Talk:Ancient technology in Stargate
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Stargate, a collaborative effort to improve all Wikipedia articles relating to the Stargate franchise. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. | ||
|
Assessment comments
|
|||
[edit] Repository of the Ancients
It does NOT require the user to have the ATA gene. Template:Sgspoiler Daniel uses it in "The Quest, pt. 2" and he does not have the ATA gene.
Faris b 18:38, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
However he is previously ascended, this may be why he can use it?
[edit] Adria's pendant
Adria's pendant was mentioned in the Personal shield section of this article. I don't think it ought to be. It's not Ancient technology - it's Ori technology. And unless there are plans to merge the whole article on Ori technology into this article, I think it should stay in the Ori section.
Anyway, for this reason, I've deleted the reference.TerraFrost 23:48, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
I agree, it's just some anonymous user changing this if I'm not mistaken, it has happened before, just revert it, no, the Ori technology page should not be merged to the Ancient tech article.
Faris b 01:23, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
there are however paragraphs about the Ori version of some Ancient technologies on their respective articles (e.g. Ring transporter and Ancient Control Chair) Maartentje 21:00, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
Well, mention of them is ok but not adding it to the List of Ancient Technology. Plus, Adria's shield is very different from the Ancient personal shield, for one the Ancient version encompasses just the area of your body exactly the same as if you weren't wearing it and it is green in color, Adria's appears to be blue-ish white and is a bubble like most shields seem to be. Also, they have different physcial appearances, the Ancient shield sticks to your body whereas Adria's shield is a pendant.
Faris b 19:23, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
Very different? A few cosmetic alterations and another shape for the shield? I would in fact call them very similar... Maartentje 22:50, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
Are you kidding? They're different. I mean, if even one thing was shared between them, I'd call them simmilar, for example, the shield shape, also how does she interact with anything/anyone with a bubble around her?
That would be like calling 2 different makes of cars the same one just because they're cars. Faris b 04:57, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Because two cars are cars is usually enough to call them similar, as long as they have four wheels and an engine, they're cars. They're not the same cars, no, but I'm not saying Adria's pendant and the Ancient device are the same, they're just similar.
The difference between the two devices is comparable to the differences between the shields on an Aurora class battlecruiser and the one on Atlantis. The Aurora shields are contoured around the hull, while the shield on Atlantis is a bubble. The Aurora shield is yellow, the Atlantis shield is green. Yet the two types of shield are listed together on this very page... An Ancient and Ori Control Chair are also similar, although the Ori version requires a Prior instead of a human with the ATA Gene and is a different shape. Maartentje 11:18, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
I know that the Aurora class ship shields are contoured around the hull as well, this seems to be a design exclusive to the Ancients as all other races including the Asgard use a bubble type shield. It's just a design difference it may even save power because it doesn't protect an empty area but the fact that they're both listed on this page is because they're both ANCIENT technology, you are talking about Ori technology being listd with Ancient technology, sure they're simmilar but made by 2 races that spil millenia ago.
Faris b 20:55, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
I know the two technologies weren't created by the same race... I finally made you admit that the two were similar and now you start pointing that out :D However, I do think that it should be mentioned on the page that the Ori use a similar device. Something like "A similar device is worn by the Orici" or something like that. After all, the small paragraph about the Personal Shield is in fact the "main article" for the device, and just like Ring Transporter mentions the Ori version, so should the paragraph about the Personal shield. Maartentje 02:27, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Whatever, but I guess that wouldn't be so bad but I was in fact referring to the fact that someone added it to the list, I guess a small line or two would be ok.
Faris b 06:19, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
I know what you were referring to, but I was mostly trying to prove that the two technologies are similar, that's all... Maartentje 13:59, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Sodan cloak
I believe it IS Ancient technology, remember in "Babylon" it was stated that they learned to build them through "The writings of our Gods"? I think it should be listed on here. Unless you're going by who built them in which case it wouldn't count but the information to build them was Ancient knowledge.
Faris b 22:55, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Oh yes, you're right. Sam called it ancient technology. However, I still think the paragraph should have been expanded a little more... (ten minutes later: so I did...) Maartentje 23:06, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Not Sure
This may sound insignificant, but is it spelled "Keron" or "Kiron". I just remember watching the closed captioning when watching the show when it was first mentioned. It was spelled "Kiron".
[edit] Sangraal or Holy Grail
Should we rename the info on the Holy Grail the Sangraal. I know that Sangraal means "Holy Grail", but Sangraal is what the Tau'ri call it. -- SFH 05:17, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
- It hasn't been called "holy grail" since Camelot, so maybe it should be renamed. Or better yet, it should get its own article... Maartentje 18:58, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
- I concur and so it has been done. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 19:16, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Asuran technology page?
Should we have an Asuran technology in Stargate page? As in it's own page, not a redirect. It seems so far that they have their own handheld weapons and that satellite thing/beam weapon in First Strike. Also, the Asuran megacity which outsizes Atlantis big time.
Vala M 04:56, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Ancient Communication Device
Since it was used by the Ancients and the Ori to communicate with each other, should it get a mention or comparable listing in Ori technology? Much of their technology is the same, and in this case it is exactly the same, it belongs to both of them.
09:52, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] DNA Resequencer
Neither O'Neill nor Jackson did ever come in contact with such a device and still they developed either telekinesis or healing power! It's simply a weapon and nothing more. Neither did the humanoid experiment of Anumbis, yet he still developed telekinesis.
Em27 23:14, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Gate Overloader
It's wrong to assume that this weapon was built by the Ancients. It was built by Anubis using the knowledge he retained from his ascension. Em27 23:27, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Technological superiority
I believe it is worth mentioning here too that it is more than likely that the Asgard have advanced far enough in their technology to also be considered equal (or superior in some fields) technologically to both the Ancients and the Ori.
[edit] Quote from Sesame street?
I'm german so I might be wrong ... when they first found this "Communication Device" thing (the one with the blue crystal on top), someone said "One of these things is not like the others" - sounded somehow like a sesame street quote. -- 194.8.205.2 20:08, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Merger of Ancient Technology Activation gene
Ancient Technology Activation gene does not establish notability as outlined in Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) (WP:FICT), and I very much doubt that notability exists (I am refering to real-world notability here, not in-universe notability). My bold merge with almost no lost content was reverted (my reply to the reverter, which is so far unanswered), so I guess a merge discussion is necessary. Note that I very firmly believe that a deletion discussion for this article would end in a merge (best case) or delete (worst case). Opinions about the merger? (Please read Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) if you haven't already, because that's the guideline which decides what fiction-related topic gets an article and what doesn't. Note that its spirit is not currently disputed, just the way it is applied in deletion debates). – sgeureka t•c 02:35, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Too many non-free images
There are currently discussions in favor of an image-reduction drive on lists per Wikipedia:Non-free content. However, there is disagreement how far this applies to fiction list-articles. Nevertheless, since wikipedia strives to be a free-content encyclopedia, it would be a good idea to reconsider how many elements on this page really need images. A preferred rule of thumb is to have no more than five such images, and to not have images for where subarticles use the same images. If someone wants to help out, even if it is just in little steps, please do so. – sgeureka t•c 17:45, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
- I removed several images and untagged this article, although I guess it is possible to remove even more images without losing much encyclopedicness. – sgeureka t•c 08:49, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Sangraal Information
I deleted a sentence from the Sangraal paragraph. It made reference to "It may be possible that this is because of Einsteins . .. . yadda yadda yadda." While the information may have been in theory correct, we are speaking on Wiki, and Wiki isnt the place for Speculation. If you found an episode of Stargate that said "Einstein's formulae for Nuclear Fusion, is the reason for why the Sangraal can destroy Ascended beings" then you could add it. Plus, not forgetting the fact that Ascended beings are
- 1. Out of the scope of Einstein. He never met any that I know of, maybe he Ascended?
- 2. They have no mass to speak of, other than what they choose to manifest, so Nuclear Fusion Laws would not apply, since it requires mass to function.
If you wish to add this sentence back in, please cite a source showing how it is relevant. EG - News Clipping "Ascended beings fear Nuclear War". Baaleos (talk) 19:55, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Merger of Drone Weapon
Per wiki definition, I believe Drone Weapon to be an article on a non-notable fictional item that shouldn't have it's own article; there isn't really anything to say about its design, development, reception and cultural impact to enhance the article's quality. I therefore propose to merge it here. – sgeureka t•c 11:26, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Merger of Aurora class battleship, Ancient City Ship and Puddle jumper
Similar to how Asgard starships in Stargate, Goa'uld starships in Stargate and Tau'ri starships in Stargate work, I propose to merge the three articles on Ancient starships into one to better meet WP:Notability (fiction). The Aurora class battleship and the Ancient City ship (minus Atlantis (Stargate) are pretty non-notable by wiki-definition I guess, but I think (especially with the help of the Puddle Jumper as a set/prop) the group can make a decent claim of wikipedia-notability for the time being. – sgeureka t•c 11:59, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
- Go for it, the Tau'ri starships article turned out better than I expected. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 19:58, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
Is anyone actually happier with all of these merges? I don't think so. Everyone hates them. It makes it harder to find anything and it discourages people from looking in huge pages. Just like the episode lists that got merged. I'm not here to argue with the "new" rules as they are unfair and nobody will listen but this is just way past too much.
I don't use Stargate Wiki as it's extremely unreliable. At least here if someone adds false speculations, it's reverted but on Stargate Wiki, anything goes.
Vala M (talk) 13:02, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
- That I supported it above indicates that someone is happier with it. These things simply are not notable enough to stand alone as articles. Since the previous article names remain the same, your argument that it makes it harder to find topics is simply incorrect. Merging these individual articles into supertopics will, in my opinion, actually make it easier, since everything will be at one location. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 00:39, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- I'm fine with the changes, Did I like them split...yes, but I'm fine with the merged. I'm also fine with merging these..except for Atlantis Terryrayc (talk) 14:26, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
