Sorry for doing it, but the image is pushing the Main ships part down, making it look completely random. Do you have any objections if i remove it?
- Well, on just about every article that has an image, there is normally an image at the top right, that is how things work. It only pushes down a little. However, the image should be kept and not removed from the article. -- Matthew R Dunn 20:25, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
- Well, then I just have to change tactic (Don't worry, it'll probably be good for the article and the image will stay there).
- Look, now the image is there, the Main ships part looks normal and the article has even more information. Everybody's happy.
What do you guys think of the new Role(s) part for the "Main Ships" section?
- It's nice.—Anubis 10545 20:28, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
- Wow, I'm impressed, you definately worked hard on this. Excellent work on expanding this and the Tau'ri page. ;) -- Matthew R Dunn 21:24, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. I just can't understand how the Tau'ri page could've be so short before.
- Wow, I'm impressed, you definately worked hard on this. Excellent work on expanding this and the Tau'ri page. ;) -- Matthew R Dunn 21:24, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
F-302 Squadrons
Have they said at any time during the show the name of the squadrons of F-302s. I mean, in Ethon, there was blue squadron, but I've never heard of "Snakeskinners" or "Wraithwaxers".—Anubis 10545 09:31, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Decks
How many decks do any of you estimate are on the 303, 304. To help with the estimations. I know this ship is from star trek. Voyager is 66m high and it only has 15 decks. The 303 is 65m high so it might have 14 decks. I hope it has more. On one of the episodes the elevator had twenty seven visible buttons. The 304 is 75m high so it might have 24 decks. so any estimations for the 303, and the 304.
- Actually, there was 28 buttons on the X-303's elevators. This was the same number as in the SGC, so I doubt the ship actually had 28 decks. 14 sounds about right... and 24 for 304s does too. I don't know the actual number though.—Anubis 10545 08:04, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
Comparison Chart
I made a types of ship comparison chart and added it to the page, but the layout didn't come out looking like I hoped. If anyone has any tips for reshaping it, I'm open to suggestions =) Cmantito 20:16, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
- I don't know. The comparison chart seems to just be full of empty spaces. Maybe some images... Anyway it's a cretive idea, but I don't think it's really necessary and, even though it's a great idea, the outcome doesn't really look that well as it is now.—Swedish guy 22:03, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
- I could clean it up by limiting it to a 303/304 comparison, since that's what I originally wanted it to be, I just included the 301/302s for completeness. Or I could split it into two charts, a battlecruiser and a starfighter chart, because a lot of the blank spaces result from things that apply to one but not the other. I don't want to trash it completely if I can help it (unless everyone really thinks I should) cause it's something I was looking for for quite a while but could never find. Some images isn't a terrible idea... Cmantito 02:28, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
To be honest, I'm not too crazy about the chart. It breaks up the page kind of awkwardly and, as was said before, there's a lot of spaces. I mean, I'm not trying to say you did a bad job... We should change its format so it looks... better, with fewer spaces. Splitting it into a "Starfighter" and "battlecruiser" chart doesn't sound that bad actually...—Anubis 10545 02:50, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
It looks a lot better now... nice :) —Anubis 10545 02:16, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- You interrupted me putting my comment on here! >:P I was just posting to say that I've removed the starfighters and added pictures, as you've already noticed! xD Cmantito 02:18, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, I hate it when that happens :). —Anubis 10545 02:32, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Hmm... While this change by Swedish Guy may look better, it's information I still feel was important, when I was making the chart, because some of the 304's do, in fact, have the slightly different technical specs from one another. Does anyone have any suggestions for keeping the information without making it look hideous? Cmantito 00:24, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Ship Designations
Ok, I know that the Prometheus was the BC-303 and that the Daedalus was DSC-304, so here is my question! What were the designations for the rest of the ships of the 304 class? Like, would the Odyssey be the DSC-304A since it was of the 304 class but was built after the Daedalus? If that is so, then would the General Hammond be DSC-304E? What the deal here?
~~Rob~~
- If you look at the image to the right, it says Odyssey - 02 (being the second one constructed). Seeing as how all 304s are basically identical, they're all just DSC-304s.—Anubis 10545 18:14, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
Measurements
How Daedalus class battlecruiser width can be 95m, if F-302 width is 26m, it will never get in bay! Daedalus class battlecruisers should by twice bigger or f-302 twice smaller! Those measurements are completely wrong!—Vilnisr 18:35, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
- yea, but we go by these Stargate DVD magazines (which are cannon). That's where the measurements come from and its the most offical source we have so it's what we go by.—Anubis 10545 20:20, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
- I suggest to remove unsure measurements! After you read these sizes and compere them and watch the shows, they seems to be quite ridiculous! As wise man said: Read and think, not just believe!—Vilnisr 07:05, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
- I'm afraid that we'll continue to use the canon measurements until they are overridden by other material. We do not use fan-made suggestions/measurements/assumptions on this site at all. —Jaymach Ral'Tir (talk) 16:42, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
- I suggest to remove unsure measurements! After you read these sizes and compere them and watch the shows, they seems to be quite ridiculous! As wise man said: Read and think, not just believe!—Vilnisr 07:05, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
X-301
I am thinking it's status should be "Unknown/Abandoned in Space(?)" :/ Supakillaii 00:44, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
its not unknown there was only one build and it got its name changed to prometheus and destroyed.A scotsman (talk) (Contribs) 01:35, December 28, 2010 (UTC)
sun tzu status
i think its status should be "unknown" since it might have not been recovered after being crippled, the only ship near it was the also-crippled apollo, so it might have been left in space ASDF1239 DISCUSSION 05:48, March 25, 2010 (UTC)
- We have Daedalus, Odyssey, and George Hammond that have been available for well over a year to bring supplies to fix the Sun Tzu. We just wouldn't leave a 304 floating in space for an extended period... possibly allowing for another race to have the opportunity to commandeer it. The status "unknown" goes without saying... we could put that as the status of everything in the Stargate universe since we haven't really had a direct view inside of it since January 9, 2009. So... we really don't need to include it. In a way, it would be just as speculative to say that its status is unknown (possibly still floating in space) as to say that the ship has been recovered and repaired. Therefore, we won't include anything... to allow for the lowest possible amount of speculation... if that makes sense. —Anubis 10545 (talk) (Contribs) 06:00, March 25, 2010 (UTC)
Battle of Dakara
How was the Tau'ri fleet a part of the battle of Dakara? Jauh0 (talk) (Contribs) 10:50, December 26, 2010 (UTC)
Also, I changed some of the battle dates to correspond the ones in their respective articles. Jauh0 (talk) (Contribs) 10:51, December 26, 2010 (UTC)