Talk:Messengers/Archive 1

We should add some more specific examples of what the hallucinations have done. A picture of Internal-Baltar with Six would also be good.--Noneofyourbusiness 15:48, 14 March 2006 (EST)

Aside from marking the page as primarily speculative, I agree this page should stay. This is one of the things that people immediately notice when watching this series, and therefore deserves a place here. --Durandal 01:02, 20 March 2006 (CST)

"Most likely"

The article suggests that Six is "most likely" an actual, downloaded personality on a chip in his head. I disagree with this, in part because RDM himself has stated otherwise in his podcasts, but also because I think they've been very careful, for the most part, to leave the question balanced. Gaius Baltar is a genius. If Internal-Six is an hallucination, then he's officially a mad genius, but he's a genius, nonetheless. Almost all of his insights into Cylon motives, actions, and character can be explained simply by his being a genius with multiple personality disorder.

And example, from the miniseries: Six points out the device (later revealed to be a kind of transponder) on the underside of the DRADIS console. Baltar (like Gaeta, who admitted having seen it) has undoubtedly seen this device out of the corner of his eye the whole time he's been in CIC, and it is pretty obviously out of place with the rest of the ship's tech. A "normal" person would either ignore it (as Gaeta did, thinking it was part of the transformation of the ship into a museum) or start speculating silently to themselves what it might be and how it got there. The difference is that Baltar now has a dissociative personality that closely resembles his Cylon lover to talk these things through. Everything he knows or speculates that's related to the Cylons now comes from this split personality, because he's desperately trying to evade his own complicity.

In short, it's just as likely (if not more) that Baltar diagnosed himself correctly from the beginning. He's basically gone mad. And since he's not being treated, he will undoubtedly get worse before he gets better.--Uncle Mikey 14:41, 14 March 2006 (CST)

Clarified.--Noneofyourbusiness 16:19, 14 March 2006 (EST)

I think this page is redundant and should be removed.--The Merovingian 14:56, 14 March 2006 (CST)

Why? It discusses both Internal-Six and Internal-Baltar, who constitute a single phenomenon or two closely related phenomena, so it doesn't belong under either Number Six or Gaius Baltar. All the information from the Internal-Six section of the Six article has been removed and put here. --Noneofyourbusiness 16:26, 14 March (EST)

I disagree with Merv that it's redundant, but I do think a lot of it is speculative. We've been tightening the standards on speculation in episode articles, but I'm not certain what the standard is outside them.--Uncle Mikey 15:12, 14 March 2006 (CST)

Since little concrete is known about the hallucinations the page about them is of course full of speculation, but they're too important not to have a page. The changes in prevailing theories as new evidence airs is noted. I agree that episode articles should not be speculative. Also, most of this content was already on this site, it has merely been moved to this more appropriate page.--Noneofyourbusiness 16:46, 14 March 2006 (EST)

A fair point, and I'm not even sure I would have noticed the speculative aspects as worthy of mention until yesterday, when the policy for "Questions" in episode articles shifted. Now, tho', I'm sensitive to the question of which articles should be strictly encyclopedic and which can and should be more speculative. I'm not saying I'm certain this article should be heavily edited to strip out speculation. I'm saying I'm not certain either way.--Uncle Mikey 15:28, 14 March 2006 (CST)

It sounds like Uncle Mikey might be ripe for recruitment. --Steelviper 15:41, 14 March 2006 (CST)

Thou shalt not make a machine mind in the image of a human mind. Oh, wait, that's the Butlerian Jihad... :-D --Uncle Mikey 09:44, 15 March 2006 (CST)

Nonetheless, there are only two instances of this. Further, Baltar was definately a hallucination by Caprica-Six, clean and simple. Meanwhile, we still don't know what virtual Six is, but that goes on her own page.--The Merovingian 06:43, 15 March 2006 (CST)

How so? Is it just a coincidence that she has an inner Baltar and he has an inner Six? --DrBat 06:06, 17 March 2006 (CST)

Further, and this is my biggest arguement against this (practicality): most of the information here is actually cut and pasted from other arguements. The entire last paragraph is just taken from the virtual Six article.--The Merovingian 06:44, 15 March 2006 (CST)

I don't necessarily see that as an argument to eliminate this article. Having a single article that consolidates information about a particular topic is not a bad thing, and this topic is certainly one of wide interest.--Uncle Mikey 09:44, 15 March 2006 (CST)

Mikey you've only got two "hallucinations". It is hard to consolidate two things. --The Merovingian 13:38, 15 March 2006 (CST)

This article is useful, and is not redundant in the least. It is speaking of a particular occurence of a character, which plays an important role and appears to be separate from all other instances of Number Six. It is silly to say that it is mere coincidence that both Baltar and Six are having hallucinations of each other, so it is a topic that should have a page listing information on each sighting of the hallucinations. After all, we have articles about marines who only have their names mentioned...considering the importance of virtual Six and virtual Baltar in influencing events, I think they more than qualify in importance in having their own article. As for the speculation, I would argue that an article about something that is as confusing as this will have a fair amount of speculation, until later episodes clear things up (if they ever do). I see nothing wrong with paragraphs beginning, "Thus far, it appears..." --Ravriem 19:48, 17 March 2006 (CST)

I am seeing no problems with this page. It works! --Shane ^{(C - E)} 21:10, 19 March 2006 (CST)

This page is extremely important. It is the only category in which Internal Six and Baltar (one of which is extremely important to the entire story) and all the hallucinations brought by six can fit. They don't fit anywhere else and to delete the page is to simply through these two and their "special effects" away. They are the reason behind everything that is going on. Face it, they are basically gods in the show, shaping the decisions of both sides. I wouldn't be surprise if they did indeed turn up being a part of the Cylon God. My point is, it is important to differentiate them from normal Baltar or any Six, they are not Cylons or humans, they are manipulative Hallucinations that have shaped things in their image. Arguing that they are only two is unfair, hallucinations refers to the entire set of hallucinations, the whole topic of mental six and mental baltar and basically the whole Six-Baltar story line. Its even more important to the story than one of the main characters like Thrace. -- Sauron18 20 March

No. In the podcasts RDM stated that the Baltar hallucination was just a hallucination, while they have been consistently ambiguous on ChipSix. Meanwhile, you even used the phrase "delete the thread"--->this is not a forum. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 23:25, 19 March 2006 (CST)

That was a mistake. No point in making attacks on a simple error, they don't really help. And RDM did not say Batlar was "just a hallucination", he said he was a hallucination, but then we already knew that, both are, by definition, hallucinations, whether aided by a foreign device or not. You interpreted to mean that baltar six was absolutley nothing more than madness. --Sauron18 19 March 2006

In this one The Merovingian, you are out numbered. There are more people here and you are the only one who thinks this should be deleted. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 12:45, 20 March 2006 (CST)

If we have such a problem with this, let me pose a solution: virtual-Six and virtual-Baltar aren't the only hallucinations, technically. They're just the only hallucinations that talk back. Baltar also hallucinated that Six brought him to the Opera House on Kobol. Maybe this should be a category, not an article, and Six, Baltar, and the Opera House couls have their own articles. Also, if more hallucinations are introduced, it would be pretty silly to have deleted this only to have to put it back. Ragestorm 13:29, 20 March 2006 (CST)

I think it is important to note that theatrically these hallusinations are treated characters in their own rights. The hallucination of the baby in the crib on Kobol is essentially a prop and whereas the hallucination of at-the-time-Commander William Adama was a character in his own right, it was a one-shot deal that was part of the scene. Also, Roslin's dreams of Adar were just dreams and not an interactive character but Adar still gets his own page because of historical notes. Hallucination-Six is a re-occurring interacting character thru many episodes and may just be Baltar's hallucination due to his psychosis, but there has to be a back story involved with her knowledge of events involving the birth of Hera. I believe this will come out in season 3 and therefore this article should be here in preparation of this revalation. Hallucination-Balter may earn his own article piece in the same revalations. We will see. I think the jury is out depending on the re-occurance of that character. StrayCat0 09:21, 21 March 2006 (MST)

Establishing a Pattern

I was watching an episode of DS9 the other day (Waltz), and was struck by the similarity of the interactions between (the increasingly insane) Dukat and his mental apparitions. Towards the beginning he is able to hold it together like Baltar and Six do, playing off comments or looks that he makes to them. It doesn't take too long before he's trying to blast them with a phaser, though. I was not surprised when I hit the memory-alpha site to find that RDM did the story on it. --Steelviper 09:39, 21 March 2006 (CST)

Dukat, betrayer of the Alpha Quadrant. Baltar, betrayer of humanity.--Noneofyourbusiness 13:43, 21 March 2006 (EST)

Should we Delete "Analysis and Questions"?

Well, recently many people have been complaining about the supposed speculation based info in this article. I've read it well, and though they are obviousley exaggerating (its only one section), it is still possible for them to continue the arguement (which is hence started being used to describe the wiki, and its editors (unjustly at times). Perhaps if we deleted this it would ease the comments which may soon start to go more unjustly than just this article. --Sauron18 23 March 2006

For goodness sake, it's a marked section. If someone doesn't want to read speculation they can just ignore that part. It's starting to sound to me like we have obsessed people out there. Edit: I don't mean you, Sauron 18, but of course that's obvious.--Noneofyourbusiness 12:36, 25 March 2006 (EST)

For the record, I personally have no objection to speculation in a marked-off section, particularly on a topic-specific page (as opposed to an episode guide page). I think that, when the series eventually comes to an end, speculations should be segregated out even further, so that a part of the site can be considered a solid reference work for the series, but hopefully we've got a while before we have to worry about that :-)--Uncle Mikey 12:48, 25 March 2006 (CST)

I concur on all points.--Noneofyourbusiness 13:57, 25 March 2006 (EST)

Yeah, I would rather leave it there (especially if something turns up right), but I was just making a sort of plan b, if the wiki begins being attacked on a larger scale. Of course, people would have to be kind of stupid to not notice it says "Analysis and Questions", but, well people do tend to be a bit like this. --Sauron18 25 March 2006

We should delete this page because A) the "ChipSix" section was better when on the main "Number Six" article; indeed, MOST of "Cylon related Hallucinations" is just a cut'n'paste of that old page's material B) the "Hallucinatory Baltar" stuff is just a copy paste of a paragraph from the episode guide. And even if they're re-written, there simply isn't much to say. And RDM STATED that Baltar was just a hallucination. BattlestarWiki is not a forum, and this page is really just a sloppy mistake. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 23:30, 25 March 2006 (CST)

You are out gunned Merv. Also this page shows that this exists, shows that these do happen. Delete it, but it would be back in another form or another because these Hallucinations are creating story plot and twists and they should be addressed all together. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 00:13, 26 March 2006 (CST)

I don't know why you think Internal-Six would be better on the Number Six article when she clearly isn't one. Also, RDM's exact words were that Caprica-Six is seeing her own idea of who Baltar is. He said the same of Baltar seeing his idea of who Six is. In neither case does this preclude something else acting like the person's idea of their former lover. For your information we've added details on many visions that weren't mentioned in the old, incorrectly-placed Internal-Six section. And indeed, even if if one or both of the Internals does turn out to be just a hallucination: (A) We don't know it yet so don't count your chickkens before they're hatched, (B) Who cares? They're still a plot-driving phenomenon even if it is just insanity. I also don't know what you mean with your "TV Guide' reference with the Internal-Baltar section.--Noneofyourbusiness 10:50, 26 March 2006 (EST)

Please bring up something relevant instead of vague threats of a revert war. No, you have not brought up an official vote. The place for this is in the Analysis section of the Episode Guides as opposed to just making up a new page for random thoughts; this is not a forum, and on a more established mediawiki like MemoryAlpha, this page would have been deleted quite some time ago. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 00:17, 26 March 2006 (CST)

Then call for a vote. Until then, it shouldn't even be deleted then or dreamed of being deleted. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 00:18, 26 March 2006 (CST)

Battlestar_Wiki:Tutorial_(Keep_in_mind)#Subject_matter - Should be taking a look at. Notable Subject Matter is something I like to point out before people check out this link. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 00:45, 26 March 2006 (CST)

I'm not sure what part of that linked section you think supported your case. I vote with Merv. --CalculatinAvatar 02:11, 26 March 2006 (CST)

I thank you, CalculatinAvatar. But Shane; encyclopedias are not a democracy; this is not a matter of informational content (we vote on things like that), but a question of wiki article standards, of "what justifies having an article" which is one of the more basic questions we run into. For example, someone could have a page devoted to "Does Cally Enjoy Cornmuffins?"; such a page could actually be based on things seen on screen, but would it justify an article? No. This is whole thing is just cut and pastes from other articles, or "Analysis" which should be put into the Episode Guide articles for analysis. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 19:50, 26 March 2006 (CST)

As for adding the link to "Notable subject matter"; Shane this didn't prove anything; everyone if you click on the link it just leads to a page saying "subject content and what constitutes and article is a hotly debates issue"--->this does not support or go against your position either way, Shane. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 19:52, 26 March 2006 (CST)

Does it have anything to do with the plot? No, then it should not be included. However, periods of this Messengers/Archive 1 happen because of the plot and effect the plot of the story. If I were to ask if brushing my teeth keep me away from having cavaities, I would say that is part of my plot. Something simple but part of my own plot. This is on a much grander scale. Also, just relizing this now, this takes down some of the size of Episode Guides. They are getting to long, and placing them on a sperate page, is what a Wiki does to conserve space so anyone can read it, even those people I know who still run a 56k modem. You keep saying no. If they didn't show it, then I would agree, but for some odd reasons they seem to a) change the music when Six shows up, b) have a real dramtic pan left or right shot to show Six has showen up again. These would be deleted scenes! As a fact, they are not. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 19:57, 26 March 2006 (CST)

The article has it's importance, in the three main types of hallucinations which do not really fit any category but this and are rather important to the plot, if not directly responsible for it. Despite some user's attempts to make it seem like foolish speculation, there is really none but in the section of analysis and questions, which is after all, for analysis and questions. It goes here because the episode guide is for episodes, not phenomena in them, though a small mention to point in the direction of the more explicit article dedicated solely to documenting the appearance and effects of the phenomena themeselves.--Sauron18 27 March 2006

Analysis is not limited to episode guides...

Just want to point out that analysis, contrary to the beliefs of some, is not limited to episode guides. In fact, as the series continues, I do not doubt that common themes will have their own articles. For instance, someone could conceivably come along and create an article on You reap what you sew, which is a common theme in BSG. On such an article, they can describe the cause and effect of this theme. -- Joe Beaudoin 21:35, 26 March 2006 (CST)

Joe -- thank you for stating this point clearly. Pages that focus on recurring themes or distinctive phenomena, and draw together information from various episodes about those themes or phenomena on a single page, make perfect sense to me, even if the information in them is made up entirely of copies from episode pages. This page qualifies, IMO. And now, I'm really tempted to write (or at least get started) the article you suggest as an example, but I don't know if I'll have the time :-D--Uncle Mikey 21:43, 26 March 2006 (CST)

I see. In that case, I will add a cleanup-tag instead of asking for deletion.--The Merovingian ^{(C - E)}

I have already done and seen considerable amounts of cleanup, and I sincerely welcome the efforts of others so long as the article is not butchered. --Noneofyourbusiness 13:12, 27 March 2006 (EST)

Not many edits since the tag was added. I guess it's ok to remove the tag? --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 06:58, 6 April 2006 (CDT)

Let's leave it on as a compromise, just so first time visitors understand that there is shaky ground around this and the tag directs them to look at the points in this Discussion page. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 14:45, 6 April 2006 (CDT)

Good idea.--Noneofyourbusiness 15:58, 6 April 2006 (EST)

May *I* suggest a tag created called Template:DisputedFacts? --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 21:31, 17 April 2006 (CDT)

If a "fact" is "disputed" it's not a fact and we don't post it here. I thought our compromise was working fairly well. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 21:32, 17 April 2006 (CDT)

The tag suggestes avtivce editing. There really isn't that much active editing on it, just a point of view problem. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 21:35, 17 April 2006 (CDT)