Talk:Destroyed battlestar/Archive 1: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 13:18, 12 December 2007

Since "Razor" shows up many frakked up battlestars, is this even necessary now? -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate - Sanctuary Wiki — New} 16:58, 11 December 2007 (CST)

Perhaps an expansion for the anal-retentive among us who have to catalog every single battlestar shown in the show. That way there's a page that says, <envallmode>"Yes, we ''know'' about dead battlestar #3...''here's your page.''"</envallmodeoff> Prevents us from making more separate pages. To my count, we can add the one Galactica type and the two or three seen in Razor. The page'll work like the Unnamed characters (RDM) page. --Spencerian 17:08, 11 December 2007 (CST)

That'd be fine... here's your [as]sign[ment]. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate - Sanctuary Wiki — New} 17:32, 11 December 2007 (CST)

Move to Unnamed battlestars? --Peter Farago 18:08, 11 December 2007 (CST)

Agreed, "Razor" kind of makes this unnessesary. I should note that including the flashbacks, "Razor" gives us at least three unnamed Galactica type battlestars alone (1 in the Flashbacks, and 2 different ships in the shipyards), and at least three types of vessels of unknown class. --OrionFour 19:07, 11 December 2007 (CST)

I don't really see the relevance either. The destroyed battlestars in "Razor" are already mentioned in a few notes pages. That should be enough. Maybe make another note here, but I don't see what there even is to document. --Serenity 18:21, 11 December 2007 (CST)

True. There's not much to document, unless we were keeping a tally on how many battlestars the Colonials had, which might be better as a part of the general battlestar article. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate - Sanctuary Wiki — New} 23:24, 11 December 2007 (CST)

ca. 120. We know that from the Miniseries. I think this is the a good time to stop catering to overly obsessive fanboys every time, and not go into excruciating detail with every minor technological gimmick. There is not much point in making a list of the ones we saw. Same reason why I'm not really a fan of making extra articles for every Viper and Raptor that's named or seen unless there is some signficance to it.

So, that said, we could merge this article with Galactica type battlestar. It already mentions this battlestar. We could make a new section and then also mention the "Razor" one. Given that appearance, the article should be slightly rewritten anyways --Serenity 07:18, 12 December 2007 (CST)

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 :I don't really see the relevance either. The destroyed battlestars in "Razor" are already mentioned in a few notes pages. That should be enough. Maybe make another note here, but I don't see what there even is to document. --[[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 18:21, 11 December 2007 (CST)
 :: True. There's not much to document, unless we were keeping a tally on how many battlestars the Colonials had, which might be better as a part of the [[battlestar (RDM)|general battlestar article]]. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]] - [http://www.sanctuarywiki.org Sanctuary Wiki &mdash; ''New'']</sup> 23:24, 11 December 2007 (CST)
+:::ca. 120. We know that from the Miniseries. I think this is the a good time to stop catering to overly obsessive fanboys every time, and not go into excruciating detail with every minor technological gimmick. There is not much point in making a list of the ones we saw. Same reason why I'm not really a fan of making extra articles for every Viper and Raptor that's named or seen unless there is some signficance to it.
+:::So, that said, we could merge this article with [[Galactica type battlestar]]. It already mentions this battlestar. We could make a new section and then also mention the "[[Razor]]" one. Given that appearance, the article should be slightly rewritten anyways --[[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 07:18, 12 December 2007 (CST)