Talk:Adrift (Stargate Atlantis)

Adrift (Stargate Atlantis) has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
May 23, 2009	Good article nominee	Listed

Television: Episode coverage / Stargate Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Stargate task force (assessed as Low-importance).

german interview source

could someone provide a source for this information? --Idjit 03:46, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

and thats why I have been deleting it as there is no source for this info.. It sounds like a joke anyway, killing off McKay after losing Carson and Downgrading Weir?? pure B.S.... EnsRedShirt 05:19, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Date

Could we at least get some info on the relsease date? Nothing precise just month or quarter? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.123.181.220 (talk • contribs).

We can just speculate at the moment, but we have to wait for official sources first (WP:CRYSTAL). That could take some months. – sgeureka ^t•c 17:03, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gate Bridge

The conversation between Colonel Carter and Colonel Ellis at the Midway Station could not be possible as it requires a wormhole all the way whereas the gate bridge stores matter/energy in its buffer then forwards it. That would mean that the message could be sent one way but it would take the full 30 minutes to arrive. The two way conversation is not possible via the gate bridge but possibly via subspace communication. Hdrit 18:47, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I didn't understand how that was possible either. Maybe they have since modified the gate bridge to dial somewhat differently.

Vala M 19:10, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Radio waves can be sent through both directions of a wormhole. I assume they simply have a macro that opens all of the Stargates without disengaging them. HotOne121 02:09, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This should still not be possible as it requires the gates to dial an outgoing wormhole and receive an incoming wormhole at the same time creating a continuous wormhole using the stargate as repeaters. This is impossible as a stargate can only support one type of wormhole at a time and cannot just act as a power relay for a single long wormhole. It could be achieved through the use of subspace repeaters placed on every other stargate and dialling a wormhole between ever other stargate prior to sending the message through the wormhole. The message would travel via the wormhole then subspace then wormhole again until it reaches the midway station but this is just speculation on my part. Hdrit 15:34, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

well, it could be simplier, apollo just dialed to the pegasus gate in the midstation, that is imposible cuz apollo was near to lantea that time, my best guess is that of a goof in the production, the explanation above seems possible, but its just especulation, even so, the repeateated wave would be delay, from repeater to repeater. It will probably retconed in the future, like a new macro or something --Mr.Amonra 09:20, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio

These tapes are not public.The only way to see them is to download them from an unauthorised source .Therefore knowledge of the plot that flows from them is a copyvio since they only way to see them is to commit a copyvio .Garda40 16:52, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then why are you the only one who is objecting to these? Vala M 16:59, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have no knowledge why others don't object but the rule I learnt was you can't use a plot summary in this type of situation until a product is released,transmitted etc .You can't sanitise a copyvio by writing it up in your own words . Feel free to post a question about this situation at the appropriate forum if you think I am wrong .Garda40 17:23, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adding one other point is that the program could be re-edited to lose(add) some material which has happened with other shows so your summary might turn out to be wrong at some points.In 8 days time the summary can be added back assuming it is still correct .Garda40 17:30, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion is verifiability, ergo these "leaks" are not verifiable as they are not legally available. I've also removed the note as it does not cite a source (and if somebody decides to re-add: a torrent site isn't a verifiable source, nor is a blog.) Matthew 16:50, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the laugh .So Joseph Mallozzi's blog , he only being the executive producer ,isn't a trustworthy source .Garda40 17:40, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps I should be more clearer "nor are torrent blogs that people have a habit of citing". I accept cheques as payment for the laugh ;-). Joseph's blog is likely a reliable source as he's likely classed as "an established expert on the topic of the article". Matthew 18:10, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Somebody re-added the "note". I've checked the provided source and can't find anything to corroborate that it was leaked on September 12th – I do see a mention of the leak though. I'm also not convinced these leaks (of many) are notable. In a day or two I will remove the note again, this time should allow an editor to assert notability of the leak. Matthew 13:00, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've now deleted it, this is not to say it can't be re-added. But you will need to establish notability for the leak if you wish to re-add it. A reasonable amount of time was given to establish notability/provide adequate sourcing, so please do not edit war. Thanks. Matthew 12:59, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A little late to be adding this but since I was off line now will have to do .

I re-added the note on the basis of your comments of 18:10, 23 September 2007.While the exact date it was leaked is not totally clear September 12th would be day it started appearing on most of the download sites which is probably why the original editor chose that date.

It is interesting how Joseph Mallozzi's went from being adequate sourcing to not being adequate sourcing in the space of 3 days .Garda40 13:56, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Guest stars?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Tapping a regular, and Higginson a guest in season four, not the other way around, as the information box states? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.54.64.253 (talk) 22:33, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's true of the season of the season as a whole but Tapping's appearances in this episode and the next are more consistent with guest star status .

It really depends on the whether the producers want to credit her with that status from episode one which we will find out on friday .

Higginson I assume would automatically fall into the guest star status as they have already said she will be only in it for a limited number of episodes but I guess it would be best to wait until friday to confirm it and have a source to cite .Garda40 22:56, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weir's Surgery

Not sure how there is confusion here - It was named specifically in the show not as "decompressive craniopathy" but as decompressive craniectomy, which is a real procedure meant for exactly the type of situation portrayed - "craniectomy" does not mean removal of the brain, it is removal of part of the cranium (skull). PhoenixFlare 14:26, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

wasen't Weir's Hair Cut off in the surgery and yet at the end it was fully grown y? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.150.105.251 (talk) 20:45, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Replicator nanites are exceedingly efficient little buggers. PhoenixFlare 22:23, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

it is wath you said, they remuve part of her skull, not part of her brain, its clearly seen--Mr.Amonra 09:24, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Goofs

At the end of "First Strike" Zelenka said that all non Essential systems were shut down and yet mckay said that he was shuting all non Essential systems in "Adrift" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.150.105.251 (talk) 17:51, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

well coul be non essential and really non essential, depend on the situation--Mr.Amonra 09:23, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Midway Station - Stargate Atlantis.jpg

Image:Midway Station - Stargate Atlantis.jpg 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 22:15, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Adrift (Stargate Atlantis). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090416121458/http://blogs.scifi.com:80/stargate/archives/2007/09/ to http://blogs.scifi.com/stargate/archives/2007/09/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:02, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Adrift (Stargate Atlantis). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:02, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Adrift (Stargate Atlantis). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090504124058/http://www.gateworld.net/news/2008/07/iatlantisi_gets_visual_effects_e.shtml to http://www.gateworld.net/news/2008/07/iatlantisi_gets_visual_effects_e.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:44, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]