I see it, he's usually in the backround without lines in a lot of episodes, or maybe a minor 20 second scene was cut. Happens all the time. --[[User:Ricimer|Ricimer]] 00:36, 24 January 2006 (EST)

== Bomb Use Spoiler ==

Ricimer, could you cite the spoiler source you have in that the bomb does function as a nuclear device and is detonated? I decided to remove your spoiltext since it was unsourced and I could find no mention of the bomb's use on our future episode pages. The magnitude of a nuke blowing up a ship in the Fleet would cause catastrophic damage to many, many ships...although I can see Pegasus meeting its end that way... --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 16:44, 24 January 2006 (EST)

* It was mentioned at the end of the podcast that the bomb story-line would come to a head in the final two episodes of this season. -- [[User:rexpop|rexpop]] 18:50, 24 January 2006 (EST)