Talk:Battlestar Galactica: The Resistance/Archive 1

Webisode Anticipation

I think the Webisodes are a great idea that may expand the BSG Audience. Anyway, I can hope. --gougef 22:07, 27 May 2006 (CDT)

I really, REALLY dont like the idea of this. 'Caprica' was bad enough (but i'll begrudgingly watch it anyway cause you kinda have to) but the idea of filler really, REALLY sucks - why oh why cant RDM and Eick just put the events of whats happened into one/two/three regular episodes rather than put these up? No doubt there'll be wonderful nuggegts of info put into these eps, and references made to them in normal eps that people wont get unless they watch these little 'things'. Ron - if you're reading this - you're getting WAY too ahead of yourself - keep to writing BSG itself first, no fancy pants crap, drop Caprica cause its a dumb idea and focus on what people want more of - BSG itself, not a spinoff, not webisodes - JUST BSG!!! </rant> Grr! --Fordsierra4x4 03:47, 28 May 2006 (CDT)

Actually it might work really well, they did a similar thing with Richard E Grant voicing Doctor Who a few years back on the BBC website --Mercifull 06:38, 28 May 2006 (CDT)

The BBC is also doing the Doctor Who Confidential series in tandem with the new Doctor Who, as well as the mini Tardisodes that you can get from BBC's site. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 08:41, 28 May 2006 (CDT)

I know the Tardisodes are available - but for those of us without broadband (i will be sans broadband for a long time in the next month or so), web episodes arent a good idea. There are going to be plenty of people that dont want to be forced into watching something online, and with the Tardisodes that the BBC put up, they're totally self contained AFAIK, with no references made to them from other episodes, and they're non-important in terms of the overall storyline of DW, as well as being able to be viewed on the Digibox (digital terrestrial DVB-T or Digital Satellite set top box) by pressing 'the big red button'. BSG on the other hand, they're talking about a major part of the backstory which is hardly what i'd call trivial! Are they going to air the episodes on telly for those countries outside the US or will they just assume everyone has fast broadband and dont watch telly? --Fordsierra4x4 13:07, 28 May 2006 (CDT)

This is the future of TV within 2-3 years most if not all tv shows will have some online content similar to the webisodes. --gougef 12:14, 28 May 2006 (CDT)

I just cant see why its necessary to split up a show into loads of different segments, have some aired on telly, some on the net - it just makes everything that more annoying - why oh *why* can't TV execs just get the idea into their thick skulls that people are happy watching telly AS IT IS!!! --Fordsierra4x4 13:30, 19 June 2006 (CDT)

My guess is that it is a business decision. You can show an advertiser exactly how many viewers. Also, you get more opportunities to advertise per viewer. Due to the web, DVR's, etc., I don't see the current TV business model surviving.--gougef 13:46, 28 May 2006 (CDT)

Unfinished Business

I have the feeling that the episode "Unfinished Business" will be a clip show of the webisodes, Just a guess. --gougef 12:14, 28 May 2006 (CDT)

No, they showed that it's different stuff: "Unfinished Business" deals with stuff *before* the Cylons came, the webisodes deal with stuff after that. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 20:52, 18 July 2006 (CDT)

Great more BSG content :D!! --FrankieG 21:52, 18 July 2006 (CDT)

I do hope that these get aired on telly, i really, really do :'( --Fordsierra4x4 13:29, 19 June 2006 (CDT)

This is not a bad idea at all. It's like a side project. Something that more than likely will have no tie-in to the regular series. Otherwise, why not call them teasers instead of webisodes? It's not featuring any of the main cast as far as we have been told. All the more interesting. My only regret about it is it will be something only accessed on Galactica's SciFi site, and not available on iTunes.--AJFederation 01:41, 23 July 2006 (CDT)

Add into Episode Guide template

Right now, Season 2 ends and proceeds to Season 3 in the template at the bottom of the screen: where's the page where I can add this webisode series into the succession?: I think it should be put at the beginning of Season 3 (or at least, after LDYB II clicking "next" would lead here, not season 3 proper). --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 18:13, 23 July 2006 (CDT)

In addition, I think the format of this page should be that of any one episode in the episode guide; that is, there won't be separate subpages linked for each of the 10 webisodes: ***Bradley Thompson, who co-wrote these, said he considers it one story, just broken up into 10 chunks, which I think is just like how a normal episode is broken up by commercial breaks. This really isn't a separate series, so much as a "special episode". It's not a separate series, but part of the series between Seasons 2 and 3 (we asked Thompson how we should consider it with that; waiting on answer). --->Originally I had thought this would be a parent series page that had episodes linked from it, but based on Thompson's comments it makes more sense just to put it in an episode format. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 19:44, 25 July 2006 (CDT)

September Debut

An BSG article in the October issue of SciFi Magazine says the Webisodes will start in September. Whether the WGA actions will affect this or not is unknown. --FrankieG 20:21, 19 August 2006 (CDT)

The WGA announcement was this Wednesday. I do know they were originally planned to be aired for 10 weeks (one each week) before the season premiere...in which case they would already have started two weeks ago. I think there was foot dragging where they hoped to vaguely "have them out in September or something" but that this broke down. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 20:24, 19 August 2006 (CDT)

The mag probably went to print assuming that everything will be ok, but it's not?? No word from Bradley yet?--FrankieG 20:28, 19 August 2006 (CDT)

Nothing. I'd make a big deal about it if there was. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 20:36, 19 August 2006 (CDT)

I was just hoping for tidbit of the webisodes by now to feed my raging beast ;-). Thanks for being on top of it--FrankieG 20:40, 19 August 2006 (CDT)

I'm confused about the last paragraph of the Contract Disputes... section. We say "several weeks" later from August, the tapes were handed over. (I assume that means at least 3 weeks.) The WGA/NBCU dispute became public on Aug. 12 and the NLRB greviance was filed on the 18th. It doesn't seem that three weeks have passed. Can that be clarified? Also, what changed or broke the stalemate? There has been nothing announced in Variety or elsewhere, at least in regard to The Office. How can the BSG producers turn over tapes without getting in trouble with the writers guild, of which Moore and Eick are presumably members. Can anyone explain?--Elach 13:42, 28 August 2006 (CDT)

"Image"

When we do a picture for the Episode Data block and this is all done, we should take all 10 of the images and put them in a pattern so it would be a mossic image. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 20:39, 2 September 2006 (CDT)

I like your idea, and I suggest 2 wide by 5 tall, as it must be either 1x10 or 2x5 (barring tomfoolery), and 5x2 would have unfortunate aspect ratio consequences. --CalculatinAvatar^(C-T) 00:20, 3 September 2006 (CDT)

Connectivity?!?

Is anyone else having problems watching the webisodes? I've waited all this time for them to air and I can't watch a single one!

How shady is that?

Do Sci-Fi.com have availbility problems regarding this, and how hong is it going to take to fix?

Does anyone know if they are going to be released in any other format other than webisode? --Jetstorm316

I just watched it not 20 minutes ago and it worked. --Talos 05:32, 5 September 2006 (CDT)

You need the latest Flash player. You can get it from the Marrocmedia Website. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 08:42, 5 September 2006 (CDT)

Any way to watch it if not from America? Wont let me watch here in the UK :( --Mercifull ^{(Talk/Contribs)} 11:21, 5 September 2006 (CDT)

Tried several US proxies and it just wont load. can someone save it and upload to google video or youtube or summit? :( --Mercifull ^{(Talk/Contribs)} 11:40, 5 September 2006 (CDT)

This is bending the policy,but it is on you-tube (Watch this morning because it works better than the official site at lower speeds). Should be a link on skiffy board somewhere. Or gtalk or gmail me and I will find the link. gougef at gmail dot com. --FrankieG 11:44, 5 September 2006 (CDT)

Well said, Frankie. No hosting or linking to "illegal" copies... but like he said there's youtube links at sciffy (even though the admins appear to be trying to delete them). And the "flash player" official version was choppy even with ultra-broadband. --Steelviper 12:00, 5 September 2006 (CDT)

Thanks for your help anyway guys. --Mercifull ^{(Talk/Contribs)} 12:13, 5 September 2006 (CDT)

Does any one have the link for the you tube version? My Flash player is upto date, but can't watch here in the UK........

Must be a Trans-Atlantic thing or something, but I hope they put it on 3.0 to compensate for people who are missing out.--Jetstorm316 19:12GMT 5 september 2006

EUREKA! Success at last! If you have a torrent client, go to this link, <<removed link>> Now, we can all watch it at our leasure --jetstorm316 19:34hrs GMT

We don't host or link copies. Removed. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 13:18, 5 September 2006 (CDT)

Please do not link to the webisodes or clips of BSG on this Wiki that are copyrighted. Thank you --Mercifull ^{(Talk/Contribs)} 13:21, 5 September 2006 (CDT)

And thats the thanks I get for helping us all out who have connectivity problems? You know what, F*** the lot of you! I won't visit this site again!

This is the last entry for Jetstorm316

Goodbye and good F***ing luck to you bunch of F***ing losers!

Please do not feel offended by up removing the link you posted. As i mentioned on your talk page It was nice of you to think of others but we dont want to get into any copyright issues with the producers. I hope you re-think your decision about leaving as your other contributions in the talk pages have been great --Mercifull ^{(Talk/Contribs)} 13:49, 5 September 2006 (CDT)

what Mercifull said. Personally, it was hard to get use to posting here after being involve with other online forums and communities. --FrankieG 13:59, 5 September 2006 (CDT)

It's easy for me 'cause on other forums I don't link to that kinda junk anyway. --BklynBruzer 22:51, 5 September 2006 (CDT)

Obviously there is more than a little frustration over not being able to connect outside the US. I'm not sure about the UK and other countries, but I do know that Canada's Space Channel has bought the show to broadcast on pretty much the same dates as in the US. This makes the fact that we Canadians(and anyone else who is going to see the show boadcast legally on television on October outside the US) would really benefit from being able to access the webisodes...we will watch the premier on Space, just like everyone else, except we are forced to result to illegal means to see the webisodes. I know this is a novelty, and perhaps the websiode content won't greatly affect the regularly aired shows, but really, I truly feel that this is a bad mistake on SciFi's behalf...and maybe even on Canada's Space Channel's Behalf for not seeking to host the webisodes on their Canadian site. It'll be something that they can claim as "EXTRA SPECIAL" on the DVD releases perhaps..but I think that once that is done, it becomes "bonus material" for the DVD and no longer the exciting and unique experience of participating with everyone else, waiting expectantly for the next five minute morsel to whet our appetites for the coming season...instead we have to lurk around in the dark and worry that maybe YOUTUBE is going to cut us off. We are fans and we all want the same great experience.

Maybe this isn't the place to debate...but I think I'll be writing both SciFi and SPACE to see how they can make a better, more rounded fan experience for an evidently GLOBAL audience. --Gallion 07:31, 8 September 2006 (CDT)

I am from the UK and sent an email to SciFi asking whether they will ever be available to those outside the US, they didn't even bother replying. --Warpfactor 13:08, 29 September 2006 (CDT)

Cast & Crew announced

Now that Ron Moore has announced the full cast and crew listing of the webisodes, it may be better to have a crew section and a cast section instead of listing the cast under each of the ten recaps. --Pedda 21:17, 6 September 2006 (CDT)

Agree, but we should make when we saw each cast memeber. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 23:29, 6 September 2006 (CDT)

Sister Tivenan

I'd imagine the pirestess I didn't recognize in webisode 2 was the Sister Tivenan in those credits by elimination. That does not leave me quite comfortable with claiming her as identified. I didn't find a Tivenan by search here, so I'd assume she's a new character. I solicit opinions. --CalculatinAvatar^(C-T) 23:54, 6 September 2006 (CDT)

She appears to be a completely new character.--Larocque6689 06:58, 7 September 2006 (CDT)

Doral/Number Five

It seems like such a trivial thing to bring up, but I notice that the Wiki credits (anticipating his future appearance) now refer to Matthew Bennett's role as Number Five even though Ron's blog specifically refers to his role as Doral and that he is referred to as a Doral model in several episodes (including "Litmus".) Rather than revert it back, I'll just note the change and leave it up here as something to resolve until he makes his webisode debut.--Larocque6689 07:04, 7 September 2006 (CDT)

There are many Fives but only one Aaron Doral, and there's no indication that it's him. RDM refers to models other than Sixes as "D'annas", "Dorals", "Sharons" etc. for simplicity's sake. Noneofyourbusiness 07:58, 7 September 2006 (CDT)

Episode 3?

So, uh, where the heck's Episode 3? It's not up! --BklynBruzer 11:11, 12 September 2006 (CDT)

Whoops, never mind. Episode 3 went up at 12 PM eastern as opposed to 12 AM Eastern. --BklynBruzer 11:13, 12 September 2006 (CDT)

Yeah. :) I just finshed watching it. It was ok. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 11:15, 12 September 2006 (CDT)

My silly school blocks streaming video :( --BklynBruzer 11:16, 12 September 2006 (CDT)

Official Sources

Thinking about moving the contract dispute stuff down the page into an Official Sources section. I find it distracting where it is. --FrankieG 16:51, 12 September 2006 (CDT)

Webisodes links

Is it okay to add links to the webisodes? I searched the source of the article but didn't see any. What about removing the comments of Jetstorm316 above, or for that matter how about all the comments that folks made without reading the webisodes FAQ which is linked to on all the webisode pages? Eghm 16:41, 14 September 2006 (CDT)

What kind of links are we talking about here? Are we talking about the official Scifi.com links? -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 17:05, 14 September 2006 (CDT)

Yes, such as /battlestar/video/webisodes/01/ (with the scifi dot com added to the front of course). Eghm 17:35, 14 September 2006 (CDT)

Done. thanks for noticing that frakup. Also, the removed contents of Jetstorm was link(s) to "unofficial" copies. Can't link directly to FAQ because it is java popup from SciFi.com. May post relevant part to official statements. Thanks again. --FrankieG 18:00, 14 September 2006 (CDT)

Swt, thanks and your welcome. The FAQ can be seen here http://www.scifi.com/battlestar/video/webisodes/faq.html I meant removing Jetstorms comments on this Talk page, maybe remove contents of the Connectivity?!? and replace it with the FAQ url? Eghm 18:50, 14 September 2006 (CDT)

I don't mind removing his comments, as long as we archive them. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 20:37, 14 September 2006 (CDT)

Why one page?

Why not have seperate pages for each webisode? Even the TVIV has seperate pages for each webisode. That's pretty embarrassing that the battlestarwiki has inferior coverage of something Battlestar related. --Mateo 18:42, 14 September 2006 (CDT)

Actually, Mateo, this is just one episode split into 10 morsels. My present feeling is that this'll be rolled into one feature on the Season 3 DVDs when they come out (or they'll also air it on Sci-Fi sometime in the future as one 30 minute special). -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 20:34, 14 September 2006 (CDT)

this is just one episode split into 10 morsels Says who? Scifi.com says otherwise. It describes them as 10 webisodes. --Mateo 18:54, 25 September 2006 (CDT)

Scifi.com also said Duck and Nora were married (when they weren't). The web staff of scifi isn't always on the same page as the writers/producers of the show. Regardless of what either of them think, though, we should probably do what makes best sense for the encyclopedia. I'm not sure if the the content of each "webisode" is enough to merit a whole "episode" article. I like the fact that this current format maintains the standard layout (summary, questions, analysis, notes) and grouping them together gives it enough meat to fill it out. It'd be a harder call if each of the webisodes had a title, but lacking that they fall neatly into the current format. I'm not dead set against separate articles (heck, we've got some really small ones), but unless this grows out of control it looks ok to me. --Steelviper 21:04, 25 September 2006 (CDT)

Cast and References

The references is a bit confusing. Cally [1][2] is for episode 1 and 4... Maybe it's different with Firefox, but right now I'm with IE. So, if we keep the references, we can create something like the wiki TvIV is using for the characters. Ex:

Cast Member	Character	Episode(s)
Nicki Clyne	Cally	1			4
Aaron Douglas	Galen Tyrol	1	2	3
Christian Tessier	Tucker "Duck" Clellan	1	2	3			6				10

I think that way we keep the references in the order they appeared and create a kind of Timeline for the entire Webisode. And no more confusion. What do you think? --Karōshi 14:17, 18 September 2006 (CDT)

Agreed. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 14:28, 18 September 2006 (CDT)

Agreed. Good idea. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 16:48, 18 September 2006 (CDT)

Jammer

In episode 7, before Number Five asks Jammer if he can refer to him as James or if he prefers Jammer, he refers to him as Mr..., I think he said Mr. Lynom. I listened to it a number of times and it's hard to make out but I am wondering if anybody else caught it. --Straycat0 10:44, 26 September 2006 (AST)

See Talk:Jammer. --Steelviper 12:29, 26 September 2006 (CDT)

Number Five's comment in Episode 7

I don't think that he asks Jammer "Can I call you James or Jim?" as was placed in the notes, I believe the correct dialog is "Can I call you James or do you prefer Jammer?" I want to change that on the article page but want verification first. --Straycat0 11:33, 26 September 2006 (AST)

You are probably right. The audio, especially Doral, sucked on this episode. --FrankieG 13:41, 26 September 2006 (CDT)

He said "Jim" not "Jammer," I just listened to it a moment ago, I'll go confirm it. --Talos 13:42, 26 September 2006 (CDT)

Never mind, got it backwards, he definately said Jammer. --Talos 13:43, 26 September 2006 (CDT)

No, Definitely, I listened to it again and he did for a certainty say Jammer not Jim. I am going to change it. --Straycat0 12:11, 26 September 2006 (AST)

Episode 9

Hello. I'm new here. I just added in a synopsis of the ninth webisode. Hopefully it's up to snuff. Any pointers on writing conventions here would be appreciated. Thanks. Alpha5099 13:03, 2 October 2006 (CDT)

You did a delightful job; that was some might fine prose. --CalculatinAvatar^(C-T) 14:48, 2 October 2006 (CDT)

Hello Alpha! Welcome to Battlestar Wiki! Thank you for your fine contributions so far! I personally look forward to future contributions from you! In response to your request for pointers, check out Battlestar Wiki's Standards and Conventions, as well as our Spoiler and Citation policies. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 14:53, 2 October 2006 (CDT)

It looks good to me as well. Thanks for your contribution. --April Arcus 18:12, 2 October 2006 (CDT)

Okay - I'm new here, but I just listened to Episode 9 and it sounds like he says "a little bird told me" not "Boomer told me" (which makes more sense, since Boomer should still be on the Galactica). Can someone else confirm/deny this? Rabidwolfe 11:16, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

yeah - I just listened to it several times to make sure - he clearly (but quickly) says "little bird told me" - Not boomer. Changing the main page. Rabidwolfe 11:21, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

Well, I'll be. That's the second time I've misheard something in these webisodes. I listened to it several times before, and it always sounded like Boomer. And everyone else I talked to heard Boomer. But I'll be damned if he's not saying "little bird". Dang, I really loved the implications of Boomer telling him. Which could definitely happen, as she's on New Caprica (Sharon's on Galactica). Even if she wasn't working with The Resistance, it made sense to me that she might contact the Chief to tell him his friend had been arrested. But alas, that plot twist is no more. Alpha5099 11:28, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

I get Sharon and Boomer mixed up all the time - oh, well. It was hard to tell what he said exactly at first, but since it's three syllables and consists of mostly hard consonants and short vowels (whereas Boomer is two syllables and has a long vowel sound and a soft consonat sound), I got curious and listened to it several times. He says it so quickly it's somewhat muffled, but it's clearly "little bird" once you figure out what he's saying.Rabidwolfe 11:56, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

No, no, no. I've listened again and again and heard nothing but "Boomer". It's one word and clearly starts with a B, clearly followed by an "ooh", clearly followed by a "mer". I've tried to hear it as "rumor" or "little bird" and failed. And I believe she informed Tyrol about the release, the arrest would have been public knowledge. Noneofyourbusiness 11:55, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

none - please listen again - the syllable count and consanant sounds do not fit Boomer. It seems some fans are too willing to hear what they want to hear. Rabidwolfe 11:58, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

(This should have been hear) I posted a question at BW:OC just to make it 100% sure. --FrankieG 11:34, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

Can we just leave off who told him until we hear some word? --Steelviper 12:00, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

Good idea - my wife insists he's saying "ol' grover told me". I have no idea now. Rabidwolfe 12:02, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

I listened a couple more times and it's still "Boomer". I could almost believe it was "bird" (no "little", just "bird") except that there's an M in it. There really is. Leaving off until we hear from Ngarenn does indeed seem sensible, Steelviper. That's why I removed that part when I edited it. Noneofyourbusiness 12:06, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

I'm pretty sure I heard Boomer, as well. --BklynBruzer 12:17, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

I'm so sure I head "Boomer" that I have difficulty assuming good faith here. --CalculatinAvatar^(C-T) 13:34, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

Agree. --April Arcus 13:37, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

Now, now. As certain as I am that it's "Boomer", I'm sure Rabidwolfe's edits were in good faith. Noneofyourbusiness 13:59, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

The transcripts posted at Sciffy began as "rumor" then shifted towards "Boomer". "Boomer" is what I heard initially. Really, this is an example that could be easily cleared up by Mr. Thompson. Worst case (if he doesn't respond) we could do the audio analysis ala "Narcho". If it's "rumor", or "a little bird", or any other generic external source then it's not of much signifance. As mentioned in the OC question, it's only noteworthy if it is in fact "Boomer". --Steelviper 14:11, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

Those transcripts are done by fans, unfortunately. Noneofyourbusiness 14:43, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

Well, right. As an RDM podcast transcriber, I recognize the fan transcripts for what they are, and realize that they are subject to error. I was just harnessing the "extra ears" to get a feel for what others heard. --Steelviper 14:52, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

I was just pointing out how nice it would be if the transcripts were official. Noneofyourbusiness 16:16, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

OK, now I'm extremely confused. I listened like a half dozen times when RapidWolfe first brought this up, and at the time, I definitely heard "little bird." He said it quickly, kinda slurred, but I swear Tyrol said it. Now I read the whole big discussion here and try listening again. I can't make heads or tails of it, because now I can't hear anything but Boomer. Apparently I'll hear whatever I'm told to. Alpha5099 15:30, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

I'm sorry - I was sure it was little bird. I promise if it is Boomer, I'll eat crow or whatever. FWIW, I just had three random friends who don't watch BSG listen to it, and the three answers they told me were: "the colonel", "rumor" and "colonel." I'm now as confused as anyone else. Rabidwolfe 15:57, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

Spectrogram

If someone can get me a WAV or AIFF of the audio in question, I can analyze it. --April Arcus 15:40, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

I have a sample. Working on it now. --April Arcus 16:14, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

Okay. Let's do a quick run-through. A narrow transcription of "Boomer" reads [pumɹ̣] , "Rumor" reads [ɹumɹ̣] , and "A little bird" reads [elɪɾḷpɹ̣d] . "A little bird" in very fast speech would probably be realized as "Lil' bird", [lɪlpɹ̣d] , or maybe just "Bird", [pɹ̣d] . What are the salient differences here?

• "Boomer" is distinguished from "Rumor" by a bilabial stop [p] vs. a retroflex approximant [ɹ] . The [p] is clearly audible to me in the recording, but unfortunately there's too much white noise to make it out in the spectrogram. However, we can ascertain whether or not [ɹ] is present, as that would drag down the second and third formants of the following vowel.
• "Boomer" is quite clearly distinguishable from "Bird". "Boomer" has two vowels, high back rounded [u] and r-colored [ɹ̣] , interrupted by a bilabial nasal [m] . "Bird" has no nasal and a single vowel, [ɹ̣] . Thus, if we see a nasal and a vowel that is not r-colored, we can safely rule out "Bird".

So, what we actually see looks to me like:

There is clearly a nasal breaking the vowel formants into two regions. Thus, we can eliminate "(a little) bird" as a possibility. The first has a fairly low first and second formant, as we would expect for [u] , and its third formant, while barely visible, does not appear to be lowered be a preceding [ɹ] . Additionally, the bilabial plosive [p] is clearly audible in the recording. In the second vowel, the third formant can be seen to lower, which is suggestive of r-coloring. Thus, "Boomer" seems to be the only possibility. --April Arcus 17:48, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

Here's the clip, if anyone wants to listen --April Arcus 18:06, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

well, that does sound like Boomer. I'll eat crow. (but please don't say I was acting in bad faith). Rabidwolfe 18:16, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

What I fail to understand is that Webisodes have logically build upon each other and suddenly they dropped "Boomer" out of the middle of nowhere. Confused me???. --FrankieG 18:20, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

I wasn't saying you were acting in bad faith; I just meant that I found it hard to believe. --CalculatinAvatar^(C-T) 21:33, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

The most damning evidence in my mind was that I clearly heard the "buh" sound. --BklynBruzer 22:49, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

I've listened to it and he undoubtedly says "Laura told me" --User:jxh487 I take it back, it undoubtedly is "Boomer told me", just said rather lazily with improper enunciation Jxh487 11:59, 6 October 2006 (CDT)

Jammer's Role

I just need to say that it's good to see Jammer playing such a large role in the webisodes, and he's become one of my more favored characters due to what we've seen of him in the webisodes. --BklynBruzer 21:10, 2 October 2006 (CDT)

I would have to agree. I've mainly noticed Jammer because of the Cylon speculation page, but he was barely in the series; The Resistance has given him some great development. I expect he'll develop similarly to Cally in Season Two: a recognizable tertiary character suddenly gets major exposure and is catapulted to secondary status. Jammer is awesome, and I can't wait to see where he goes in Season Three (even though the trailers have already given me far too good an idea).

I'm also glad Duck is getting developed in the webisodes, but so far his storyline in The Resistance hasn't quite been as interesting. Hopefully episode 10 will give us more delightful Duck and Jammer goodness. Alpha5099 21:23, 2 October 2006 (CDT)

I posted a question at BW:OC just to make it 100% sure. --FrankieG 11:34, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

Frankie, I think you meant to post that in the Episode 9 section :) --BklynBruzer 11:42, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

Yes DUH!. I'll copy it. --FrankieG 12:03, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

Hyperlinks to the episodes

Shane, I'm just curious, why did you remove the hyperlinks to specific webisodes? --BklynBruzer 21:38, 2 October 2006 (CDT)

With the redesign of their site to total flash, the HTML pages were courput. I am going to re-add the URLs to the Flash pages themselfs once Episode 10 airs. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 23:04, 4 October 2006 (CDT)

Oh, God. There are several citations linking to deleted scenes using the old URL scheme... --April Arcus 23:19, 4 October 2006 (CDT)

Are podcasts changed too? --Mercifull ^{(Talk/Contribs)} 02:54, 5 October 2006 (CDT)

No. --April Arcus 03:04, 5 October 2006 (CDT)

Perhaps this is something that cant be done on the wiki but its something we use at work on our website. All external links are in a database so that if it changes you can updates all the pages with the link on it. Its kinda hard to explain but basically if you wanted to link to the webisodes you would link to www.battlestarwiki.com/webisode1 and then you would set that url to redirect to whatever the external url was. --Mercifull ^{(Talk/Contribs)} 03:26, 5 October 2006 (CDT)

Unfinished

Due to the discussions about having problems hearing certain things, look at this interview. It looks like that the webisodes were unfinished, especially the sound mixing. May want to import some of this to the actual article itself. --FrankieG 14:35, 3 October 2006 (CDT)

Chinese Characters

I am Chinese, and the three Characters in episode 07 are "盐","渍" or "溃" and "姜" respectively. The right top part of the second character is too blurry that I can't figure it out. As you can see from the candidates I provide, they looks very similar.

1. "盐": means "salt".
2. "渍": means "be soiled"(verb) or "stain" (noun). And "溃" means "to ulcerate".
3. "姜": It has two meanings: a surname or "ginger".

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by SuperMMX (talk • contribs).

Actually, the second (middle) character looks more like "油" or "oil". Which makes a lot more sense, really, since it reads "salt", "oil", "ginger", all cooking ingredients. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 03:36, 29 October 2006 (CST)

Episode 10

I commented out a line of speculation. I am not sure we can reference their actions without proper visual confirmation. Jammer might be just talking a walk. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 11:55, 5 October 2006 (CDT)

The implication was so clear that no other interpretation seems reasonable. --April Arcus 11:59, 5 October 2006 (CDT)

Use of Roman Numerals for Episodes

I noted that Peter reverted the use of Latin numeration in favor of Roman numeration (Episode X instead of Episode X) in some article references. Was this discussed? While we break down multi-episode parts by Roman numerals, we haven't set such a convention for this instance. Which should it be? I prefer Latin, although Roman has an asthetically pleasing look. --Spencerian 15:44, 5 October 2006 (CDT)

There was no discussion - it just seemed jarring to have the two systems next to each other as I was writing the article. I'll go along with whatever consensus dictates. (BTW, the notation 1, 2, 3… is usually called Arabic numerals, not Latin.) --April Arcus 15:54, 5 October 2006 (CDT)

I like the "look" of the Roman numerals, which seems to be consistent with the past. --FrankieG 15:59, 5 October 2006 (CDT)

OK. Let's stick with Roman, then, unless there's a significant objection. --

Spencerian 16:17, 5 October 2006 (CDT)

I OBJECT (significantly). It's been hundreds upon hundreds of years since the end of the Roman Empire and I say we do away with ROman Numerals once and for all, and what better place to start than Battlestar wiki! 'End of the Romans! End of the Romans!' --User:jxh487

Let's be radical and start using numbers from Ancient Babylonian Cuneiform. (just kidding). Rabidwolfe 20:11, 5 October 2006 (CDT)

As I noted On Nicholas Tyrol's Talk page, episodes (and webisdes) are typically numbered in Arabic Numeral (1, 2, 3, etc) and Parts are typically numbered in Roman Numerals (I, II, III, etc) and what are called Parts are usually Story Names (Home Pts I & II, Kobol's Last Gleamin Pts I & II, etc). But the webisodes have been called episodes of the web series The Resistance and though they are much smaller and have a single storyline, they are in fact still called episodes of the web series Battlestar Galactica: The Resistance. Under this light, they should follow an episode convention and be numbered in Arabic Numerals (1, 2, 3, etc). --Straycat0 21:51, 5 October 2006 (CDT)

Length

I just did the math, and the webisodes (using our approximated times) add up to exactly 25 minutes. --BklynBruzer 16:14, 5 October 2006 (CDT)

"Traitor"

"In particular the webisodes chronicle Duck's and Jammer's motivations to become suicide bomber and traitor respectively." The word "traitor" is judgemental, too imbued with negative connotations, and, most importantly, a matter of the point of view. That's why I generally get annoyed with people using it. As Garak in "Deep Space 9" would say: "Treason, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder". Therefore I have changed it to "collaborator", which might be mostly used in a ngative connotation, but it is still more neutral and describes the situation more accurately. FrakkinToasterLover

Good call. I recall a similar discussion when "Collaborators" aired some additions were a bit POV. --Serenity 12:58, 2 January 2008 (CST)