Wikipedia: Star Trek versus Star Wars

Did a related website in the community go down? Come back up? Relocate to a new address? Install pop-up advertisements?

This forum is for discussion of these sorts of issues.
User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Wikipedia: Star Trek versus Star Wars

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Sat Aug 18, 2007 9:18 pm

Many of you probably already know this page.

It's a good more or less objective take on the situation, but it's far from complete, and still lacks a couple of facts.

Since wiki's AOTC: ICS page doesn't dwelve in argumentation over the disputes, it seems logical to adress those lacking elements on the page that is dedicated to this issue.

What is absent from the page?

- Quotations from Saxton's interviews.

- Sarli's severe comments on Saxton's numbers. As such, the article completely fails to acknowledge that the opposition does not only come from so called pro-Trek people, but also from people working within LFL.

- Notifaction of the recent admission of the existence of two canon policies. The EU policy is presented as the canon policy, without ever acknowledging the admission from a LFL representive of the existence of two policies.
Or, if not necessary to add it in detail, the article still lacks a link to the canon page, which reports Chee's words.

These are facts, unbiased facts, which are daringly lacking.
Last edited by Mr. Oragahn on Sun Aug 19, 2007 4:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Cpl Kendall
Jedi Knight
Posts: 513
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 7:30 pm
Contact:

Post by Cpl Kendall » Sun Aug 19, 2007 4:15 pm

Well if you get into that, be prepared to play the edit game alot.

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Sun Aug 19, 2007 4:31 pm

Yeah, I know, I wouldn't bother that much. :)

That said, the history shows what was edited out, so it's still possible to see what are the elements which are deemed unacceptable or annoying.

I don't even know how to become an editor over there, and I wonder if someone here has already edited stuff for the global wiki.

Cpl Kendall
Jedi Knight
Posts: 513
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 7:30 pm
Contact:

Post by Cpl Kendall » Sun Aug 19, 2007 4:33 pm

You just create an account and you're free to edit any article you want.

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Sun Aug 19, 2007 4:35 pm

Mkay... I'll think about it.

User avatar
2046
Starship Captain
Posts: 2040
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:14 pm
Contact:

Post by 2046 » Sun Aug 19, 2007 5:08 pm

Just check the relevant discussion pages . . . you'll find that the moderators have had a helluva time keeping SDN people (specifically somebody called Jim Raynor) in line. They've previously tried to remove ST-v-SW.Net and CanonWars from the links, for instance.

Adding the Sarli info would be pertinent, and though the Raynor-types would bemoan it they couldn't really have it removed for any valid reason. The Saxton interview comments on not having worked from the film might be worthwhile as well, though there might be a fight. Adding Chee's dual canons would also be very valid, although I'm sure they'll fight that tooth and nail.

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Sun Aug 19, 2007 5:42 pm

2046 wrote:Just check the relevant discussion pages . . . you'll find that the moderators have had a helluva time keeping SDN people (specifically somebody called Jim Raynor) in line. They've previously tried to remove ST-v-SW.Net and CanonWars from the links, for instance.

Adding the Sarli info would be pertinent, and though the Raynor-types would bemoan it they couldn't really have it removed for any valid reason. The Saxton interview comments on not having worked from the film might be worthwhile as well, though there might be a fight. Adding Chee's dual canons would also be very valid, although I'm sure they'll fight that tooth and nail.
Sure, but they are fact. Straight from their mouth. There's no spin put by anyone on them.

If that kind of info, objective and all, doesn't make it through... what will?

The point is just to provide the data, not to say, or attempt to shift the phrasing to imply who's right or wrong.

Jedi Master Spock
Site Admin
Posts: 2164
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 8:26 pm
Contact:

Post by Jedi Master Spock » Sun Aug 19, 2007 9:02 pm

It's very difficult to have a comprehensive article that maintains a neutral point of view on a topic of that sort.

IMO, the Wikipedia article is in better shape than the Wookieepedia article.

User avatar
Trinoya
Security Officer
Posts: 658
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2006 6:35 am

Post by Trinoya » Mon Aug 20, 2007 4:32 pm

I second JMS on that. Wikipedia has been very difficult to deal with when it comes to the star trek vs star wars debate or any thing on it for that matter. Just look at the discussion about removing ST-v-SW.net in star wars canon. I have friends who can't stand to hear about this debate who came up to me to ask what that was about...

At the end of the day, it is easier to just keep those articles from being far too bias one way or another, and let mods deal with the odd fanatic or two.

WolfRitter
Padawan
Posts: 41
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 11:09 pm

Post by WolfRitter » Wed Aug 22, 2007 2:56 pm

Sarli's a moron. Simply put, and that thread proved it. '100 megatons is enough to wreck the Earth and cause nuclear winter (see Carl Sagan's "The Nuclear Winter")', I'm glad someone saved my thread so his stupidity is saved for eternity. Yes, I said my thread.

Mt. Saint Helens exploded with 350 MT of force, and the combined power of all nuclear testing is 85.371 MT, apparently humanity has been wiped out and magically ressurected four times over.

The 100 MT statement is not a strawmen, he actually said it, and it's right there in the link.

User avatar
l33telboi
Starship Captain
Posts: 910
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2006 7:15 am
Location: Finland

Post by l33telboi » Wed Aug 22, 2007 4:11 pm

WolfRitter wrote:Sarli's a moron. Simply put, and that thread proved it. '100 megatons is enough to wreck the Earth and cause nuclear winter (see Carl Sagan's "The Nuclear Winter")', I'm glad someone saved my thread so his stupidity is saved for eternity. Yes, I said my thread.
Actually, if you would've bothered to read the actual debate, he never said that.

WolfRitter
Padawan
Posts: 41
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 11:09 pm

Post by WolfRitter » Wed Aug 22, 2007 4:14 pm

l33telboi wrote:
WolfRitter wrote:Sarli's a moron. Simply put, and that thread proved it. '100 megatons is enough to wreck the Earth and cause nuclear winter (see Carl Sagan's "The Nuclear Winter")', I'm glad someone saved my thread so his stupidity is saved for eternity. Yes, I said my thread.
Actually, if you would've bothered to read the actual debate, he never said that.
Yes he did, I was in that thread, here's a clue l33t, on SB.com my avatar is a half-fiend Red Dragon, Kothardarastrix translates from the D&D Draconic language as Demon Dragon, I started that thread. Regardless, I took that quote directly from the link, he said it, deal with it.

User avatar
l33telboi
Starship Captain
Posts: 910
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2006 7:15 am
Location: Finland

Post by l33telboi » Wed Aug 22, 2007 6:44 pm

WolfRitter wrote:Yes he did, I was in that thread
I know you were. And no, he didn't say what you are implying he said. Here's a hint. The problem lies within quantity. The examples you provided for instance, how many explosions are there in those?

WolfRitter
Padawan
Posts: 41
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 11:09 pm

Post by WolfRitter » Wed Aug 22, 2007 6:54 pm

l33telboi wrote:
WolfRitter wrote:Yes he did, I was in that thread
I know you were. And no, he didn't say what you are implying he said. Here's a hint. The problem lies within quantity. The examples you provided for instance, how many explosions are there in those?
Oh yeah?
Gary M. Sarli wrote:To give you an idea: Saxton calculates that it would require over 400 million megatons of energy, equally distributed over the surface of a planet, to melt its entire crust to a depth of 1 meter. Now, as a comparison: 100 megatons is enough to wreck the Earth and cause nuclear winter (see Carl Sagan's "The Nuclear Winter"), and the total US and Soviet arsenals during the height of the Cold War was somewhere around 400,000 megatons (give or take a hundred thousand), enough to completely obliterate every human on the planet several hundred times over. Saxton, meanwhile, assumes that the Imperial Navy would choose to spend its time liquifying the surface of a planet for no good reason -- why keep shooting once everyone is dead and there's nothing left in a usable form? -- and thus he comes up with a number about 1,000 times more than the combined arsenals of our entire planet. (Another comparison: This is 8 times more than the energy that would be produced by a 6-mile asteroid or comet smashing into the Earth, the current likely suspect for killing the dinosaurs and almost all life on the planet other than the the smallest scavengers such as rodents and insects.)
That's straight from the link, l33t.

User avatar
l33telboi
Starship Captain
Posts: 910
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2006 7:15 am
Location: Finland

Post by l33telboi » Wed Aug 22, 2007 7:00 pm

WolfRitter wrote:Oh yeah?
You didn't answer my question, Schatten. How many explosions were there in your example? That question was quite relevant. Why?
That's straight from the link, l33t.
And this is why your example (and insinuation) was off:
Sarli wrote:So, if you engaging in such an argument, then I would remind you that doing so is a violation of the Code of Conduct (off-topic, baiting), so do not do so in the future if you wish to visit these message boards. The only alternative is that you have no idea what I was talking about and missed the very subtle differences between "devastate" and "destroy," so I'll just assume that this is the case and explain it. :)

[NOTE: Everything in this paragraph is a very brief summary of Sagan's argument about the results of nuclear war in The Nuclear Winter.] Sagan was referring to a 100 megaton nuclear exchange -- not one underground detonation, not several nuclear tests (both under- and above-ground) spread out over decades, but an actual nuclear war. Keep in mind that most nuclear warheads (e.g. those used in MIRVs) are measured in kilotons, not megatons, and this is still more than enough to destroy a city -- 100 megatons of total detonations might be, say, 1,000 100-kiloton detonations, each over the 1,000 largest cities or other major targets. The resulting widespread fires combined with particulates injected into the atmosphere by the detonations themselves would result in a world-wide level of "soot" in the atmosphere that would cause nuclear winter. The capability of civilization to survive this one-two punch (wiping out all major population centers and the majority of infrastructure, then changing the climate and making it hard to grow enough food and get clean water to survive) is at best questionable. Would at least some people survive? Probably -- but civilization itself probably would not.

Now, you can certainly argue with Sagan's specific numbers -- is 100 mt enough, or would it take 200 mt, 500 mt, maybe 1 Gt? -- but no reputable scientist would disagree that any significant nuclear exchange (enough to destroy all major population centers of all sides of the war) would lead to nuclear winter.

In any event, attacking the Sagan reference is really a red herring -- I cited it as an example of the minimum needed to devastate a populated world, certainly, but you'll note that I suggested that a Base Delta Zero could certainly use firepower equal to 1,000 times this amount (which is still 1,000 times less than Saxton's estimate). For example, I think that dropping a 100 kt warhead on the one million most valuable targets on an average planet would effectively destroy all assets of production. A more underdeveloped world (such as Tatooine) would probably take a lot less, and a more heavily-populated world (such as Coruscant) would obviously take more -- but this is a reasonable average.

Post Reply