Forum:Homo Reptilia: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
No edit summary |
m (Sorry for having to do this, but I'm being forced to change my sig, and clean up after it, by Wikia Staff) |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{ | {{archive|Panopticon archives}}[[category:failed proposals]] | ||
I was thinking we should merge [[Silurian]] and [[Sea Devil]] into Homo Reptilia. I'm A Hydroponic Tomato! [[User:Bigredrabbit|Bigredrabbit]] ('''[[User talk:Bigredrabbit|talk to me]]''') 12:59, July 5, 2010 (UTC) | |||
:I don't. Sea Devils and Silurians are different enough to justify different pages. We have separate pages for [[human]]s and [[Neanderthal]]s, and they have more in common. -<[[User:Azes13|Azes13]] 17:38, July 5, 2010 (UTC) | |||
:I don't. Sea Devils and Silurians are different enough to justify different pages. We have separate pages for [[ | |||
We should do that, or give the New Series Silurians their own page. They are clearly different to the classic Silurians. If we do merge, the name of the article should be Earth Reptile, the politically correct term from Love and War. I mean, we don't have a page called Homo Sapiens, we have a page called Human. | We should do that, or give the New Series Silurians their own page. They are clearly different to the classic Silurians. If we do merge, the name of the article should be Earth Reptile, the politically correct term from Love and War. I mean, we don't have a page called Homo Sapiens, we have a page called Human. | ||
| Line 16: | Line 14: | ||
Then if you call Silurians Homo Reptilia, then why not call Sea Devils Homo Anphibia. --Catkind121 15:30, July 13, 2010 (UTC) | Then if you call Silurians Homo Reptilia, then why not call Sea Devils Homo Anphibia. --Catkind121 15:30, July 13, 2010 (UTC) | ||
:::I disagree with any decision that would separate BBC Wales Silurians from BBC Silurians. In no way is this a "Mondasian/Pete's World Cyber-split" situation. These are just different tribes of the same race. Since we don't know the name of this tribe, we don't have a basis for starting a new article about them, in the way the Wikipedia have separate Cherokee and Sioux pages. The only thing canon allows us to do is to leave them all on one page. What you ''call'' that page is a separate matter. I think the MOS says to go with the most recent name first, which would make '''Homo reptilia''' preferred over Silurian. So the lead would run something like, '''Homo repitilia''', sometimes referred to as '''Silurians''' . . ." Frankly, though, I don't mind ignoring the MOS and going for the more common name, which is Silurian, and inverting the name order there. '''[[User:CzechOut|<span style="background:blue;color:white">Czech</span><span style="background:red;color:white">Out</span>]]''' [[User talk:CzechOut|☎]] | [[Special:Contributions/CzechOut|<font size="+1">✍</font>]] 03:43, July 18, 2010 (UTC) | :::I disagree with any decision that would separate BBC Wales Silurians from BBC Silurians. In no way is this a "Mondasian/Pete's World Cyber-split" situation. These are just different tribes of the same race. Since we don't know the name of this tribe, we don't have a basis for starting a new article about them, in the way the Wikipedia have separate Cherokee and Sioux pages. The only thing canon allows us to do is to leave them all on one page. What you ''call'' that page is a separate matter. I think the MOS says to go with the most recent name first, which would make '''Homo reptilia''' preferred over Silurian. So the lead would run something like, '''Homo repitilia''', sometimes referred to as '''Silurians''' . . ." Frankly, though, I don't mind ignoring the MOS and going for the more common name, which is Silurian, and inverting the name order there. '''[[User:CzechOut|<span style="background:blue;color:white">Czech</span><span style="background:red;color:white">Out</span>]]''' [[User talk:CzechOut|☎]] | [[Special:Contributions/CzechOut|<font size="+1">✍</font>]] 03:43, July 18, 2010 (UTC) | ||
==Archivist's notes== | |||
Not sure how to archive this discussion, exactly. Seems to have had a few very different things proposed, but nothing really gained traction. About the only thing that's clear is that the proposal to split new series from old series Silurians was clearly rejected. Also rejected was the original proposal — that [[homo reptilia]] should be the page for ''both'' Silurians and Sea Devils. Currently, [[homo reptilia]] is a redirect to [[Silurian]]. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}19:22: Fri 21 Oct 2011 </span> | |||
[[Category:Discussions without clear resolution]] | |||
Latest revision as of 03:40, 28 August 2012
Forums → Archive index → Panopticon archives → Homo Reptilia
I was thinking we should merge Silurian and Sea Devil into Homo Reptilia. I'm A Hydroponic Tomato! Bigredrabbit (talk to me) 12:59, July 5, 2010 (UTC)
- I don't. Sea Devils and Silurians are different enough to justify different pages. We have separate pages for humans and Neanderthals, and they have more in common. -<Azes13 17:38, July 5, 2010 (UTC)
We should do that, or give the New Series Silurians their own page. They are clearly different to the classic Silurians. If we do merge, the name of the article should be Earth Reptile, the politically correct term from Love and War. I mean, we don't have a page called Homo Sapiens, we have a page called Human.
- I agree that we should give the new Silurians a separate page, but they never gave them a good name. The Homo reptilia doesn't set them apart from the Silurians and Sea Devils and don't remember them mentioning any other names (unless they mentioned the Tribe they were a member of and I've just forgotten). -<Azes13 15:11, July 7, 2010 (UTC)
- If we were to merge/separate out articles, Earth Reptile would refer to the classic series Silurians (as I seem to recall they're specifically referred to as having the third eye).
- I don't think 'just because they look different' is quite enough justification for a split, between DW and the Silurians and Warriors of the Deep they change appearance (and what their third eye does).
- If their tribe is mentioned that may be a way to go, but we'd still likely have information on the main Silurians page and then a page for whatever the tribe is. Just as we've got a page for Saxons, Vikings and Celts. --Tangerineduel 14:36, July 12, 2010 (UTC)
Then if you call Silurians Homo Reptilia, then why not call Sea Devils Homo Anphibia. --Catkind121 15:30, July 13, 2010 (UTC)
- I disagree with any decision that would separate BBC Wales Silurians from BBC Silurians. In no way is this a "Mondasian/Pete's World Cyber-split" situation. These are just different tribes of the same race. Since we don't know the name of this tribe, we don't have a basis for starting a new article about them, in the way the Wikipedia have separate Cherokee and Sioux pages. The only thing canon allows us to do is to leave them all on one page. What you call that page is a separate matter. I think the MOS says to go with the most recent name first, which would make Homo reptilia preferred over Silurian. So the lead would run something like, Homo repitilia, sometimes referred to as Silurians . . ." Frankly, though, I don't mind ignoring the MOS and going for the more common name, which is Silurian, and inverting the name order there. CzechOut ☎ | ✍ 03:43, July 18, 2010 (UTC)
Archivist's notes[[edit source]]
Not sure how to archive this discussion, exactly. Seems to have had a few very different things proposed, but nothing really gained traction. About the only thing that's clear is that the proposal to split new series from old series Silurians was clearly rejected. Also rejected was the original proposal — that homo reptilia should be the page for both Silurians and Sea Devils. Currently, homo reptilia is a redirect to Silurian.
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍ 19:22: Fri 21 Oct 2011
