User talk:The Merovingian

Why is a raven like a writing desk?

Regarding your RfA

Hi Ricimer, while your RfA did not pass, I firmly and wholeheartedly believe that you are fully capable of passing the RfA, should it come up again within, say, six months. If you have any concerns, feel free to address them with Peter, myself, or any of the other major contributors. Have a happy New Year! -- Joe Beaudoin 12:31, 30 December 2005 (EST)

I have yet to play my trump card. --Ricimer 12:32, 30 December 2005 (EST)

Should I be afraid? *wink* --Day 20:21, 31 December 2005 (EST)

"Plan R" --The Merovingian 23:12, 5 March 2006 (CST)

Plan R = Plan Recruitment --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 00:56, 26 March 2006 (CST)

Battle Template

You're the guy who came up with this, right? Do you think that a) the thing could be made into an actual template (like the Character Data one with dissappearing/reappearing fields, etc) and b) it could be re-designed to look like the Character Data one (in terms of looking like the rest of the theme (the red/black is the default theme, isn't it?)? I don't know how these two things would be accomplished, but I thought I'd put this out there and see what you thought as far as feasability and also as far as should we do it. --Day 17:00, 18 January 2006 (EST)

As you are the instigator of the battle template, I would like your opinion on this subject.

I have been checking through the TOS battle pages and found that the category listings vary. Sometimes it is listed as Battle of X, other times X, Battle of. When they are listed alphabetically they are under B in the first instance and X (or whatver) in the second. Which way round would you prefer? --Grafix 01:30, 14 March 2006 (CST)

I don't even touch Original Series stuff. If there's anything there, it was someone trying to copy the template onto a different article. --The Merovingian 03:21, 14 March 2006 (CST)

User name change

Just letting you know that I changed your name from Ricimer to The Merovingian. Let me know if you encounter any issues, not that I'm expecting any but just in case Murphy's Law decides to come and play. -- Joe Beaudoin 23:19, 7 February 2006 (EST)

Also on this topic: You should probably update the first sentence of your User page to reflect the name change. If you want, I could probably get a decent screen-grab of the identically named character from the Matrix. Unfortunately, I don't have a DVD from which to grab pictures that stars any of the folks who founded Paris. --Day 01:24, 8 February 2006 (EST)

Yes, actually, that would help immensly. I need one of The Merovingian when he's in Club Hel, standing at the balcony looking imperiously down at Neo. A shot that shows his whole body instead of a closeup would be preferred. --The Merovingian 02:13, 8 February 2006 (EST)

You should watch "Revolutions" again. Merv isn't peering down at Neo but at Morpheus, Trinity, and Seraph (Neo never visits Club Hel in the movie series, although the Path of Neo video game takes him there while the Club is closed). I'll also try to get a screencap for you if time allows. My Matrix knowledge may be better than my BSG knowledge (note witty, illustrated user page; I've been almost tempted to change my user name to something more appropriate... ;) By the way, I like your revised user page. Merv is one of those characters whose deserved more exploration on the same level as the Oracle and the Architect. --Spencerian 10:45, 8 February 2006 (EST)

"Neo" just came out; I was thinking Seraph & Co., just typed the wrong thing. (That little Judas! I'm going to have him killed and buried in a shallow grave, then dig him up and kill him again...That's the beauty of a shallow grave!) --The Merovingian 16:52, 8 February 2006 (EST)

I actually took a philosphy class and my choice for a paper was on The Matrix. Basically, I've made several of the more...insightful speculations about The Merovingian on his Wikipdia article. You see, Morpheus and Neo represent Socrates: wanting to get out of "The Cave" to the real world beyond, etc. However, I believe (and I'm the only person I know of who's thought of this; I didn't read it anywhere, but thought it up after reading Leviathan) that The Merovingian is the embodiment of Thomas Hobbes in The Matrix. He spouts off Hobbesian thought all of the time. Hobbes said that "choice is an illusion" that the only constant is "cause and effect", and that the best thing we can do with our lives is kind of movie along with the flow of causality in such a way that we enjoy all of the *physical, transient* pleasures that we can, while we can. Live a life of comfornt and luxury, etc. The Merovingian *lives out* this ideal: He's living in complete luxury, like at Le Vrai, the Chateau, Club Hel (and he has affairds with women all the time, etc), he wields a great deal of physical power...yet recognizes that it's all just "a game" devoid of purpose; it's transient, etc. He's stopped seeing any higher meaning in anything. --->Hobbes was a big critic of Socrates, and his philosophy was the polar opposte of Socrates' thought. In the same way, The Merovingian opposes Neo and Morpheus' philoshpy of getting out of the Matrix.

I hold with the theory that he's a former One, that got his brain pattern scanned into a computer to outlive the death of his body. But he got so disillusioned with all of the lies and how the quest for freedom was just a reset button, that he turned against all of this and became the master of the Exiles, living the complete opposite of all of this (note; he really hates the Oracle, and views everything Neo says about her with extreme sarcasm). Plus, the initials "LV" on the walls of "Le Vrai" are Roman numerals for "LV" = 55. Now, we've already seen 303= Trinity, 101= Neo. So there's something about The Merovingian and the number "5". On top of this, when we first meet him there are 5 glasses set out in front of him (and Persephone, his Trinity-analog, has 3 chocolates on her plate). --->There have been 5 "Ones" before Neo. I think the Merovingian is the first "One". --The Merovingian 17:01, 8 February 2006 (EST)

Yeah, that theory and his Hobbes relationship (I think--it may be in a book I read) is on the Wikipedia article. I edited the article in dispute of Merv being a past One. It all comes down to some logic points. Why does he hate the Oracle so much? Because she succeeded where he failed. She stabilized the Matrix by adding true choice, where Merv was likely tapped by the Architect earlier to program basic cause-effect subroutines in the Matrix code as well as manage the root-programs in Matrix-beta-2 that could be used to help with these changes (these programs he now holds for his own purposes). The Architect realized the utopian flaw in beta-1 and thought that simple cause-effect (combined with the root-programs--the monsters of myth) would be sufficient to convince the human minds. He was wrong, of course. Remember that the Merovingian is big on cause-effect, and the Oracle states that he is one the oldest of them all, which makes his human origin very unlikely as the machines by then were fully distrustful of humanity and saw itself as a steward, not bothering to hear out humanity anymore than we would listen to the needs of an ant. The One is purely human; if the Merovingian were a "One", he would have been generated within beta-2, and, as a result, would not be like the Ones that base their power from true choice (particularly the power to disbelieve what they see and act otherwise). To add to that: Merv could also be very mad at the Oracle because, in the Oracle's version of the Matrix, any powers he may have had in beta-2 are practically non-existent. (You gave me a new take the character now from that...hmm.) Oh, and "La Vrai" means, "The Truth", which is just Merv's way of protesting of what's around him..vulgarities of "choice". Only in his establishments, by the name implication, will the populace understand the "truth" about what is illusion to him (choice) and real (cause and effect).

I wrote a paper about the origin of the One (with a bit on Merv) for a SF convention that will BLOW. YOUR. MIND. If you like, I'd be happy to send you a PDF of it. I've not published this as yet, so it's a unique read that incorporates the above. --Spencerian 17:29, 8 February 2006 (EST)

I would like to BLOW. MY. MIND. as well... the preceeding, signed comment and small recommendation that Spence forward me a copy of his insightful paper on Merv was made by Joe Beaudoin on 17:47, 8 February 2006 (EST) :-)

Actually, Spence... Could you just, maybe, copy it to User:Spencerian/Matrix or something? It might save you from forwarding it to a billion people. If you don't like that idea, then put me on your forwarding list. --Day 00:19, 9 February 2006 (EST)

There, I must disagree with you. The Merovingian is not "the oldest of us" but "one of the oldest of us", which would still fit my interpretation. Further, in Leviathan Hobbes goes on a tangent where he says that because everything in life is "cause and effect", logically, we should in theory be able to predict the future, because life has no external factors (god, random choice, etc. Fate/causality rules all). But he adds that in practice, this is impossible, simply because there are so many variants that the human mind cannot grasp at once--->it reminds me of discussions of psychohistory in "Prelude to Foundation"; hen Hari Seldon originally presented his first paper theorizing that psychohistory was possible, he explained that he did not yet have a working model because his paper essentially just proved that you could actually analyze all of the "antecedants" of life in a computer model. I.e. if the universe is so compex that the only functional "model" of it is something as big and complicated as the universe itself, such a model is useless. However, he said that you could actually make a model smaller than the universe itself..

Well, the point is that according to The Merovingian's own Hobbesian principles, he is in a possition SIMULTANEOUSLY A) He believes the world to be governed by nothing but causality, and therefore, he should be able to predict the future, but B) THE VERY SAME principles that idea is based on also state that predicting the future is Practically impossible. This might get a little annoying to him. --->So then there's The Oracle, who CAN predict the future, while he cannot (though in theory, he should). Therefore, this adds another level of hate for her, and he wants the "eyes of the Oracle" (which he's "Wanted ever since I came here) because he's jealous. And who's to say the Machines would not want to tap the talen of the "grotesque" human mind in designing/running a more human world (beta-2)? I digress. P.S. Don't get me started on MXO's Agent Pace...--The Merovingian 18:13, 8 February 2006 (EST)

Yes, Merv is one of the oldest, not the oldest. Merv was only half-right, which is why his Matrix worked only halfway. Predicting the future is not impossible if the events in the world work like a computer program does. He wanted to predict things logically--but, with choice involved, prediction becomes far less logical or predictable. When people in his Matrix version realized they, too, could guess the logical cause and effect, they lost believablity in their Matrix. The Oracle's Matrix has no such problem for the most part. Hey, you haven't an email address to send you my paper (Joe just got a copy). You can send me your address privately to my email if you care not to post it publicly. --Spencerian 19:57, 8 February 2006 (EST)

Tangent: I once tried to start up a Matrix-themed MUSH which was to be placed in an unspecified previous iteration of the Matrix, only a few years after the death of the One that started the thing. We had some lengthy debates about how to implement the Oracle or make any sort of assertions that would A) be specific enough so as to be cool when they came true but, b) be vague enough so as to be possible in a roleplaying environment that included, well, choice. Eventually, though, all the staffers got busy doing other things. *wink* --Day 00:19, 9 February 2006 (EST)

Merovingian, eh? I must say I like it, much preferable to Ricimer - and I'm not a troll. Jzanjani 02:33, 21 February 2006 (EST)

Prove it. --The Merovingian 03:02, 21 February 2006 (EST)

To get back on topic, almost. I got you something, Merv: Image:Merv.jpg. It's only 200px wide because of the native resolution of the capture. It should be fine for use on your user page, but it looked just horrid blown up. I also capped one without the green lights, but I liked this one better. Lemme know what you think. --Day ^(talk) 02:40, 1 April 2006 (CST)

A Revelation I've Had

[AgentSmith]Let me share a revelation I've had [/Agentsmith]. In case you are new, most here are of the consensus that my attitude towards edits is overall blunt/brusk, not "polite", etc. (it's just letters on a screen, so I just never gauged "politeness" much; not that I make personal attacks, just that I "cut through it" and say what I'm thinkin'). Anyway, Day summarized some of this pretty well on Talk:Perry when he said just now: "your jumping off the cuff with aggressive language at people who simply disagree with you. It may be a matter that would be handled by inflection, were you interacting in real life, but you should realize that when you're dealing with text only, you have only very gross control over inflection: normal, bold and italics. And they can be construed as meaning many things. As a side note, I've noticed you like to use bold and such a lot and so, sometimes, you do combinations or all-caps or asterisks for further emphasis. I mean this in only an entirely constructive way, but... I have no idea how to interpret those passages except as very loud, so they're more confuysing to me, personally, than helpful.". Well, I think I've finally realized what the crux of the problem was:

Loss of essence. A profound sense of fatiuge, a feeling of emptiness...caused by terrorists trying to sap and impurify our precious bodily fluids, through water fluoridation. It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hard-core terrorist works. He hold no value for human life, not even his own. Well, I can no longer sit back and allow terrorist infiltration, terrorist indoctrination, terrorist subversion and the international terrorist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.--->Hahaha, sorry. I can never resist a good plug for the old Dr. Strangelove routine.

But I digress.

No, seriously. I finally realized what the crux of all of this friction has been: As you know, I am a prolific poster on the official messageboard. I think the problem is, I've been posting on BattlestarWiki as if it were a messageboard. You see, messageboards aren't as formal and a lot of, well, yelling, arguing as part of debate, etc., is actually the norm there. Further, when it comes to my overuse of **inflection** ....I'm just *used* to typing that way because that's how you highlight and emphasize stuff on messageboard posts (it's sort of how you make up for not being able to see visible social cues, etc.) Also--->Posts on messageboards can sometimes fill an entire Microsoft word single-spaced document page. They can get really long. So you've really got to highlight the beginning of every new idea or paragraph like that to make your point, etc.

But on the whole, it's just a different atmosphere, more "pack-mentality" to establish dominance through a show of force (GREAT Farscape joke about that one in the first episode of the fourth season...but I digress.), and a fanatical amount of information, etc.

I realize it took me a while, but I've finally come to the full realization that My Talk page posts, etc. seem kind of rough because I'm just typing like these are messageboard posts. (Messageboard posts disappared practially after 5 minutes, so you try to have as big an impact as possible, while here they just stay there for long periods, etc.)

So, I've realized that that's what's been going on, and I realize now (from experience) just how different a wiki is from that, so I will alter my tone accordingly. (Of course, I'll still highlight stuff that might seem important, but not go overboard). --The Merovingian 03:36, 10 February 2006 (EST)

Excellent! That's an angle I hadn't considered. The signal to noise ratio is definitely much higher here than at some other places. Heck, the fact that people were still discussing a question I asked around the first of December is an excellent demonstration between the way things happen around here and the official board. I hope you have begun to see that the people here value what you have to say/contribute (without the need to clamor to be heard above the din). --Steelviper 09:30, 10 February 2006 (EST)

That may be a very apt metaphor, SV. Reading Merv's posts is sometimes like listening to someone who thinks your in the other room, but really you're right behind them. Roughly, "Hey. I'm already listening, Dude." *wink* Anyway, I hope this is exactly the issue at, uh... issue, here. --Day 16:24, 10 February 2006 (EST)

Template Categories

What are you looking for for the writers and directors? A navigation template? Or a category (I ran into Category:Directors after I created one)? I'd be glad to help, I just don't have a concept of what you're needing. --Steelviper 20:19, 10 February 2006 (EST)

When I write pages about Sharon, Number Six, etc. I write at the bootom "Category:Cylons" (with double brackets around it). I think we need a Category set for "Writers" and "Directors" (in place of "Cylons"). However, one or two episodes split the "Writers" credit between "Teleplay" and "Story by" (see official site episode guide). I just put "Story by" into "Story by" slots in the guide, and Writer for who wrote the Teleplay: Regardless, I think both Teleplay and Story writers should fall under the "Writers" category, and I will make note of which was which on their individual pages.

---

>Essentially, I realized we had no "At a Glance" method of seeing the past work of a writer or director. Essentially, I see that episode 3.12 is coming up, and I see "hmm, who is this? why, I'll click on his name and get a list of other episodes he's done.....oh no! He wrote the abysmal "Black Market"!...or..."Hmm, she wrote the wonderful "Resistance"...this should be interesting. I'm trying to make A) pages for all of the writers and directors, and B) lists on those individual pages of all the episodes they've worked on, so, logically--->C)We should have a more fully developed category system for "Writers" and "Diretors" (the rudiments of which are present on the main page, but which were never fully developed. I felt that now is a good a time as any.)--The Merovingian 20:33, 10 February 2006 (EST)

There's a directors category already, and a Category:Director: Michael Rymer, which is a subcategory of Michael Rymer. Thus if you tag an episode with Category:Director: Michael Rymer it should fall under the Michael Rymer category. The directors category would then just be a container for all those subcategories. So we just need a Category:Director: X where X is each director (and make sure that each of those has the category of Director, so that they show up as subcategories). We could then make a template, I guess, but since we're talking about just having to add one category tag at the bottom, I'm not sure it merits a template. I'll start up the Category:Writers, if you want, if you could list out which Directors and Writers we need to capture. We may want to consult with Farago on this, as he has a knack for categorization. --Steelviper 20:44, 10 February 2006 (EST)

Ah. There's already a Category:Writers as well. Looks like somebody planned ahead. It looks like we'd just need to make the subcategories then. --Steelviper 20:47, 10 February 2006 (EST)

Just to say

Merv, I just wanted to say that I think you've been putting an excellent face forward recently. Keep it up. --Peter Farago 20:23, 19 February 2006 (EST)

All is proceeding according to plan..--The Merovingian 21:07, 19 February 2006 (EST)

Welcoming Committee

Thanks for taking on some of the welcoming committee responsibilities. I think the new users appreciate it (and Joe probably appreciates not being the only one who does the greeting). I tend to only pick up that job when the new user crosses paths with something I am working on. --Steelviper 14:21, 3 March 2006 (CST)

I am just a humble servant of this wiki and the information therein, I ask nothing in return. --The Merovingian 14:47, 3 March 2006 (CST)

This is a test to see what time my signature says--The Merovingian 23:11, 17 March 2006 (CST)

That's odd; what are our signatures saying Central Standard Time Intead of Coordinated Universal Time (UTC), that is, Grenwich Mean Time?--The Merovingian 23:12, 17 March 2006 (CST)

RFA

Because it looks like you didn't see it, notice that a user has added a question to the stock three. I think it would be safe to say it's because he was wondering what your would be. *wink* --Day 21:22, 18 March 2006 (CST)

Day, I will gladly answer any questions, but I note that you did not have to answer such a question when you were running for Administrator. Irrelevant; I mean I can answer it--The Merovingian 00:44, 19 March 2006 (CST)

I'm sure we all would have been happy to answer if anyone had asked. --Peter Farago 01:28, 19 March 2006 (CST)

http://openpolitics.ca/wiki+etiquette

As this page puts it...

Be Respectful Open politics has high standards for debate and civil discourse. If we wanted to participate in name calling and ad hominem attacks, we could visit our legislature. As an editor, you can relocate, revise or remove any content or contributions which give offense or are out of place. Participants who have differing points of view are invited to issue challenges to each other - a formalized competition of ideas which serves the public interest by allowing detailed head to head comparisons of differing positions on an issue.

You do not need to place my name in the comment's system. I find that offensive. Read http://openpolitics.ca/ad+hominem to better explain why.

Maintaining the correct Point of View A page that has been collaboratively written by dozens, if not hundreds of people will be quite a mess unless the participants all agree to write from a point of view. When describing issues, Open Politics uses a neutral point of view - when talking about same sex marriage as an issue, one should not discuss whether they are for or against it at the top of the page. Hold off on stating your opinion? until you get further down - to the position statements.

My edit was correct and if it needed to be removed, it should have been talked about first. My addition was completely under the guidelines of Wiki Etiquette.

Understand how wiki works In a wiki based web service, each page is dedicated to deliberating on a specific topic, which is determined by the page name. Everyone who views the page is welcome to edit the content of the page, making contributions in any way that (they think) helps. If others agree your contribution was helpful it will stay there - a "good edit."

Again, until you came along this evening, it had staied there for a day.

I am not someone you want to get on your bad side Merv. Trust me. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 00:55, 26 March 2006 (CST)

"...high standards for debate and civil discourse... I am not someone you want to get on your bad side Merv. Trust me."

You linked to a sub-par definition/explanation of ad hominem. Wikipedia's, e.g., is much more detailed (and better formatted).

A delay of a day is less than the gap between my reads of recent changes (and probably all but 4-5 users') so it hardly counts as a consensus of positive peer reviews. --CalculatinAvatar 02:24, 26 March 2006 (CST)

How can any Administrator possibly consider the crude threat "I am not someone you want to get on your bad side Merv. Trust me." to be "proper Wiki Etiquette" or "respectful", all matters aside? --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 21:50, 26 March 2006 (CST)

I've already addressed that issue in private. I don't forsee it occuring again.

On an unrelated note, I was the one that came up with the {{welcome}} message -- and it's a template, not a bot. No bots are operational as of yet. (As such, the template is added manually by users.) Just wanted to let you know about that piece of information. Obviously, any concerns should come to my desk per se, as always. :-) -- Joe Beaudoin 22:01, 26 March 2006 (CST)

Yes of course; that was actually quite helpful.--The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 22:47, 26 March 2006 (CST)

Well, you don't go on another site making fun of another person explaining why their ideas are bad. Merv, I think you need to appoligize for your remarks on the BSG fourm on Scifi.com. If not, I will be sure to post this entire thread as a reason for why you should not be an Administrator on this Wiki. While I voted because of other reasons the last time on your RFA, and moved my vote to netural, I would have kept my vote to oppose. In six months or so I will be very busy with my job so I am going to make a note on my calander to come back, and still vote no and post a PDF document of your thread. You will also know, that even though I can not post there, I can still read, and have sent the PDF document to Joe, for harressing a member of the site. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 10:01, 26 March 2006 (CST)

I have read the post. Quite frankly, I am disappointed in your behavior, Merv. It's quite unbecoming.

May I request, in the strongest possible terms, that you keep your thoughts on the Wiki in the Wiki? Things like this not only reflect badly on yourself but on every contributor here. Thank you. -- Joe Beaudoin 12:43, 26 March 2006 (CST)

The Merovingian's Opinions On Things That Should Be Done At BattlestarWiki (TMOOTTSBDABSW)

I have been at a Science Fiction convention this past week. During this time, my access to the internet was limited (well, relative to my usual levels) and I made a long post at Scifi.com describing various opinions I have about things that need to be done at BattlestarWiki: these are my opinions, and I have not assumed as a given that they will be realized. Some were displeased, and rightly so, that I did not state them here: Actually, I was going to make a long post on my Talk page as soon as I got back anyway, relating the opinions I stated there. I do appologize that I did not *immediately* post them here as well, because I was not trying to go behind anyone's back. Joe, I should post things about BattlestarWiki here first, and I will NEVER post something on another messageboard that I would be unwilling to post here (cursing, defaming remarks, etc. that I would not also make here); I am sorry, but I cannot limit my thoughts on BattlestarWiki to this Wiki; however, you have my promise and assurance that I have never said anything that I thought was innapropriate, nor will I EVER cross that line. Indeed, Not keeping my thoughts on this Wiki, limited to this Wiki, has resulted in a great awareness about this website spreading across the messageboards. That said, I agree, I will never make comments about this Wiki again which were as large or personally directed as the ones I made. I should have done this here first.

With that preamble, here is a list of things mostly for my own personal reference, which I think: I can post such things, I would think, on my own Talk page, and if posting this reflects poorly on my next bid for Administratorship...well then it does, and everyone who might disagree with these opinions won't have to deal with an Administrator who feels this way, so I see no reason for them to complain about me saying these things here. Logically, that would be the outcome. And if some people support me, well then, they do. Hier stehe ich, ich kann nicht anders. Gott helfe mir. Amen.:

1. Shane's new Portals project needs a lot of fixing up, and we need to work pretty hard on that once ready so it can be as operational as possible.
2. Many of the new Writers and Directors pages are just dead link stub pages. I will try to fill them in when I have time.
3. I don't think AI Bots are very practical for use on BattlestarWiki. It has been said that if they are used, their performance will be closely monitored: [yodaspeak]How embarrasing, it would be[/yodaspeak] if a bot made an exceedingly long string of mistakes that took forever to clear up. If you want to try it out, okay, we shall see how it progresses. I'm just no big fan.
4. I think the Cylon-related Hallucinations page is ridiculously unnecessary; it is just the information from the ChipSix subsection of "Number Six" plus some minor points on the Hallucinatory Baltar from Downloaded: Ron Moore confirmed in his podcast that Hallucinatary Baltar really is just a hallucination, and they thought that would be an interesting twist. --->I'd remove it. However, Joe has said that such speculation pages are to be supported: I would remove it simply because there is so little real information to put there (appart from the ChipSix stuff which could be moved back). So I've marked it with a cleanup tag instead. I think we can all agree to that.
5. When I created the Battles Series, I made a clear list of what defines a battle; the "Fall of New Caprica" is not a battle. However, now that I'm back I'm going to clean it up. I would personally like to delete it, but, as some think it was an important event, I'm going to clean it up i.e. remove stuff that isn't just a copy/paste of "New Caprica" article and keep the relevant military stuff. I think we can all agree to that. (BTW; I laid out a set of rules on "What makes a Battle page" on the Standards and Conventions Talk page; I'm not sure if we adopted this as an actual rule or a "guideline"; do not reply here; please voice your concerns on the matter on Standards and Conventions Talk. If it doesn't become an actual "rule" fine, just keep it on Talk to give people a general idea of how it works).
6. We should edit down and practice concision on overlong Question sections, but we should not make it a policy to wipe these sections entirely. Visitors come here to check out questions and several, factually based counterpoints about them--->Things not so much supported/presenting an opinion should be moved to Analysis, and these should be check so there is no utterly wild speculation; wild speculation should be removed. It's often hard to quantify the line between educated guess and speculation, of course, and we must be cautious in these.

That about wraps it up. I am sorry if I have hurt any feelings, this is not my intent: facts are my goal, and not malice. And I fully realize that I might lose a civilized debate; simply because I am arguing strongly for an opinion on categorization or something does not mean I am threatening to destroy BattlestarWiki. "I know when I'm beat", and I will obey the Administrators when given a direct order. I will not continue to pursue revert wars while debate is ongoing on a subject, and if it has *officially* been declared that debate is over, rest assured that I will yield. It is hard to express emotional nuance using just text messages here, but I am not expecting some kind of Inquisition to be started. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 22:34, 26 March 2006 (CST)

What's this all about?

Care to explain this, because from my end it looks like a personal attack. -- Joe Beaudoin 11:19, 27 March 2006 (CST)

Oh I'm sorry that's just a joke from Blade Runner; Task Bot is a robot AI, so I just thought it cute to ask "him" a question which in Blade Runner was the question that stumped the robotic Replicants during the Voight-Kampf test. It's just a BR joke. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 14:51, 27 March 2006 (CST)

Asking a man in a mask who he is...

Merv. Just saw V for Vendetta. If I still lived in Austin, I'd go to my favorite comics shop tomorrow and pick it up. As is... I'll have to wait for my next trip. Anyway... I enjoyed it quite much. Thought you might want to discuss it. If you're interested, we could do it here or feel free to email or IM me. --Day ^(talk) 02:23, 1 April 2006 (CST)

You do realize that I have a full Guy Fawkes costume and mask and I run around my college terrorizing our campus Republicans? The first day I went to the convention I wore my standard Doctor Who attire, the second day I went in a V costume. Fairness, justice, and freedom are more than just words...they are perspectives...'--The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 03:43, 1 April 2006 (CST)

That's creepy. Maybe I should start to call you Elrond, then. *wink* --Day ^(talk) 11:43, 1 April 2006 (CST)

That's not funny. I'm also I diehard LOTR fanatic. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 11:50, 1 April 2006 (CST)

So am I. That's why I find it so funny. I was talking, some time ago, with some friends about what we'd do if we could make a Hollyqood movie parodying the LotR movies. One would be to say what they messed up (Haldir at Helm's Deep, for instance) and another was to have Elrond in shades and call Strider "Mis-ter Aaaaragorn." Also, hobbits would all have been gay. Of course. But then, we've been making those jokes about the Fellowship since before the movies. --Day ^(talk) 22:54, 1 April 2006 (CST)

.....you seriously have never heard about the gag reel? There's a blooper reel of LOTR which they've made, but just for conventions and reporter interviews and the cast, but never for DVD. Maybe it will be released in the half-mythical 25th Anniversary addition (with an hour of deleted or new footage! haha-->listen to the ROTK commentary). Anyway, Hugo Weaving stated that they had one really good blooper scene which he made up himself: You see, for whatever reason, that scene when Elrond comes in the tent and gives Aragorn his sword Anduril, the shot of Elrond taking his hood off to reveal himself so you can see who he is and saying his first few lines, was not going well. Jackson kept making them do it, over and over again. It got annoying. So what he did was he put on a pair of his Agent Smith shades underneath the cloak, them when they shot it pulled his hood back, and said in Agent Smith voice: "You must join with the Matrix...Mr. Aragorn". Of course it's not just what he said; I mean more than half of this is in the delivery, how he does that almost-robot emotionless voice for Agent Smith. So that's "out there" but has never been released to the general public...yet.--The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 23:09, 1 April 2006 (CST)

Diff for future RFA

I just wanted a place to keep this diff for future RFA purposes (as an example of newbie interaction). It'd be kinda creepy on my user page, so I'm putting it here. This page is getting a bit long (your talk page sees SIGNIFICANTLY more traffic than mine), so it may get archived, but at least I'll know where to find it. --Steelviper 14:30, 7 April 2006 (CDT)

Well okay if you wanted to clean up your own userpage:

"Reaver, please try not to post fanfic stuff like you did on Mercury class battlestar in the future. Also, you added an image of a "Pegasus uniform patch" to the Pegasus (RDM) article: We've actually proven, through multiple screenshots and closeups, that Pegasus is in fact part of BSG-62, and that's what it says on their emblems. In the first episode it was in, "Pegasus", the sets and emblems were all a little blurry, so we weren't entirely sure what it was and there was much debate ("is that a 6? and 8? a 2? a 5? etc. etc.) Anyway, the next episode, "Resurrection Ship, Part I", showed many clearer shots that established that it was Sixty-two. However, many months passed between those times----->I've seen that "BSG-63" patch around a lot: one of the custom-scifi emblem production companies did a rush-job, and they made a patch that incorrectly says "Pegasus BSG-63", but it's sixty two. At the scifi con last month I went to that had Richard Hatch, I actually pointed this out to a vendor or two selling them, and was surprised that they said I was like the 5th or 6th person to point this out to them that day. I really hope that misprinted patch fades away without any more people getting confused by it. I hope this helps. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 13:48, 6 April 2006 (CDT)" -- For future reference. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 14:46, 7 April 2006 (CDT)

Point Out Mistakes

You don't have to point out the mistakes I made and post them directly into the comments. That is very rude. My name also never has to be in the comments also merv. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 15:29, 8 April 2006 (CDT)

Merv's edit summaries seem to me to have been composed in good faith. --Peter Farago 15:32, 8 April 2006 (CDT)

Shane, if I have a comment that is only a sentence long, I put it in the edit summary box, rather than going to all the confusion of putting it on a separate talk page; this doesn't mean I am attempting to "hide" it, how could I? It's in plain sight, and I intend people to see it. And I don't want everyone to be reading a rude remark or personal attack: that's not what I am writing--->the entire concept behind the summary box is that we explain why we're editing something--->if I just edited it without explanation, this would be considered rude. I am making these changes in good faith and explaining what I think is wrong with them. Rather than pouting that I am "attacking" you Shane, you should be focusing on doing a better job in the future. I hope this improves. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 15:35, 8 April 2006 (CDT)

(Shane...we have no idea how many officers are on a ship. You made that up.) could have been (removed officers; speculation), and I would not have said anything because of course I made it up. It isn't documented any where that I know. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 15:45, 8 April 2006 (CDT)

Nothing I said was incredibly offensive. And you shouldn't make things up. Shane, you cannot shrug off your own mistakes by accusing everyone that is trying to correct you of "ganging up" on you. The thing you should be doing is learning from your mistakes, listing to criticism in order to edit articles better. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 15:48, 8 April 2006 (CDT)

funny how all the stuff I did was edited by you at least 2 or three times. You proved my Proof, and by the end, all my edits are different because you didn't like the style. There are others in this "Proof" and all the evidence I need to prove it. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 15:54, 8 April 2006 (CDT)

To be honest I really don't understand what you just said: Yes, I edited several changes you made, and did so several times: how does this "prove" anything? What does it "prove"? That I'm editing things? I've already...said that. What? I can't understand your comment--The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 16:30, 8 April 2006 (CDT)

The entire tone of this disturbs me. Shane, you have many good ideas and considerable skill at the rather arcane wikicode. This is a waste of your time, Merv's time, and third parties' time.
Assume temporarily Merv hates and, consequently, mocks you.

This doesn't matter. Others will presumably note this and discount any personal attacks. Any edits he makes to your work out of spite will ultimately only be kept if the consensus is in favor of them, i.e. they are improvements; the motivation behind an improvement ultimately doesn't matter.

Spending time on something that does not matter is a waste.

Waste is bad.

You should not spend time on Merv hating and mocking you.

Assume temporary Merv does not hate you and, consequently, is not mocking you.

Merv hating and mocking you does not matter, for lack of existence.

Following the above, you should not spend time on Merv hating and mocking you.

Either way, you should not spend time on this. [The above to "The entire tone..." are my edits; the tabs are not being used to indicate reply.] --CalculatinAvatar 16:17, 8 April 2006 (CDT)

I do not hate Shane nor am I mocking him. ***That's my entire point: Whenever Shane's work is criticised, constructively or for logistically based (impersonal) reasons, he launches into a tirade that "everyone hates and is mocking" him and gets incredibly defensive. This is simply not the case. I am sorry if I have caused irreparable damage to his ego, but I am simply trying to keep the Wiki streamlined. If Shane is upset and openly surprised that every single edit he makes is not hailed and universally supported by everyone...he is not being a very responbile wiki user. For example, take my changes around with the template: CalculatinAvatar has changed several of the additions I made; some of these I actually felt were BETTER than my own, while on other points, (Raptor ECM, what's that? etc etc) we have discussed the point. I have worked with consensus whenever possible. But Shane just changes whatever he feels like, and when Farago or I tell him to slow down and at least discuss the point, he goes ahead and does whatever he wants, and then is appalled when everyone doesn't immediately proclaim that he is automatically correct. Even *I* can be wrong, when the facts are against me. But Shane doesn't really work well with others here. He's just doing his own thing. I sincerely hope that his behavior improves, so that he can make beneficial contributions to this wiki. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 16:40, 8 April 2006 (CDT)

From the perspective of a prolific Skiffy poster, I have to say that thicker skins all around on this wiki would be a valuable asset to this community. Perhaps you should all spend a little bit more time on the boards -- I think the bar as what sinks to the level of 'insult' might be adjusted a little.--Dogger 16:37, 8 April 2006 (CDT)

Indeed, Dogger. The fact that I disagree with Shane or the policies he supports, does not mean I am launching some kind of vengeful attack on his person.--The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 16:42, 8 April 2006 (CDT)

Doctor Who?

Better than the .AU file; http://joebeaudoin.net/music/Doctor_Who_(2005).mp3 -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 00:49, 21 April 2006 (CDT)

That's the Ninth Doctor's theme song. Good, but Fourth Doctor is the best. Fourth Doctor was Tom Baker, with the floor length multi-colored scarf. And I dress like the Fourth Doctor all the time (well, the messageboards, upon seeing my pics, said I looked like a refined, more presentable Fourth Doctor (I shoot for looking "plausible, while still wearing a long scarf" (i.e. not blatantly wearing an old-timesly vest under it, just a good 1940's-ish Man's overcoat and the Scarf and a Fedora). Dare I say....a "Re-Imagined Fourth Doctor?" well I wouldn't got that far, but I try not to make it look like "a costume", but something someone would actually wear. Upon seeing it, the messageboard users declared that I looked "like the Fourth Doctor but with a Humphrey Bogart slant", which is kind of the refined, film-noir esque thing I was shooting for (sauve, not wacky). So, long story short, that is why I use the Fourth Doctor's theme; I simply enjoy it the most of all of the Doctor Who theme song incarantions. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 01:12, 21 April 2006 (CDT)

Your Flamewar with KR on Scifi

For the love of God, Merv, just stop it. You don't speak for the wiki, the vote isn't concluded, and your claim that all the administrators have voted is wrong (Day hasn't). You are embarassing yourself and us. --Peter Farago 18:17, 22 April 2006 (CDT)

You are going a tad far, and not presenting a very sympathetic face. --Noneofyourbusiness 19:55, 22 April 2006 (EST)

Agreed. I tried to end it nicer than I started. No point going on, word already got out as much as it will. I ended it and just told them all to see if spoilers pan out in 8 months. I am sorry, Peter, if I have offended. I just wanted to maintain standards. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 19:03, 22 April 2006 (CDT)

I think one of us should apologize to KR for Merv's tone and invite him to defend himself here. I'd do it myself, but SciFi seems to be taking their time to verify my account. Noneofyourbusiness, if you would deign to pass this message along for me, I would appreciate it.

///Begin Message///

Greetings. I am Peter Farago, an administrator on the Battlestar Wiki. I'm sorry to see the direction this conversation has taken, and would like to clarify a few points.

1. On the behalf of Battlestar Wiki, I want to apologize for the tone The Merovingian has taken with you. Although a valued member of the community, he is not our spokesperson, and his comments should not be taken as our official position.
2. The vote is currently underway at http://www.battlestarwiki.org/wiki/Battlestar_Wiki_talk:Citation_Jihad#Koenigrules_.2F_Hollywood_North_Report , and will not conclude for some time yet. You are entirely welcome to defend your position, and I'm sure we'll be willing to extend the vote's closing date if you can address the concerns raised. In particular, it would be very helpful for us if you could answer the following questions:
   • How do you address the innacuracy of your previous reports?
   • In the future, would you be willing to identify which pieces of information come from publicly available sources (casting sides, interviews, etc.) and which are from your confidential sources?
   • Do you believe that you distinguish personal speculation from your own investigations on a reliable basis? If not, will you be willing to do so in the future?

Thank you for reading this. I look forward to reading your response on the wiki, if you choose to make one.

///End Message/// --Peter Farago 19:29, 22 April 2006 (CDT)

A) That sounds very good Peter, B) I've never claimed to be the spokesperson for BSwiki. Could you add to the sentence "he is not our spokesperson" that "Nor has he claimed to be"? Other than that I'm fine. I too do not like the tone it took, and I ended it by just saying we should stop argueing and wait until October. I tried to resolve that myself, but I am also not happy with how it turned. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 20:05, 22 April 2006 (CDT)

I have given him the message as a Personal Message. Would you have preferred that I post it on the BBoard itself? --Noneofyourbusiness 21:10, 22 April 2006 (EST)

That may be wise. Other posters are beginning to have doubts about the Battlestarwiki because of this. Perhaps it would reassure them of how it really is over here. --Sauron18 09:23 22 April 2006

Be Friendly with the Newbies

Don't just remove the question, post your response. I seen this a couple of times so far. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 16:56, 30 April 2006 (CDT)

First: I "removed" a lot of material from my talk page at the end of the season, when it was getting so large it was straining my computer to display it all. Others here refine their talk pages. Anyway, Shane you're not exactly a "newbie" in that you've been here for more than just a week or two, and you've been working on the main page and portals system for a long time. Although at first (based on the half-finished early form) I wasn't convinced it would work and was against it, I actually think you've been doing good work trying to set it up. But still, that doesn't mean it's ready to use. I already said this before, but I was *waiting* to see if it was as done as you thought it could be. To be more specific--->I thought it would take you several weeks to set this up to your satisfaction, and thus it would be wrong of me to drop in and criticise the whole thing when you felt it wasn't even presentable yet; not finished. --->Now, you are complaining that Peter and myself SHOULD NOT make constructive criticism/comments, because we should have done that BEFORE? Shane, you weren't ready before, so we didn't examine it before. Personally I actually like to redesign stuff while it's being implemented, so we can understand how it flows when operational better. I am sorry Shane, but Peter and I have just been trying to fix up things with this main page and portals redesign, touch ups before it gets the go ahead if possible. No, calmly and constructively trying to alter things about it for the better is not "biting the newbies". Instead of getting angry when you don't get full control over the setup, you should really work with the group on this, Shane. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 18:06, 30 April 2006 (CDT)

He may actually have been referring to this (in terms of removing the question (regarding newbies). --Steelviper 21:18, 30 April 2006 (CDT)

If that's the case, Merv's actions weren't out of line, as the comment was borderline unintelligible. To be exceptionally courteous, he could have moved the comment to talk and asked its author, Nevfennas to defend it, but I don't think even that was necessarily called for in this case. Responding directly on the talk episode page, as Shane suggests, is not a good idea - our episode guide pages are not a BBS. --Peter Farago 21:34, 30 April 2006 (CDT)

Well, er, yes Peter. I couldn't really understand what he was even really trying to say there, but I...gathered that he was postulating that the Cylon detector doesn't even work, which is odd because "Flesh and Bone" showed that it really does (in its final form). --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 22:20, 30 April 2006 (CDT)

Babel Templates

Bringing over al the babel templates could be a bit of a task, particularly since very few of us are active on more than one language wiki. Is it worth the trouble yet? --Peter Farago 23:14, 30 April 2006 (CDT)

Probably not. Just an idea I was kicking around the old noggin. Heghlu'meH QaQ jajvam. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 23:34, 30 April 2006 (CDT)

it's [br /]

The Slash is included. It's XHTML standards. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 12:00, 6 May 2006 (CDT)

It works just as well, there's no difference. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 12:11, 6 May 2006 (CDT)

There is a difference. That is why it's in the S&C. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 14:34, 6 May 2006 (CDT)

No, there is no difference in MediaWiki. The HTML tags used in wikimarkup aren't used directly, but are converted to XHTML anyway, so both <br> and <br /> end up as <br />. Ausir 03:32, 7 May 2006 (CDT)

If that where the case, my XHTML validator would say that it was vaild. We disabled "tidy" the progeam that does that because we use portals. Tidy would have done that, but since we have it disabled, we need to make sure we close the tag. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 23:34, 10 May 2006 (CDT)

That's really quite useful to know, though it reminds me of the distaste I have for some of the tricks MediaWiki pulls. I'll still probably switch any <br>'s I happen across for coding style reasons. --CalculatinAvatar 21:57, 10 May 2006 (CDT)

Persimmons?

I would like to ask your permission to use your likeness (from an image on your user page) in a project I'm working on. It's just a little banner I'm putting together for the Galactica BS fan art forum (not going to be on the front page of anything, just in a post or two (if the original ends up being quoted). I'm actually done with yours but posting it once is as good as publishing in these days of caching, so before I even posted a preview of it to photobucket I wanted to clear it with you. I just used your pic as is, with some minor changes in scaling, rotation, and shadow. I'm not 100% done with it, but it's looking pretty good. I'd rather not spoil the "surprise" of what exactly I'm doing until closer to unveiling, but I could promise a preview before it is "published" (aka posted into my fan art thread). Just drop a note here (or on my talk, or email, or whatever) letting me know. --Steelviper 14:49, 16 May 2006 (CDT)

Well yeah but preview with it with me first so I can give it the go ahead or not. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 22:10, 16 May 2006 (CDT)

I sent a preview link via the "Email this user" function here. Did you receive it, and if so, is it ok? --Steelviper 14:22, 18 May 2006 (CDT)

I haven't received it. BTW, what does "Persimmons" mean?--The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 18:53, 18 May 2006 (CDT)

Ah. I missed this response. I'll pm you the previous work (over at GalacticaBS), though now that I have more experience under my belt, I'm thinking I could do MUCH better (the current on is pretty dark). Persimmons is just a stupid computer geek thing. Common typo of "permissions" (more relevant for Linux/Unix). --Steelviper 09:43, 26 May 2006 (CDT)

I supppose I'm responsible for worse jargon; I'm known to segway into Nadsat. Now lets viddy some DVD's my droogs, followed by a bit of the 'ol ultra-violence... --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 09:50, 26 May 2006 (CDT)

Have you gotten my PM's at BS? I was pretty sure I had sent them, but now I'm not seeing anything in my "sent folder". --Steelviper 20:46, 26 May 2006 (CDT)

Another PM has been sent. --Steelviper 09:50, 1 June 2006 (CDT)

I haven't received any reply from the PM. Have you received it? I'm still interested in your thoughts on the pic as well as a url or file of "Death" that you mentioned. --Steelviper 11:53, 9 June 2006 (CDT)

Just a reminder

Hi, Merv. On your last edit of Armistice Station, I agree that the text by Tauron detailing the Armistice Officer wasn't needed there since he has a page, but do remember to place something in the article edit comments detailing why you did what you did. As you know, some people get bent out of shape when edits are done without explanation, and, although I was able to glean why, others do not. If your reasoning is too long for the summary note, throw it on talk, of course.

That being said, I hadn't asked you about "V for Vendetta." I hadn't time to see it yet. How was it to you? --Spencerian 07:57, 27 May 2006 (CDT)

Spencerian I own a replica Guy Fawkes mask, wig, hat, and costume and I run around my college campus at night vandalizing advertisements that the campus Republican club puts up. Comparing the movie to the comic: well it was a great and skillful condensation; I mean a shot for shot remake of the comic would have lasted 5 to 6 hours. Excellent. --14:29, 27 May 2006 (CDT)

I'll take that as a recommendation to see it, then. And Republicans aren't that bad...if you use the same marinating sauce I use on Democrats. Tastes like chicken, or Tastee Wheat if you get one of the radical ones. :) --Spencerian 15:10, 27 May 2006 (CDT)

Battle Pages Verb Tense

Merv, S&C guidelines indicate verb tense is to be present in episode and character narratives except where such things would cause confusion (such as flashback moments). I don't an exception has been made for Battle of Ragnar Anchorage or any other of the battle pages in this. I'm sure we've all talked about it before, but I don't believe we made an exception for these. Unless you remember differently and can point to the discussion thread defining this, I'll be inclined to roll this page back. --Spencerian 17:11, 31 May 2006 (CDT)

The battle pages sound riciculously awkward when put into the present tense. I'm streaminling the entire thing. I realize that you disagree, but lets see everyone else weigh in on that when I have finished. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 12:18, 2 June 2006 (CDT)

That makes no sense. If everyone likes present tense better, then you'll just have to undo all that work. I thought the Way We Do Things was to talk about an action before doing it, rather than do, discuss, undo (optional). This reminds me of what was so off putting to me about the Portals thing. --Day ^{(Talk - Admin)} 23:05, 2 June 2006 (CDT)

I'm already almost done so I'll finish it up, though I understand; we're usually kind of sluggish when it comes to rearranging the verb tenses. Day I honestly have no idea if "everyone" likes present tense for battles better because so far only Spencerian and me were talking about it. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 07:50, 3 June 2006 (CDT)

Yes, but there is a convention. I realize it's no policy, but it was established by discussion already. As it is a broader convention that somply applying to Battle pages there is, naturally, no specific consensus on this change, but were I you (and I'm not), I would assume that the braoder convention was the default way for things to be. If I thought we should make an exception for Battle pages, I'd have brought it up in the S&C talk page, or on a Battle talk page, at least. Before spending a lot of my time making changes that may eventually have to be undone anyway. However, as I said, I'm not you. So...

Why do you like the past tense better? Because of the more "historical" feel? I think that's pretty valid. It's the only reason I can think of, but it is no uncompelling. What else've you got? --Day ^{(Talk - Admin)} 23:38, 3 June 2006 (CDT)

Need to continue this tomorrow, plus on S&C: well, yeah the historical feel, but also because when I proofread it it just doesn't really sound right; the flow is awkward. On top of this wikipedia and Memory Alpha have battle pages (like Wolf 359) in the past tense. Well, reading through each version, which did you think one was better? --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 00:29, 4 June 2006 (CDT)

Battlestar Wiki:Official Communiques

Merv, I create a section where we can consolidate questions in a better section. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 21:27, 8 June 2006 (CDT)

Yes, we can't have a million people jamming someone's talk page. Good idea.--The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 10:29, 9 June 2006 (CDT)

BattlestarWiki Roving Reporter

As some of you may already know, recently on June 2nd a "super-trailer" for Season 3 was screened in New York. I thought it would go online a few days afterwards, but it did not. In fact, I was present during this event, and if you see the webcast of the Q&A section at http://www.mtr.org/ you can see that I'm the audience member who asks the first question (which I thought was a smart one, better than the subsequent lady who said "hey, Jamie Bamber, you've got an English accent in real life! How does this make you feel! (shudder)). Anyway, I assumed the trailer would go online but it didn't.

Frankly, I don't want to give it away if it's super-spoilers, but on the other hand it was a public venue and most of those TV Guide people we use as sources were there and later reported on it: however, I like what TheGreatLink (a UK fansite) did: blacking out and censoring a lot from their report.

Either way, we don't really have a policy where the "source" is a BattlestarWiki user's own two peepers. And I am uncomfortable with super-spoilers. You can see in the webcast available to all some other info, for example, that Sergio Mimica-Gezzan will direct the season premiere, not perennial golden boy Michael Rymer. However, within the super-trailer:

Spoiler follows, highlight to read.

As many have speculated since "The Farm" (i.e. myself) yes, Leoben pops up with a baby claiming that Starbuck is the mother (and presumably he is the father) using her stolen egg cells. Meanwhile, yes, Colonel Tigh loses an eye. His right eye (left from our perspective). Lots of explosions. Viper Mark VII tearing apart in slow motion (good FX shot). Number Six and Number Three with Baltar in Colonial One. Number Six getting shot in the head (unknown by who, and I think she's "survive" getting shot and just download anyway). Baltar demanding that he be killed. Caprica-Sharon insisting that Adama has to keep fighting. Apollo telling Dualla he's going to do something he should have done a long time ago. More explosions. Fighting. Tigh looking really hagard, has one eye (white medical patch over it), with a heavy beard, saying there's a war for him to fight. Incredibly large number of explosions.

So I'm not sure how to integrate all of this into BSWIki, as I don't want to super-spoil, but if they were willing to let the TVGuide people see it....--The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 15:02, 9 June 2006 (CDT)

RFA

If you dare, here is a chance. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 22:24, 9 June 2006 (CDT)

Well, I have never been one to fly in the face of public opinion. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 22:25, 9 June 2006 (CDT)

I appreciated the way in which you handle this RFA. Just hang in there. Sooner or later you will go from godsend to god ;). --FrankieG 10:06, 26 June 2006 (CDT)

"The problem of leadership is inevitably: Who will play God?"

--Muad'Dib from the Oral History, God Emperor of Dune --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 10:19, 26 June 2006 (CDT)

Publishing

If I don't hear anything back from you (either at this talk page, my talk page, or PM at galacticaBS), I'll just go ahead and edit EJO back into the high-res versions of the group shot and "publish" those. --Steelviper 20:21, 13 June 2006 (CDT)

Please include me in the final version of that: I thought they looked cool. You have the go-ahead. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 23:08, 13 June 2006 (CDT)

Sweet! (Posted into my fan art thread over at Galactica BS.) --Steelviper 07:52, 14 June 2006 (CDT)

BW:OC

merv, this is someone's question to the cast/crwe. Please let them answer it. If you want to comment on something, please send it to their user talk page. This will allow things not to be process be interupted. This is common curtoisy --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 20:07, 24 June 2006 (CDT)

I'm confused: other people were doing that to many of the other questions; such as for "Colonial One" and "Rebirth Room", and there was no problem with this then. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 20:24, 24 June 2006 (CDT)

Yeah, some questions can be helped by wikipedians or expanded, that way, when the cast/crew person does respond it will either be easier for them to explain or they will just confirm/deny it. For example if someone asked "What's up with the 12 Models, why 12?" We have the answer, so we could just answer it ourselves and that way save the cast/crew person some trouble. Sort of like for RDM's blog in Skiffy --Sauron18 22:05 24 June 2006 (CDT)

That 12 Models thing is a good example, Sauron. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 09:17, 25 June 2006 (CDT)

Your Minor Edit

Thanks for the information! However, your contribuation to Battlestar Wiki talk:Policy was more than just a minor edit as you indicated by clicking the "[ ] This is a minor edit" checkbox is unchecked for these types of edits. Please read up on the guidelines refering to minor edits. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 17:18, 25 June 2006 (CDT)

Thanks for the information! However, your contribuation to Battlestar Wiki talk:Policy was more than just a minor edit as you indicated by clicking the "[ ] This is a minor edit" checkbox is unchecked for these types of edits. Please read up on the guidelines refering to minor edits. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 17:37, 25 June 2006 (CDT)

Response to your Message on Homeworld616's user talk

You are good! I wasn't expecting anyone to notice that about my username. Yes, I did add the "616" as a reference to our Universe's tag number in the Marvel Comics Multiverse. You truly do seem to know everything you can. Congratulations on figuring that out! I should give you a prize for noticing trivia! --Homeworld616 09:16, 26 June 2006 (CDT)

It is my business to know. At least until the entire M-Day madness. I'm taking a break from Marvel for a time. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 09:25, 26 June 2006 (CDT)

Hey, Merv. Your map/plotting of where the Colonies might be in the galaxy as shown on Wikipedia is great. I want to adapt it for an addition to the Science in the Re-imagined Series article, it's just that well thought out for a person who's merely a trafficker of information. :) --Spencerian 13:43, 27 June 2006 (CDT)

I'll get on that if I can; I didn't make the map actually, though I figured out that whole Cygnus arm theory. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 15:53, 27 June 2006 (CDT)

It was a very nice bit of deduction. I managed to add a version there now. Mercifull is considering making a graphic of the galaxy that we can upload here for the article to complete it. --Spencerian 14:58, 28 June 2006 (CDT)

Regarding Wiki-Terrorism

Is there a response? Kkimball 22:11, 28 June 2006 (CDT)

These wiki-terrorists will be found, and we will show them what "terror" really means. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 00:35, 29 June 2006 (CDT)

Merv, I appreciate your help, but please stop. You're only complicating the edit history. I'm nearly done. --Peter Farago 00:25, 29 June 2006 (CDT)

All done. Thanks for taking care of Scoke Faofa's edits during the confusion. --Peter Farago 01:36, 29 June 2006 (CDT)

On Screen Death Count

Hey, this is a handy little thing I felt didn't justify adding into templates or anything, but people keep saying BSG is a really dark series, so I actually wanted to keep track of how many "On Screen Deaths" there are. Note that mentioning someone was killed, i.e. a marine was killed off screen in "Litmus", does not add to the count. And it's about actual people dying on screen: for simplicity I'm ignoring the destruction of the Olympic Carrier and Cloud 9, and of course the genocide-leve Fall of the Twelve Colonies, as I feel it's not the same "visceral, OMG how can TV do that?" this is a "dark", "Violent" show effect as when a person actually supposedly dies on screen (I count Admiral Cain-type stuff; even if the camera cuts away, they do "die"). Just trying to figure out which was the bloodiest episode (thought to be honest, like one person dying, say, Tarn, can be more graphic than many of these put together). Humanoid Cylons count as a death. Please point out if I make a mistake. Without further ado, starting with regular-season episodes:

33: 1 - a Number Six shot by Caprica-Six

Bastille Day: 1 - Mason

Act of Contrition: 13 pilots (technically offscreen)

Litmus: 5 - technically 1, really as we only see Doral die, and they say he killed a marine and 3 civillians were caught in the blast

Flesh and Bone: 1 - Leoben Conoy

The Hand of God: 4 - Vipers lost, including Fireball, Stepchild, and Chuckles

Colonial Day: 2 - Valence, a Boomer copy on Caprica

KLG I: 11 - the 10 Man crew of Raptor 3, and Karma on Raptor 1. Well, we see the crew of Raptor 3, it's not just a CGI thing like the Olympic Carrier, but we don't actually see them "die" die as the camera cuts to their ship exploding, so leave that one up to the academics I guess.

KLG II: 1 - A Number Six on Caprica. Severl Boomers are seen on the Basestar near the nuke, like a dozen, so I guess you could put them in but that verges on CGI territory for the Baseship exploding, so I don't really count that as much.

Scattered: 1 - Tarn

Valley of Darkness: 4 - Well 12 people supposedly die (though we see quite a few bodies more, maybe a goof I don't know I didn't count the corpses). People who actually die on screen are Socinus (dying from injuries/euthanized), Flyboy, and the 2 Marines Collishaw and Twinam

Fragged: 1 - Crashdown

Resistance: 5 - Four civilians shot on screen aboard the Gideon, plus Galactica-Boomer

The Farm: At least 4 - Sue-Shaun, 2 Simons, a Number Six (I think she got killed when she was hit with a fire extinguisher), some of Ander's resistance members get shot but I don't know if they were wounded or died (in context, i.e. I remember seeings a guy shot but dragged away). I don't think I"ll count the woman who died when their life support in the Farm was turned off, as they were kind of already half dead and just a set piece for Sue-Shaun dying.

Home, Part I: 3 - Elosha, 2 Zarek redshirts

Home, Part II: 2 - Meier, another Zarek redshirt

Pegasus: 1 - Lt. Thorne, plus no one died in Final Cut or Flight of the Phoenix

Resurrection Ship, Part 2: 2 - Cain and 1 Pegasus marine

Epiphanies: Technically at least 3 people die, as a suicide bomber detonates and kills some civies, but that's really just a CGI explosion (either way, other episodes have 4 people die on screen definately so it's not really important)

Black Market: 3 - Fisk, Fisk's assassin, Phelan

Scar: Odd case: this episode was billed as a "meatgrinder" war of attrition episode, but many of them happen off screen. Technically only BB died "on screen", and even then it was over the radio. Ultimately, I'm not going to assign a number, but it doesn't count as having the most deaths because they were just mentioned or offscreen.

Sacrifice: 7 - Sesha, her 3 henchmen, 2 marines, and Billy Keikeya. Yep. All of them died on screen, were shot and died with blood and bullets, no CGI ship explosions. Meat grinder episode.

The Captain's Hand: 5 - Well technically 1 as Commander Garner is the only one to die on screen, while the 4 Raptor pilots die off screen. Either way it doesn't beat Sacrifice.

Downloaded: 1 - Number Three. I don't think Six and Boomer's flashback deaths count as this is old "previously" footage really, Maya's dead baby is shown standing in for Hera but it was already dead. Anders apparently killed 40 Cylons in an explosion, but we don't see any bodies or them actually dying or anything, so this falls into my "off screen" territory.

Lay Down Your Burdens, Part I: This is odd because according to the credits, 29 people die by LDYB II. Now a Raptor was lost which might account for 4 guys, but that's "off screen" and we didn't even see their Raptor explode. I think they brought Team Anders into the count or something and that's why it's lower, well I mean there was a big fight with Centurions but I don't think THAT many people died; many were wounded, but I'd really have to rewatch it to see how many people get shot.

Lay Down Your Burdens, Part II: 1 - Gina.

I realize I was all over the place on this, and I'd have to rewatch "The Farm" and LDYB I to try and see number of people shot or died but ultimatley I don't think either displaced Sacrifice. But ultimately----->Sacrifice was the bloodiest episode of Battlestar Galactica to date. 7 people died in Sacrifice, and we actually see each one get shot and die. In "Act of Contrition", 13 pilots are killed in an explosion, but we don't actually see them die, the camera cuts away, and that puts it back into "Olympic Carrier" and "Cloud 9" "I didn't actually see people dying" territory. So at the moment, Sacrifice's 7 actual onscreen deaths is the number to beat. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 22:12, 2 July 2006 (CDT)

The Miniseries doesn't count as a regular episode, so it wouldn't fit into an official "bloodiest hour of tv" type thing. Still, lets see: Armistice Officer, Number Six killed a baby, Number Six killed in nuclear blast, Prosna died, well...I don't know if I'd count random Vipers being destroyed as "people being killed" in the sense that TV considers this just special effects, not people getting violently killed. Leoben Conoy after big fight. Helo shot some random guy. So maybe like 6. Losing 80+ people in the part landing bay fire was also kind of "CGI". I dunno. I still think "7 people actually dying on screen by getting shot or attacked physically) is the bar that has been set. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 22:18, 2 July 2006 (CDT)

Good work. Wonder how BSG compares to other series? --FrankieG 22:26, 2 July 2006 (CDT)

Downloaded Comment

Your comments about neutron bombs brought another thought of pure spectulation out of me. Maybe the Cylons didn't bomb citys, but other areas just to throw up radiation into the atmosphere and kill the humans while leaving some cities intact. Just a wild idea. --FrankieG 20:10, 3 July 2006 (CDT)

That's scientifically implausible - you can't "throw radiation". Moore had the cylons use nukes for a good reason - we know what they are, and they're scary. --Peter Farago 21:14, 3 July 2006 (CDT)

Okay, so for "throw radiation" read "cause massive amounts of fallout to spread out". --Day ^{(Talk - Admin)} 21:34, 3 July 2006 (CDT)

Is there another way to do that besides detonating a nuclear bomb? --Peter Farago 22:09, 3 July 2006 (CDT)

We saw Caprica City nuked, Adama said they hit it with a 50 megaton. I don't know why every now and again people get confused about this, but the way it works is that the Cylons nuked *most* of the cities on Caprica, but they wanted one or two to use as foward bases, so they intentionally *didn't* nuke cities like Delphi (Delphi is not the same city as Caprica City) so they could take them over for their own use later. There were no neutron bombs. Most cities on Caprica are craters now. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 22:17, 3 July 2006 (CDT)

We know that Caprica City got hammered. In my poor way, I was trying to explain how to use a nuke as a radiological device. Use ground bursts outside citys as to create the greatest amount of fallout. No need for neutron bomb. Just rampant speculations. Merv, can you point me to the source about the bases. I missed it somehow. --FrankieG 22:39, 3 July 2006 (CDT)

I forget specifically, but they're using it as a base and moving in. RDM describes this in some early podcasts of how the Helo storyline was being made up as they went for the first half of season 1, but then it clicked and they knew where it was going. But yeah, he says how "okay, Helo's in a deserted city. Not really ruined beyond some superficial damage. Things like this just start out, but then branch off into knew story elements of "well, why isn't this particular city destroyed like the others?" etc. It's in various podcasts. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 22:51, 3 July 2006 (CDT)

Thanks. Just want to be sure I didn't miss something on an episode. --FrankieG 23:01, 3 July 2006 (CDT)

Battlestar Galactica (2005 Novel)

Please check my last edit. I have been structuring the article to list the addition/subtractions/errors and any discussion of differences in continuity in the Analysis section. Is my edit ok? Don't want to change your meaning. Also, I will look up the page numbers on your additions. Oh, can we say "contradicted" since it is a separate continuity? Thanks. --FrankieG 19:43, 7 July 2006 (CDT)

Well I'm playing it loose. I think Analysis is for "overall Analysis", while the other stuff is just notes. Yes, most of the notes I'm going to be making have page numbers (only a few don't), and I'll insert them in order. We can then play around with where to categorize them. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 19:47, 7 July 2006 (CDT)

Sorry thought you were done. let me know when you're finished. I'll leave it alone until then --FrankieG 19:52, 7 July 2006 (CDT)

Actually, "Notes" and "Analysis" really don't fit. Any ideas? --FrankieG 19:54, 7 July 2006 (CDT)

Battle Templates

Just checking to see if you are happy with the changed I made for your battle pages with the new template? Was quite a bit of work doing but I think it looks much better now :).

P.s I think your talk page needs a bit of archiving lol --Mercifull ^{(Talk/Contribs)} 18:17, 10 July 2006 (CDT)

Generally good, but I base this on Wikipedia's World War II battle pages such as that for the Battle of Midway: "Material Losses" and "Casualties" is cluttery; the template should have "Material Losses" removed and combined under "Casualties". How do I do that? --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 18:25, 10 July 2006 (CDT)

If you bring it up on the talk page for the template then we can discuss better ways for the template to look. I waited a long time for responses before putting the templates into effenct so I dont really want to change it now unless its absolute neccesary. --Mercifull ^{(Talk/Contribs)} 18:28, 10 July 2006 (CDT)

Spoilers in edit summary

I generally watch the "Recent changes" like a hawk, so if you could avoid discussing spoiler stuff in the edit summaries (Battle of New Caprica), I'd appreciate it. --Steelviper 06:42, 12 July 2006 (CDT)

Word for Word?

Wouldn't that be a copyright and not a rewrite? --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 18:25, 16 July 2006 (CDT)

What are you referring to?--The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 18:59, 16 July 2006 (CDT)

The news entry. --Shane ^{(T - C - E)} 19:01, 16 July 2006 (CDT)

I do not understand what the problem is. Plus I didn't copy anything "word for word", I don't understand. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 19:06, 16 July 2006 (CDT)

Star Trek XI

Just wondering what you think about this. Looks like it might be a prequel or reboot? --FrankieG 14:26, 18 July 2006 (CDT)

First, Rick Berman (the man who destroyed Star Trek) kept saying "I'm working on a new movie script!"....when at the same time Paramount was saying they wouldn't buy or produce anything for years and didn't know what the heck he was talking about: essentially he was trying to save face and make it look like he wasn't fired, which for all practical purposes he was.

I was not "wowed" by the news of JJ Abrams version. The ONLY, only good thing I've heard is that Abrams is on record as saying that he is going to watch Nemesis as a guide for what *not* to do in a successful Trek movie (the one-two punch of Nemesis and Enterprise Season 2 (one of the worst seasons of Trek ever) shattered our delusions that the current problems with the show could have been fixed.

Anyway, Berman's idea of doing a prequel roughly set around the Birth of the Federation and (hopefully) Romulan War which is what MADE the Federation (though Berman chose never to refer to this established fact as he thought fans would be confused). However, I was enraged that his "Birth of the Federation" movie idea ***would not include the Enterprise cast***, even though Enterprise is set during the BotF Era. --->Abrams idea is to do an early Kirk and Spock, either the perennial-fallback-idea "Starfleet Academy" or an early mission of theres. A small good note is that he won't reboot it, it's going to be withing the normal continuity. ----->I HATE this early Kirk and Spock idea, not only emotionally, but practically because I honestly think no one really wants to see that and it won't restart the franchise or even make for a good standalone story: a would spit on this idea with my last breath, for hate's sake.

Honestly: J. Michael Strackzinski was pitching a "reboot" idea that never got off the ground, so he released it so people who were curious would know what it was (nice): however, JMS' idea was....a rebooted original Enterprise with Kirk and Spock. Granted, JMS is a great writer, and I actually think he could have crafted a good story out of this.

But in the end...Abram's idea was "Kirk and Spock again!" and even the alternate dark horse JMS' idea was "Kirk and Spock again!". First, I don't think we could really like Kirk and Spock without the iconic performance of Shatner and Nimoy. But even if it was a dead-on performance, or an original-take, likable performance.....they're just going back to the well again. Resting on their laurals, feeling incapable of good writing or anything NEW again. I'm just disappointed about the whole thing.

One day, Star Trek will be back. I don't know how. Maybe I'll see. But it won't come back until it's ready. To be honest what fan-series are doing now like "Hidden Frontier" is more original and simply better than what they're coming up with now. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 19:41, 18 July 2006 (CDT)

I not a avid fan, but there is only one Kirk and Spock. I always hoped, but now it's too late that they would do a series around Sulu. Another decent (not great) idea is a "Timecop" series based on the time police from TNG. Where's "Hidden Frontier"? --FrankieG 20:05, 18 July 2006 (CDT)

Dunno just a name I heard, I meant fan series in general. --The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 20:11, 18 July 2006 (CDT)

Bulleted Character Bio Ideas

Merv, the experimentation with the use of bulleted bios to keep character bios short has been up for some time at User:Spencerian/Shortbio, where a number of folks have commented on it on its talk page and enough time had passed to where making that page live was appropriate, where then we could all look to forming a convention. Given that the article's been up for a while, I recommend that you edit this dummy page with your ideas first since they'll be no ill-effects from doing so. I'll check in later to see your idea since there's still some wiggle in how we do it, so long as we keep it simple and short. If the idea is convoluted or complex, we may need to move the work to a Think Tank project. --Spencerian 12:28, 19 July 2006 (CDT)

Oh no, I mean I think it's a good idea for whittling down long pages, I just think maybe I could toy around more with it: I'll help out on the talk page and stuff, etc. tinkering with ideas of what to do on long page: I actually don't have a solution of my own on-hand for what to do with these pages; I was just saying "yeah, I should be working on fixing these up, too". I'll get to this eventually...--The Merovingian ^{(C - E)} 12:57, 19 July 2006 (CDT)

Alrighty, then. Looking forward to seeing your idea. --Spencerian 13:27, 19 July 2006 (CDT)