User talk:Dogger

Excellent to see you finally turning your talents towards the BattlestarWiki, largest source of BSG info on the net. Stay close to me, and we might just get through this with our lives. --Ricimer 03:38, 6 February 2006 (EST) (a.k.a. The_Merovingian)

Welcome

A welcome to the most prominent scifi.com'er (outside of Merv) that I've seen over here. --Steelviper 07:52, 12 March 2006 (CST)

Er ... thanks! Is this how I reply? I'm pretty new at this wiki thing, I wandered over for support information about the numbers of remaining pilots to use in arguments, didn't agree with the information, and fixed it. The meat of the fixes stands so I assume everyone was ok with them. Of course, it became pointless to try to track them after the Pegasus arrived, but now with all the changes for Season 3 -- who knows? A List of Pilots Part 2 might be in order.--Dogger 22:02, 14 March 2006 (CST)

Yep. That's all there is to it. The "chat" interface is identical to the article editing. That's a reason why the wikis are better suited to the article creation/editing than for discussion (but then, that's what message boards are for). Usually people indent one level more than the previous speaker, using colons before their paragraph to achieve this effect. (I went ahead and put a colon in front of your paragraph, and then two in front of mine.) --Steelviper 08:06, 15 March 2006 (CST)

Proposal for a Logic & Continuity Page

I have just read Peter's note that he wants to strike the analysis of the numbers of pilots available in earlier episodes, and I disagree with that. And that started me thinking -- I have always thought it was a little bit odd to have the analysis of the numbers of pilots and vipers on the 'List of Pilots' page. To me they serve two entirely different functions: that of 'databasing' or cataloguing show elements, and that of tracking the show's continuity and logic. I realise the former function is the main purpose of a wiki, but my primary interest lies in the latter.

The reimagined Galactica is written in such a way that it is up to the fans to use their heads to fill in the gaps (especially when it comes to the equipment or technology available) between episodes and plot events. This opens up this show more than any other science fiction TV show to a lot of criticism from people unwilling or unable to fill in those gaps, and I think a wiki page devoted to listing the possible speculations that have been advanced to answer many of the common fan continuity questions would be very valuable. It wouldn't have to be slanted, the top two or three theories could be listed for each so-called plothole. Where there is no theory reasonable enough to actually fill in the missing details then it would be called 'probably a plothole' in the same way that the pilot analysis deals with the effects shots in Flight of the Phoenix.

It wouldn't be a 'fanboy excuses' page, but it would be explicitly based (in a short mission statement at the top) on the idea that due to Ron Moore's 'no technobabble' style, it is up to the fans, not the show's writers, to use our heads to understand the world of BSG. Because the fact is, people like to think the BSG world is self-consistent, and if they don't have the knowledge or the time to think these things through for themselves, it's a valuable service to have a non-combative environment where these gaps are filled for them and maybe they can relax and turn off their plothole radar a bit and enjoy the show more.

I have been thinking for some time about this since I spend a lot of my time on the Skiffy boards repeating the same explanations for missing technical information over and over again, and I have been considering setting up my own 'Logic & Continuity' page. I don't really know if this is covered already in some assembly of your other pages, but if you folks here at the wiki are interested in this I would be willing to shepherd the 'Logic & Continuity' page and fill in most of the information.

I have never done wiki before so I don't really know what the community rules are -- I don't even know if I am posting this proposal in the right place. But I am easygoing, open to other ideas, and I work well collaboratively. If you agree I will probably list the open logic & continuity questions on the page first, and then start filling in some answers from my own old posts on Skiffy. I would do it slowly, I couldn't fill in the page all in a rush or anything.

Also the numerical pilot analysis could be moved to be the first item on the Logic & Continuity page, leaving the List of Pilots a cleaner presentation (although I think it would be wise to leave behind a link to the Logic & Continuity page because there are a lot of posts of mine on Skiffy that refer people to 'List of Pilots' to resolve numerical questions).

Sorry for the overlong explanation of my idea -- but what say you all?

DB.--Dogger 06:15, 16 March 2006 (CST)

Cool idea. I like it. While such explanations and reasoning probably exist around here, they are likely dispersed throughout the wiki. It'd be nice to see them aggregated as sort of an anti-"continuity errors" page. As for the right place to post THIS... well, I'm not quite sure myself. Your user page probably won't get the traffic that the proposal deserves, so you may want to consider moving this to either the Quorum or the Admin noticeboard, though I'd lean towards the Quorum as you seem to be addressing the community at large (not the mop-boys). My only other thought on the matter is (barring some sort of unforeseen outry) to go for it! Generally the worst thing that can happen is that a page gets deleted outright, but it is far more common for the content to find a new home (or confirm that the content already exists elsewhere) before deleting it. If you need any help starting up the page (in terms of the wiki-stuff), feel free to drop me a note on my talk page, or on the Admin noticeboard. (Also, let me know if you need a hand moving this discussion to one of the above places, if you're interested in hearing some more opinions.) --Steelviper 07:13, 16 March 2006 (CST)

Thanks for the advice Steelviper on where to post this. It appears I am going to have to put this idea on hold because of personal time management issues, which is also pushing my participation in the message boards to the wayside. I'm not sure if it's the right project for a wiki, anyway. It may be better accomplished as just a personal website, since it will be mostly full of speculation. But in any case, appropriate or not, I won't be the one to pursue it for quite a while. Thanks for the encouragement, and I'd like to leave this information here as I remind for if I ever pick up this project again.--Dogger 04:58, 25 March 2006 (CST)