Talk:Goa'uld

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Stargate, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Stargate on Wikipedia.
stargate-sg-1-atlantis - edit talk + - project - talk + - join 


One possible way to reconcile the inconsistency between Ra in the movie and the Goa'uld in the series is in the translation of the name Goa'uld - "Children of the Gods". The Goa'uld could have been created by Ra or his people, as a means of carrying on their culture, even though they were dying as a species.

BTW, please excuse my ignorance if I have started this Talk Page incorrectly - I'm a bit new here :) Riggermantis 17:40, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You did fine. :) It's an interesting theory, but I don't think it'd fit in on the article itself unless some notable figure in the Stargate community (people working on the series for example) were to discuss it in some verifiable manner. Wikipedia's got a policy called Wikipedia:No original research that frowns upon us coming up with new things ourselves. Also, this theory raises some questions about the fossil Goa'uld that were discovered on P3X-888, which I recall were described as being a little more primitive than "modern" Goa'uld. If the Goa'uld evolved naturally in the wild then what was Ra's involvement? Bryan 23:13, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Yeah, I kinda forgot about the "no original research" thing, lol. And it's been a while since I saw the episode dealing with P3X-888. Riggermantis 05:18, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I always assumed the name was invented as a putative root for "ghoul". And that the "children" in the pilot are the barely-mature Goa'uld being implanted in Skaara, et al.
—wwoods 01:06, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Hmm. But then, it also sounds like god and gold. LD 21:25, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Goa'uld Language should have its own page as it is much too large for this article. --Zippanova 20:29, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] POV?

By the way, isn't "Most Goa'uld are evil, egocentric megalomaniacs who pose as Lords or Gods to control armies." blatantly POV? After all, one man's 'evil, egocentric megalomaniacal blasphemous parasite' is another man's 'freedom-fighter'. —wwoods 01:21, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Speaking as one who campaigned against the phrase "the evil Decepticons", I have to agree. I'll edit it to specify which people consider them "evil" - those who worship them presumably don't, for the most part. Bryan 03:56, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] De-wiki the table

Would anyone mind if I de-wiki the table on this page. Currently it is a mess.

Lady Aleena | Talk 05:11, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

de wiki? -- Alfakim --  talk  06:25, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
I think she means either turning it into HTML (so some sort of HTML-tidy program could be run on it maybe?) or turning it into a plain old list. Not sure how well either of those would work, might be better to just fix the current code. Bryan 06:43, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I was thinking of making the table all HTML instead of wikicode. HTML is a lot easier to format. One can control things better with HTML than with wikicode, in my opinion.
Well, I've literally spent years converting HTML tables into wikicode throughout Wikipedia, so I think it's safe to say that I'd disagree with this. :) Bryan 08:05, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Considering it takes up half the article currently, I'm going to split it off into List of Goa'uld. That'll make it easier to fiddle around with without breaking anything important. Bryan 06:43, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Parasitism vs. Symbiosis

Sometimes the distinction between parastism and symbiosis is blurry. The Goa'uld do provide some very significant symbiotic benefits - long life and health for example. The "only" parasitic aspect is that they enslave you - of course, it's a big "only". If they took over creatures that were not intelligent, we might not consider it so parasitic. Some human servants of the Goa'uld, particularly servants of system lords, have shown eagerness to become hosts, despite presumably knowing what life would be like for them. Presumably, the semi-vicarious lifestyle holds appeal.--RLent 18:24, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Contradictions

In the first paragraph it states " "Goa'uld" means "God" in the Goa'uld language."
And then later it states "In fact, the term Goa'uld means "Children of the Gods"."
Surely they can't both be right?
Now in the following section first it states as fact that the Goa'uld took the names of Earth Gods, and then it later says that there is a debate about this, (which of course there is). You can't state one theory is true and then say the alternative theory is just as likely, it needs to be reworded.
"Most Goa'uld like to take the name of a classical god from Earth, especially those of ancient Egypt, but not the Norse or Aztec gods (whose identities were assumed by other alien races), nor has any known Goa'uld ever used a name from the Judeo-Christian or Muslim faiths, though one (Sokar) pretended to be Satan to a group of medieval Christians. In fact, the term Goa'uld means "Children of the Gods". There is still debate as to whether the Goa'uld assumed the names of Egyptian gods already in existence or whether Egyptian mythology stems from the Goa'uld's one-time domination of (ancient) Earth."
--Hibernian 02:02, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Goa'uld means God. the other translation is incorrect. -- Alfakim --  talk  23:36, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
You sure? Got a source? Or is that just speculation, and perhaps we don't know what the name really means (I suspect the writers didn't have any intended meaning, just made something up that sounds "wicked", but that is also just speculation as well). 74.38.32.128 02:00, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] new image

Not sure it is a copy vio. Could someone check on it? Thanks :) Dlohcierekim 15:04, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

also poor quality--too dark

[edit] pic

someone changed the pic of the Symbiote to a pic of Tanith. well i dont mind if it isnt changed back, but this article DOES need a pic of the actual goa'uld species in its actual form. so the pic should be reinserted somewhere. -- Alfakim --  talk  23:38, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

It was changed by a new contributor. I'm not usre of his judgment. I think it's a copyvio, but I'm bnot sure. :) Dlohcierekim 00:29, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
'twasnt a copyvio, but it probably needed fair use tagging. i'd like to see that image back again, but i cant find its path anymore. -- Alfakim --  talk  16:17, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Goa'uld insignia

Anyone know of a website correlating Goa'uld to the insignia that their jaffa wear? For example, Teal'C's insignia (or "brand" or whatever) signifies that he was in the service of Apophis. What about the other insignia? TerraFrost 09:02, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes. See Talk:System Lord--Alfakim-- talk 14:29, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
Any reason those icons can't be added to their respective Stargate character templates? TerraFrost 08:36, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pronunciation of Goa'uld

I'll readily agree with anyone who says that the common pronunciations of "GOOLD", and "go-OOLD" is mispronouncing the word, but the pronunciation listed in IPA: [ˈgoʊ˘uːld] is not entirely accurate either. From the correct pronunciations that I have heard, the ' in fact stands for a glottal stop, which would make it consistent with Arabic transliterations. (How one would resolve this with the name "Teal'c", you got me, my best guess is that who ever was making up the names, wasn't a linguist.)

From what I hear, the most accurate pronunciation would be: [ˈgoɑ.ʔuːld]. --Puellanivis 22:35, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] How long do they live ?

I know in the series the lived for a very long time but do they eventually die from old age ? (Gnevin 17:51, 20 August 2006 (UTC))

We've never seen a Goa'uld die of anything that could be termed natural causes, always killed by a variety of means and enemies, so their actual age-limit is completely unknown. However, it is likely that there is a cap to their regenerative abilities, even with the support of the various healing devices they possess, because Yu was seen growing senile (for lack of a better word) towards the end of his life. Though never explicitly proven to be a result of the natural progression of his life, various characters within the show hypothesized that it might be because of his extreme age (He was the oldest living Goa'uld at the time). If there truly is an age limit, it's at least 10,000 years (Please note that this involves frequent check-ups with the aforementioned healing technologies). JBK405 02:43, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Glowing Eyes

Has it ever been explained why/how the host's eyes sometimes glow? --Dr Archeville 23:58, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

In or out of universe? JoshuaZ 00:00, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Either. (Other than "Because it's a cool-looking visual effect that the audience can 'ooh' and 'aah' over," of course.) No one's ever said (on the show, comics, novels, or RPGs) something along the lines of "the Naqahdah in Goa'uld's body combines with certain proteins in the sclera of the host's eye and adrenaline released during periods of agitation to create a photonic effect," correct? --Dr Archeville 04:55, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

The "why" is that the eyes glow whenever the Goa'uld are feeling extreme emotion, or want to display extreme emotion, though they can suppress the glow if they want to (Such as when they're posing as a non-Goa'uld). However, exactly how it happens has never been discussed (At least, I don't think it has). JBK405 02:23, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

I'd say that's more of a "when," but that's just me  ;-) --Dr Archeville 04:55, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Good point. The why, in that case, is that they want to appear superhuman and deific. JBK405 22:09, 5 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Argument of the physical strength of a Goa'uld Host

Through the entirety of the show, We have been told of the increased physical strength of a Goa'uld Host and many times, it has been explained as being something that is greater than the average Human. Well, how much greater? There has been occassions, where we have seen how strong they are, but in terms of superhuman strength and such, they do not appear to be in possession of such a level of strength. They have been seen, knocking over a full-grown human, but no further back than 5 feet at the most; been seen breaking through a pair of plastic binding cuffs; choking a doctor, before brutually breaking his neck( a la Major Kawalski), and occassionally lifting and throwing someone a small ways, away from them. the Ashrak, was show to be able to knock aggressors around like bean bags, and do enough damage with a knife, to make most foresnic experts cringe at the sight and details.


By definition, how is this superhuman strength? Granted, they are stronger than the average Human, due to the control the Goa'uld symbiote, has over the muscles and muscular contractions, and whatnot, giving the Host improved strength and whatnot. They seem to lead us on, trying to make us think, that because of the control of the Symbiote, that the Host is now faster, stronger and much more tougher than the average Human. I mean, come on; the Wraith, are much more stronger, faster, and tougher than the Goauld.


We've seen a Wraith leap upwards to impressive heights, and survive falls of the same distances; knock people around as if they were paper dolls; move so quick, that the dots representing them on a tracking screen, appeared in one spot for a second, before appearing on another part of the screen, a great distance away; seconds later, and we've seen them take a full clip of a P90 and then some, to the chest and torso, without crumpling over; only to recover seconds later, ready to rip you another hole.

So, seriously; is the physical strength of a Goa'uld,along with other supposed other greater physical improvements; that much above Humans, for it to be considered superhuman? I have yet to see a Goa'uld punch through a solid wall; move fast that the heroes have a hard time keeping track, and leap upwards and in any directions far beyond Human capability, and survive long falls, and land on their feet. if this has happened, i must of missed, because that would be something, that would convince me otherwise, of how much stronger a Goa'uld Host, is; in comparison to the average and not-so average Tau'ri.

celestialphoenixreborn

  • Uhh.....what does that have to do with this article? What you have posted is a whole mess of original research, none of which can be included in the article per Wikipedia policy. That post would be better suited for Gateworld Forums, as the talk page is not the place to discuss the show in that fashion. Gamer83 13:24, 30 November 2006 (UTC)


Well, then; why does this discussion section of the article, make mention of how long a Goa'uld can live in a host body? Shouldn't something like that be in the Gateworld Forums as well? plus, isn't a whole lot of what is posted on wikipedia, original research? I mean it would be both biased and foolish to assume that none of the material presented on here, is original research. Just making an observation. Besides, isn't that what the dicussion section of the wikipedia articles is for; to debate over the discrepancies and veracity of certain claims? celestialphoenixreborn

It has been stated in the show that the Goa'uld bestow increased physical strength to their hosts, therefore that is what is in the article. It is not up to you, me, or anyone else to analyize the show and attempt to enter original research into the article. Here is the policy stating just that for your reference Wikipedia:No original research. Also talkpages are not for chat to discuss original research, just because some people above misused this page deosn't mean it is ok for you to now do it as well, Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. Gamer83 18:58, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Regardless of the OR nature, the argument is for saying that Goa'uld do not have "superhuman" strength. "Super" comes from Latin for "above", and human, we already know. Do Goa'uld have superhuman strength? If they have strength anywhere above what the host originally had without the host, then it's superhuman strength. Just because there are stronger or more powerful aliens out there does not change the fact that Goa'uld are stronger than humans, and thus have superhuman strength. Any other definition of "superhuman strength" would require subjective attitudes to be introduced, and thus cannot be considered. If you want to add something to the article saying something along the lines of "Despite the Goa'uld giving superior strength, speed and survivability to the host, there are other aliens out there that are stronger." Well, that's just plainly appartent, and not really necessary to the article either. --Puellanivis 19:36, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree with everything you said Puellanivis. The only reason I didn't enter an argument like yours to begin with is because his argument is only supported by his own personal, subjeective, original reseaerch; and thus was invalid from the start. Gamer83 19:52, 30 November 2006 (UTC)


Its funny that you feel my argument is personal and subjective. I could devel into the whole deal about how any inquiry we as Humans do, is subjective, despite our stance towards objectivity; but that would be a waste. Besides, if wikipedia was so adamant, about not including anything that was considered to be original research; why make the format so accessible, that it allows for anybody and everybody, to edit and change the contain, given within any article avaialable to the site?


If original research is so inherently detrimental, why allow for anybody and everybody to have access to the site? If objectivity, true objectivity, is attainable, in any given field of research; then wikipedia should be made access to those, who can prove their claims to objectivity, and have them write all the articles, instead of having subjective individuals, like me; have any say in what is written within a given article. But, hey that's just me. Besides, there a thousands upon thousands of entries on wikipedia; that include personal research, I don't see anybody bothering them about their entries or their methods of inquiry, etc., etc.


In the end, I'm gonna drop this conversation, because I don't know how certain people are gonna react to what is said and whatnot, and I enjoy wikipedia too much, to be barred access to it, just because of how certain people(not pointing fingers; could be anyone)are gonna react to my statements, and act as if I'm trying to start fights on a website, which would be rather stupid, since threats over the internet, are pointless; like any act of aggression made over the interent.

celestialphoenixreborn

Dude, this isn't a philosophy class. Your entire argument makes no sense. You’re basically saying " I saw a bank robbery yesterday, therefore it must be ok for me to rob a bank as well". All of your superfluous Red Herrings are meaningless. Wikipedia has policies and we must all adhere to them, regardless of how you philosophically feel about them. Gamer83 21:12, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../g/o/a/Talk%7EGoa%27uld_2c0e.html"