Talk:Space Jockey (Alien)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||||||||||||||
Contents |
[edit] Page history
In the early days this article used to exist along with Space Jockey (short story) at Space Jockey. So both of these articles share their early page history. That history is located at Talk:Space Jockey (alien species)/Early page history.--Commander Keane 12:59, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Contradictions with Derelict
It should be noted that the article contradicts the information contained within the article on the Derelict. In the latter, the argument is rather convincingly made, along with corresponding references to pre-production storyboarding that the eggs on LV-426 are contained within a cave, seperate from the Space Jockey ship. Much of this article, and the inferences it makes, are premissed on the notion that the eggs are contained within a cargo bay onboard the ship. Obviously this makes a difference as to whether the SJ visited the planet with the eggs on board or whether it fell victim to the Xenomorphs after the crash. Alternatively the Alien that hatched from the pilot could have ultimately been the one to colonise the cave, but in any event it's bad form for an encyclopedia to argue for two mutually exclusive positions.
[edit] "Space Jockeys once ruled the universe"
I removed the statement that Space Jockeys once ruled the universe. Initially my intent was just to move it in order to clarify that sentence (the sentence was somewhat ambiguous about whether the Space Jockeys or the Xenomorphs were supposed to have once ruled the universe) but I decided to leave it out for the time being until someone can come forward with a reference to support it. I'm relatively certain it's not in the Aliens canon, so if that idea comes from a comic or video game (or simply fan speculation) it should be noted as such. Kafziel 19:32, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
Never mind. This article has passed beyond ridiculous, and it's just not important enough to me to waste my time fighting with all of these anonymous editors and asking for sources for all this nonsense. The grammar is terrible, the references are nonexistent... I give up. Kafziel 19:49, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- Yeah, there's a lot of unreferenced stuff in here, and things being written as if Space Jockeys were "real". I'll take a crack at it too. Bryan 19:38, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Timeline section unnecessary
Do we really need the "timeline" section? I don't really see how three dates constitutes a timeline, and two out of the three listed aren't even canonical. The last one doesn't even make sense in the context of the article. (Diplomacy? Why was there an attempt at diplomacy? Since when are they at odds with humanity? What happened because the diplomacy failed?) I'm removing the timeline section because it sucks. If anyone is furious about it, feel free to revert me. If you do, though, please try to improve it. Kafziel 05:43, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] canonicity of Original Sin
The new novel Aliens Original Sin has as many continuity errors as any novel that came before it and cannot be considered canon. The prologue establishes that the Betty has landed on a beach in New Zealand which contradicts the ending of Alien Resurrection Special Edition, which shows the Betty landing near the ruins of Paris. At one point in the novel Ripley says she can quote Ash's description of the alien word for word but the quote she gives is from an old version of the Alien script and isn't what he said in the actual movie. The novel picks up several years after Alien Resurrection with Riplay, Call, Johner, Vriess and several new crewmembers are on some kind of crusade to fight aliens throughout the galaxy and fight some big conspiracy. No motivation is given for why these characters would willingly risk their lives and there's no way that a bunch of pirates who don't care about anyone would risk their lives to fight aliens and rescue colonists like the Colonial Marines did. Simoni is shocked when Ripley tells him that the Nostromo crew encountered evidence of intelligent alien life (the Space Jockey). This is contradicted by the novel Predator Forever Midnight which establishes that intelligent aliens were known about centuries earlier.
[edit] Space Jockey's race creating Xenomorphs
The director's commentary for Alien doesn't say that the Space Jockey's race created Xenomorphs. All it says is that they used them as bio-weapons. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 218.215.130.98 (talk) 04:00, 9 April 2007 (UTC).
[edit] Canonicity
As a general rule, if a film is the main medium of a franchise, what is shown onscreen takes priority. Any materials related to the films (such as production notes, interviews with the writers and directors. After all, they were responsible for putting the film together. If anybody knows more about the films, it's these guys.) really should be considered more legitimate than other materials not related (such as comic books, and other sources that were written by people who had no connection to the films).
Die-hard fans who try to preserve the "feel of the films" in their websites to lend accuracy to timelines, encyclopedias, etc., tend to stick to the films, DVD documentaries, deleted scenes, magazine interviews with the directors and other production people, novelizations (normally a taboo source, but Alan Dean Foster stays pretty faithful to the scripts), script drafts, and other materials that have a direct link to the films.
What is generally rejected by such fans are comic books (and the Dark Horse novels based on them), video games and other sources that tend to contradict the films to a greater extent. Some of these things contradict each other as well! Please read the following page at the bottom for examples:
http://time.absoluteavp.com/eutime.html
[edit] Space Jockeys
The term "Space Jockeys" comes from fan fiction. The production team only used the terms "Space Jockey" and "Pilot" which were always singular. I have removed every instance of the word Jockeys from the article and replaced it with Jockey's race. Also, Ridley Scott said that the Space Jockey's race used the Aliens as bio-weapons but he never said they were created by them. In fact it was never said in any novel or comic or game that the Aliens were created by the Space Jockey's race. It's just a fan theory based on the fact that they were both designed by Giger. If you think I am mistaken in any of this then prove me wrong. 218.215.149.63 (talk) 01:22, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:The Derelict.PNG
Image:The Derelict.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 06:27, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Merge into Alien (film)
I'm not the guy who suggested the articles be merged, I just thought it odd that there was no discussion here. I personally think that an alien race that seems to exist in canon entirely as one nameless corpse isn't notable enough for its own article. Master Deusoma (talk) 02:35, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
