![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
![]() | Contents of Talk:Battlestar Galactica (reimagining)/Archive 1 were merged into this archive on 6 December 2022. The /Archive 1 now contains even older archived content. |
Should there be some discussion about some of the backlash from fans of the original? While I think the new Galactica is one of the best shows on TV there was a LOT of backlash from fans of the original who just could not adjust to the new version.
How do we know it's a distant galaxy? In fact, isn't it supposed to be the same galaxy that Earth is in? Evercat 20:37, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
It would have to be the same galaxy. The planetarium in Athena's Tomb showed a nebula that the Galactica could also see, indicating they were in the same galaxy. — Phil Welch 05:19, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
In the last episode of season three we definitely see it's in the same galaxy, not too far away even.--
80.146.21.189
21:39, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
The intro contains the line: "in the tradition of Star Trek, the writers use science fiction to examine contemporary social, moral and ethical issues in allegory."
It'd probably be more accurate to say: "in the tradition of science fiction, the writers use science fiction to examine contemporary social, moral and ethical issues in allegory." It's not like this is original or unique to Star Trek.
http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/tv/la-et-galactica12feb12,1,7910575.story?coll=la-headlines-entnews&ctrack=1&cset=true Please look into this http://slashdot.org/firehose.pl?op=view&id=91282 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.96.0.185 ( talk • contribs)
Many articles have been written that touch on who the battlestar galactica audience is and how the show impacts them. We could totally write down a few things from those and then build a "Audience" subsection. Lotusduck 00:45, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Producers Make It Official: 'Battlestar Galactica' Is Done [1]-- 88wolfmaster 01:21, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I'm no Battlestar expert, but it seems to me that it would be really nice to have a section of the choice of character names in the series. Names such as Hadrian (the security officer who begins a kind of witch hunt) and Socinus clearly were not chosen by accident, and it would be a notable addition to the article to add some links to the origins of these names.. .I'm just not sure how best to go about it! -- Tomhannen 09:46, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
And the country has come up yet again with people adding Canada and UK to the country in the infobox. Why? It's a US production made by a US studio and production company. It's shot in Canada yes, but that doesn't make it Canadian. And as for the claim that it's UK produced where has that come from? The only UK connection to the show other than a couple of actors is Sky One provides some of the funds, but they have nothing to do with the production. See also Talk:Battlestar_Galactica_(2004_TV_series)/Archive_3#Country_of_origin:_United_Kingdom.3F. Ben W Bell talk 08:45, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
All: according to an article from the BBC News service, Sky One provided the necessary funding for the series launch in exchange for first airing rights of season 1, which aired in the UK in October 2004. The US would not see season 1 on the Sci Fi Channel until January 2005. Sky One did not provide any production work and therefore is not a producer of the show. Sky One's involvement with Battlestar production was limited to season 1 only, had no involvement with the miniseries except for its airing, and did not provide any other funding for the series after season 1. UK airings (by Sky One through licensing with NBC Universal) now occur after the US airings. Sky One receives some credit for its financial support for the series pre-production. Here is another link to Sky One on the Battlestar Wiki, where I am a bureaucrat. While Battlestar Wiki is not a news source itself, the wiki uses only credible news sources to aid in its articles, as does Wikipedia. -- Spencerian 16:31, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
The lead section appears to be a tad bit long per WP:LEAD, and I think some of the sections could use a bit of restructuring. I'll give it a shot, let me know what you think... Dreadlocke ☥ 23:59, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Executive producer Ronald D. Moore points out that the Cylons and Al Qaeda are not necessarily intended to be directly allegorical : Al Qaeda is not intended to be directly allegorical ?? meaning ? -- Anne97432 ( talk) 16:35, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
The current section References to modern society contains not just very general info, but spoilers for those that haven't watched Season 3. Part of the discussion around spoilers and deleting the {{ spoiler}} template involved appropriate headers being used on sections that contain spoilers (so I added that to the guideline but don't know if it'll stick). I don't want to edit or rearrange it as I'm only up to season 2 myself. -- Chriswaterguy talk 02:21, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Fer Gads sake people, put in some spoiler tags! The article outright tells you that Starbuck is a cylon, and after I read that Valeri was one I didn't want to read any further. Sure, I knew Boomer was but having not seen past the 2nd series I didn't want to read any further in case. You guys might know it all but not everyone does! 82.29.235.234 ( talk) 21:11, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
I didn't know if it was worth entering that they had an auction in January of many key set pieces & costumes. I thought it would be interesting to list how much everything had sold for total, as well as how much some of the more iconic pieces (Head Six's red dress & the crew's dress blues went for the most) made. I saved the results on my computer so I could compile this data if someone thinks it would be worth entering in. Not many shows have a public auction (let alone a public charity auction) like this I'm guessing that it's worth at least a few lines somewhere in the article. Most times the sets are either stored away for years, worked into other shows the company is making, or quietly sold to private collectors. I personally think that it's something to note, but my biggest question is where we would work it into the article. Tokyogirl79 ( talk) 06:06, 4 February 2009 (UTC)Tokyogirl79
I propose that each of the incarnations of Galactica have its own article, one for the 1970's version encompassing all of that show's cannon plus Galactica 1980 (which some see as non-cannonical) and one for Galactica 2003 (or re-imangined or whatever title is decided on) which encompasses the mini-series, the re-imagined series, Razor and possibly Caprica (That will be subject to debate) along with the section under Destruction of the Tweleve Colonies that pertains to each version. Hx823 ( talk) 23:21, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
it seems that 'the third planet of nine in a system on the northern rim of the milky-way' is to forgotten in this timeline. I frankly cannot believe that this society is having such a hard time finding earth. It would ahve to be set in like, 18897 ad or something closer for Earth to really be forgotten. i know i havn't seen the whole series, but i can't imagine with internet and archiving all history that somthing as precious as our planet's location.
my main question - when is this version of the show set? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.93.212.79 ( talk) 23:56, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
The image Image:Battlestar Galactica intro.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- 08:19, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
The beginning of the Production section needs to be corrected. As a search for online articles(examples: 1, 2, 3) will show Zoic is only one of several VFX shops that worked on the effects for the show and while they were instrumental to the miniseries their share of the effects declined during the run on the show just as with the other studios (Atmosphere, Enigma Animation Productions Inc.) moving the main load of the effects to the show´s in-house effects team coordinated by Gary Hutzel. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lennier1 ( talk • contribs) 23:47, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
I disagree that this is merely miscellaneous information. It's fundamental information about the franchise, laying out all the various projects and their order and so needs to be placed early in the article. Perhaps some of the extra information can be cut out though. Pabsiletr ( talk) 04:28, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
This is not the proper name for naming convention. If this is a TV series, then it should be labeled "TV series", or more specifically "2004 TV series". I will attempt the move. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 14:14, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was merge
I was looking around at TV articles and I came across this one and Battlestar Galactica (2004 TV series), and realized they were two pages on the same topic. What I see on this page is a page that talks about the miniseries and also talks about the 2004 series. Whatever is said about the miniseries should be on the miniseries, and whatever is said about the 2004 series should be on the page. We should not be rehashing the same information (or splitting it off under the same title) on two different pages. The 2004 page needs major cleaning (it tends to go into unnecessary detail about each season and spin-off when they all have their own pages). This page is highly unsourced to begin with, regardless of the fact that any relevant production history of the 2004 series should be presented on that page. There is reptition of reception and awards. A massive cleaning house needs to be done, but there is no reason that there should be two pages talking about the same subject. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 16:22, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
![]() | Contents of Talk:Battlestar Galactica (reimagining)/Archive 1 were merged into this archive on 6 December 2022. The /Archive 1 now contains even older archived content. |
Should there be some discussion about some of the backlash from fans of the original? While I think the new Galactica is one of the best shows on TV there was a LOT of backlash from fans of the original who just could not adjust to the new version.
How do we know it's a distant galaxy? In fact, isn't it supposed to be the same galaxy that Earth is in? Evercat 20:37, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
It would have to be the same galaxy. The planetarium in Athena's Tomb showed a nebula that the Galactica could also see, indicating they were in the same galaxy. — Phil Welch 05:19, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
In the last episode of season three we definitely see it's in the same galaxy, not too far away even.--
80.146.21.189
21:39, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
The intro contains the line: "in the tradition of Star Trek, the writers use science fiction to examine contemporary social, moral and ethical issues in allegory."
It'd probably be more accurate to say: "in the tradition of science fiction, the writers use science fiction to examine contemporary social, moral and ethical issues in allegory." It's not like this is original or unique to Star Trek.
http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/tv/la-et-galactica12feb12,1,7910575.story?coll=la-headlines-entnews&ctrack=1&cset=true Please look into this http://slashdot.org/firehose.pl?op=view&id=91282 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.96.0.185 ( talk • contribs)
Many articles have been written that touch on who the battlestar galactica audience is and how the show impacts them. We could totally write down a few things from those and then build a "Audience" subsection. Lotusduck 00:45, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Producers Make It Official: 'Battlestar Galactica' Is Done [1]-- 88wolfmaster 01:21, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I'm no Battlestar expert, but it seems to me that it would be really nice to have a section of the choice of character names in the series. Names such as Hadrian (the security officer who begins a kind of witch hunt) and Socinus clearly were not chosen by accident, and it would be a notable addition to the article to add some links to the origins of these names.. .I'm just not sure how best to go about it! -- Tomhannen 09:46, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
And the country has come up yet again with people adding Canada and UK to the country in the infobox. Why? It's a US production made by a US studio and production company. It's shot in Canada yes, but that doesn't make it Canadian. And as for the claim that it's UK produced where has that come from? The only UK connection to the show other than a couple of actors is Sky One provides some of the funds, but they have nothing to do with the production. See also Talk:Battlestar_Galactica_(2004_TV_series)/Archive_3#Country_of_origin:_United_Kingdom.3F. Ben W Bell talk 08:45, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
All: according to an article from the BBC News service, Sky One provided the necessary funding for the series launch in exchange for first airing rights of season 1, which aired in the UK in October 2004. The US would not see season 1 on the Sci Fi Channel until January 2005. Sky One did not provide any production work and therefore is not a producer of the show. Sky One's involvement with Battlestar production was limited to season 1 only, had no involvement with the miniseries except for its airing, and did not provide any other funding for the series after season 1. UK airings (by Sky One through licensing with NBC Universal) now occur after the US airings. Sky One receives some credit for its financial support for the series pre-production. Here is another link to Sky One on the Battlestar Wiki, where I am a bureaucrat. While Battlestar Wiki is not a news source itself, the wiki uses only credible news sources to aid in its articles, as does Wikipedia. -- Spencerian 16:31, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
The lead section appears to be a tad bit long per WP:LEAD, and I think some of the sections could use a bit of restructuring. I'll give it a shot, let me know what you think... Dreadlocke ☥ 23:59, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Executive producer Ronald D. Moore points out that the Cylons and Al Qaeda are not necessarily intended to be directly allegorical : Al Qaeda is not intended to be directly allegorical ?? meaning ? -- Anne97432 ( talk) 16:35, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
The current section References to modern society contains not just very general info, but spoilers for those that haven't watched Season 3. Part of the discussion around spoilers and deleting the {{ spoiler}} template involved appropriate headers being used on sections that contain spoilers (so I added that to the guideline but don't know if it'll stick). I don't want to edit or rearrange it as I'm only up to season 2 myself. -- Chriswaterguy talk 02:21, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Fer Gads sake people, put in some spoiler tags! The article outright tells you that Starbuck is a cylon, and after I read that Valeri was one I didn't want to read any further. Sure, I knew Boomer was but having not seen past the 2nd series I didn't want to read any further in case. You guys might know it all but not everyone does! 82.29.235.234 ( talk) 21:11, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
I didn't know if it was worth entering that they had an auction in January of many key set pieces & costumes. I thought it would be interesting to list how much everything had sold for total, as well as how much some of the more iconic pieces (Head Six's red dress & the crew's dress blues went for the most) made. I saved the results on my computer so I could compile this data if someone thinks it would be worth entering in. Not many shows have a public auction (let alone a public charity auction) like this I'm guessing that it's worth at least a few lines somewhere in the article. Most times the sets are either stored away for years, worked into other shows the company is making, or quietly sold to private collectors. I personally think that it's something to note, but my biggest question is where we would work it into the article. Tokyogirl79 ( talk) 06:06, 4 February 2009 (UTC)Tokyogirl79
I propose that each of the incarnations of Galactica have its own article, one for the 1970's version encompassing all of that show's cannon plus Galactica 1980 (which some see as non-cannonical) and one for Galactica 2003 (or re-imangined or whatever title is decided on) which encompasses the mini-series, the re-imagined series, Razor and possibly Caprica (That will be subject to debate) along with the section under Destruction of the Tweleve Colonies that pertains to each version. Hx823 ( talk) 23:21, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
it seems that 'the third planet of nine in a system on the northern rim of the milky-way' is to forgotten in this timeline. I frankly cannot believe that this society is having such a hard time finding earth. It would ahve to be set in like, 18897 ad or something closer for Earth to really be forgotten. i know i havn't seen the whole series, but i can't imagine with internet and archiving all history that somthing as precious as our planet's location.
my main question - when is this version of the show set? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.93.212.79 ( talk) 23:56, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
The image Image:Battlestar Galactica intro.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- 08:19, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
The beginning of the Production section needs to be corrected. As a search for online articles(examples: 1, 2, 3) will show Zoic is only one of several VFX shops that worked on the effects for the show and while they were instrumental to the miniseries their share of the effects declined during the run on the show just as with the other studios (Atmosphere, Enigma Animation Productions Inc.) moving the main load of the effects to the show´s in-house effects team coordinated by Gary Hutzel. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lennier1 ( talk • contribs) 23:47, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
I disagree that this is merely miscellaneous information. It's fundamental information about the franchise, laying out all the various projects and their order and so needs to be placed early in the article. Perhaps some of the extra information can be cut out though. Pabsiletr ( talk) 04:28, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
This is not the proper name for naming convention. If this is a TV series, then it should be labeled "TV series", or more specifically "2004 TV series". I will attempt the move. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 14:14, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was merge
I was looking around at TV articles and I came across this one and Battlestar Galactica (2004 TV series), and realized they were two pages on the same topic. What I see on this page is a page that talks about the miniseries and also talks about the 2004 series. Whatever is said about the miniseries should be on the miniseries, and whatever is said about the 2004 series should be on the page. We should not be rehashing the same information (or splitting it off under the same title) on two different pages. The 2004 page needs major cleaning (it tends to go into unnecessary detail about each season and spin-off when they all have their own pages). This page is highly unsourced to begin with, regardless of the fact that any relevant production history of the 2004 series should be presented on that page. There is reptition of reception and awards. A massive cleaning house needs to be done, but there is no reason that there should be two pages talking about the same subject. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 16:22, 9 April 2009 (UTC)