Talk:Dalek/Archive 1

message: About that Dal-Lek encyclopedia business - if an encyclopedia has a volume that stretches from D to L, then the preceding A-D volume must have had some very long articles!!
There is nothing 'rabid' about disputing its existance. The word itself is not very NPOV and another reason for taking it out.  
Arno
:You know, I've seen that urban myth discussed on the internet as pertaining to an encyclopaedia, but whenever I heard the story back in the day, DAL-LEK were the headers on volume 2 of the Greater London telephone directory.  Which wouldn't be too unreasonable--surnames, particularly from the same language (surnames in London in the early 1960s still being fairly homogoneously British/Irish) aren't distributed evenly across the 26 letters of the alphabet, and I would have no problem believing that A-D had a comparable number of entries to D-L.
:That said, of course, it's still an urban myth.  Binabik80 22:00, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Dal-Lek

message: I don't have Genesis of the Daleks on hand, but I don't think the CIA was ever identified as the agency that sent the Doctor to Skaro, although I know it's been assumed by fandom (and fan canon) that it was the CIA. If anyone can confirm an on-screen mention that it was the CIA, please do, otherwise I am of the view that it should be reverted. -khaosworks 07:16, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: It said so at Celestial Intervention Agency, so I figured that in the interests of consistency at least it should say the same here. The CIA entry is just a stub so if you revert here a bit of explanation of the fan theories vs. onscreen canon over there would help to pad it out some. IIRC, the old FASA Doctor Who RPG says it was the CIA that sent the Doctor to Skaro so it may be more than just idle fan speculation even if not mentioned on-screen. Bryan 09:11, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Celestial Intervention Agency

message: Have a look at Dalek ranks. I've tried a cleanup, but the state of it is quite dire, and desperately needs copyediting and to sort out all the bad information from the good. Maybe it should be redirected to "Dalek models" or something. Suggestions and thoughts? -khaosworks 09:16, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe Types of Dalek? I'll look at the contents tomorrow and see if I can do some tidying too. Bryan 09:49, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Dalek types, maybe. But let's clean it up first before deciding whether we should shift it. Thanks. -khaosworks 11:44, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: If we move it to Dalek variants, then the stuff you just moved here would fit quite well as the intro text at the beginning of the article IMO. Bryan 00:36, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Dalek ranks

message: (The following is being placed here until we can figure out how to integrate it properly. Might even consider merging it with "Dalek ranks".)
The appearence of the Dalek itself has evolved over time, although not as much as Doctor Who's other robot nemesis, the Cybermen. Originally sporting a silver metal band along their chest area in the Daleks (1963), their look was further modified in The Dalek Invasion Of Earth(1964) with larger bases and radar dishes. This story also introduced the Supreme/Black Daleks, Dalek commanders painted black. The "Ear-bulbs" also underwent a change from round to a more conical shape. The look of the chest was further modified in The Chase(1965) with "a Solar panel array" on the chest consisting of wiring and slats. 
The Daleks of the 60s were mainly silver with blue spheres. Another Dalek variant, the Dalek Emperor, was introduced in "The Evil Of The Daleks"(1967)-basically, a large, stationery Dalek with only one row of spheres,attached to wires on Skaro. Also certain Daleks appeared with only their domes painted black in this story.
In the 1960s movies based on the Dalek serials, the Daleks had larger, "jam-jar" ear bulbs and a larger base. In "Dalek Invasion Earth 2150 AD" the Solar panel slats were added.
When the Daleks appeared in color in Day Of The Daleks(1972), the Daleks adopted a dark-grey color scheme, with their leader being painted gold. In Planet Of The Daleks(1973), a new Dalek Supreme appeared, sporting the movie design and a gold-black color scheme. It's eye also lit up when speaking.
In Death To The Daleks the Daleks returned to a color scheme reminiscent of their 60's incarnations, being silver with black spheres. But by the next story, Genesis Of The Daleks, they turned back to their grey state.
The Black Supreme Dalek returned in "Resurrection Of The Daleks" with a black color scheme and white spheres. This story also featured the bizzare "Dalek troopers", a group of mercenaries sporting helmets that resembled Star Wars Imperial blast helmets but styilized to look like a Dalek. In "Revelation of the Daleks" a new Dalek faction was created sporting a white finish and gold spheres and appendages. These new Daleks-who were loyal to Davros-were further modified with flatter 'ears' and more specialized "plungers" in the final Dalek serial "Rememberance Of The Daleks". This story also saw the Dalek Battle computer-a child sitting in a Dalek chair and stylized helmet-and another, smaller Emperor Dalek with a rounder dome and no eyestalk, and the Special Weapons Dalek, a worn-looking Dalek sporting a massive cannon.
The Dalek seen in one episode of the new Doctor Who series is structually similar to the movie Daleks, but with more detail and weathering; it also has a gold finish that is reminiscent of the leader Daleks in the Pertwee serials. A new, even more advanced design will apparentally appear at the end of the season.
:Information has been merged. Dalek ranks moved to Dalek variants, which is a more accurate article title. -khaosworks 00:40, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Dalek variants

message: Your reverting my edit back to yours(http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dalek&diff=next&oldid=13098582) was a poor choice for a few reasons. 1) My revisions made your sentences less choppy. 2) I added necessary info and corrected things that could confuse people.  The museum is HIS not A museum. A museum implies that it's just some museum that he can put stuff into.  3) You edited stuff out of mine then took stuff back from it to make a second edit of your own. Overall this is poor judgment.--Chadamir 22:40, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poor Revision 

message: Someone has gone into the edit and replaced every instance of "Dalek" with "Faggot"
Someone please undo the dammage done, I was never very good with editing: 
Someone else warn off the little punk; this little twerp needs to know in no uncertain terms that he's not welcome around here. I am very "with" the concept of an open encyclopdia: That doesn't mean I tolerate mindless vandalism.
BTW, this Dalek enrty is very well done. Go Wikipedia!
The Daleks Rule!!! Great Article!!!Classicjupiter2 20:37, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandal Alert 

message: Hey, it was a joke. Sorry to all those who got upset :-( Ta bu shi da yu 23:31, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps pertinent clarification (particularly in light of the section immediately above), he means this edit, not this one. Different kinds of darkness. HTH, –Hajor 23:51, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This is correct. Again, sorry. - Ta bu shi da yu 00:01, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  I plead guilty to all charges. 

message: I dunno, I like the focus/highlight the character box gives the article;  maybe its content can be reused here, and only altered to fit the article as a special case? Dewet 20:09, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, what more can I say? Well done! ;) Dewet 20:34, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Character box 

message: it needs the definite article here I think. or start "A Dalek..."
I don't think it really needs the article. e.g. in a paragraph talking about Americans, it'd be fine to start "Americans are...". Having said that, it definitely sounds better with the article in there. --DudeGalea 06:02, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I don't mind either way, but I prefer it as it is now. Dewet 07:39, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Definite article

message: Added the link and added some quotes at the other end. Room for expansion! GraemeLeggett 16:49, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dalek quotes 

message: In The Clash's self title debut, at the end of the song 'Remote Control' there is a line that goes "Gonna be a Dalek” Didn’t see this reference on the site and wasn't sure if is the type of thing that is added.  If it is of merit I invite someone else to check it out and find a place to stick this invaluable Dalek sighting.
:You could certainly put a sentence about this in Dalek#Other appearances.  I don't know much about the Clash: why not put it in yourself?  Be bold! —Josiah Rowe 03:37, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Just noticed this and added it. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 03:45, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dalek invade the Clash lyrics 

message: Yes but "dissolved" means specifically a solid dissolving into a liquid.--feline1 17:35, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: How about "disintegrate"?  That doesn't specify the final state of the solid, just that it loses its cohesion. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 19:59, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Vapourized vs dissolved

message: An anon has just changed the second pronunciation of the word "Dalek" from "DAH-lick" to "dar-lick".  Now, to an American (and, I'm guessing, to any speaker of a rhotic dialect of English) that seems absolutely wrong, as it suggests a hard "r" sound at the end of the first syllable (think of the American pronunciation of "darling").  However, I'm reluctant to revert the change, since I'm not sure what that spelling might signify to the speaker of a non-rhotic dialect (and since Doctor Who is British, and most British dialects are non-rhotic, that should take precedence).  Could a speaker of British English please comment on the difference between "dah" and "dar" to your ear, and say whether you think that the first syllable of "Dalek" is ever pronounced "dar" as opposed to "dah"?  Thanks. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 18:00, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I definitely agree with you, but I'm also an American.  On the show itself it was never acceptable to use the pronunciation "darlick". I think the official pronunciation used should stand, regardless of how some fans choose to say the word. --Larry 15:06, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a much of a muchness, in the end — if "dah" and "dar" are pronounced the same to non-rhotic ears as makes no difference, then the former should hold as the least ambiguous phonetic translation for both rhotic and non-rhotic forms. I'm reverting it. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 15:14, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Speaking as a UK resident, I would go with "dah", as besides being incorrect, "dar" also has a tendency to give rise to a popular mis-spelling of the word. --Chris 42 17:14, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation revisited 

message: Are all the items at the end of the list plays ?  Or do we have - original novels - audio plays - more novels, but not so described ?
-- Beardo 06:55, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Everything beneath "Audio Plays" are audio plays. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 08:00, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plays / novels 

message: :The Cyrillic letter Д, or "D", coincidentally also resembles a Dalek.
I removed this with the comment that it's "preposterously far-fetched". khaosworks reinstated it with "How far fetched can it be when you can actually see the letter itself?"
That's a fair comment, so let me say what I actually meant to say: insofar as I can see that the shape of the letter and the shape of your average Dalek (minus plunger, eyestalk and rounded dome) are not completely without resemblance (although I don't consider it convincing by any measure), I still consider this personal observation trivia of the kind that has to be firmly resisted. 
Would anyone consider it reasonable or important to mention that the letter 'S' resembles a snake? I'm fairly certain this resemblance is much more notable and uncontested than the Dalek resemblance (one we could even back up with independent sources), but it still wouldn't pass the bar for inclusion in an encyclopedia—at least not in the entry for snake. Possibly in the entry for S, but even that is tenuous.
In short: it's a cute thing to point out to your friends, but it shouldn't be in an encyclopedia of any kind. Obviously it's not something to get worked up about, but I do think it's a mark of unprofessionality to let this sort of thing slip in. That the word dalek actually means something in other languages is of note. That a Cyrillic character may resemble a Dalek if you squint your eyes is not. 82.92.119.11 19:14, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Might we slide around the issue by deleting the explicit mention of the letter Д, but mentioning the Russian word далеко (daleko, far) along with the Serbo-Croat?  I'm thinking something like "Other Slavonic languages have similar words for "far", such as the Russian далеко (daleko).  That puts the letter Д on the page without having to say anything explicit about it — an observant reader can make the connection.  Just a thought. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 06:10, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Д is for Dalek, EX-TER-MIN-ATE 

message: Mecha are limbed robots that may be operated from the inside or, in other cases, remote controlled.  Does this definition apply to Daleks (and no, Daleks aren't more like tanks - tanks always have caterpillar tracks)? RobbieG 10:11, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Japanese might call a Dalek mecha but I don't think it likely that any westerner would  as their not of Japanese origin or appear Japanese mecha influenced. GraemeLeggett 11:14, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mecha 

message: Rewatching the episode "Dalek" it really does seem to me that the writer/director intent was to show the "Dalek Bumps" as vaporizing the bullets fired at the Dalek.  I had previously added something to that effect to the article, but someone removed it.  I assumed someone knew something I didn't, but rewatching the episode made me wonder, because that really did seem to be what was going on.  I'm probably just crazy, and there is no definitive statement that the "bumps" were responsible, but I'd like to know if anyone else interpreted the scene the same way.D1Puck1T 17:12, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There was no SFX surrounding the bumps as the bullets came flying in, only a shimmering mirage-like convection effect indicating a force field, which didn't seem to be generated by anything specific on the Dalek, so, no. Not me. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 00:20, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Erm... "Bumps" 

message: Spencer Chapman did not design the Daleks - he did design work for The Dalek Invasion of Earth (and stuck a radar dish on the back of the Daleks), but not the original Daleks themselves. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 11:24, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Spencer Chapman

message: The "Bumps" Have been, in the past, called sensedomes and the reason for their existance was to create a sense of spacial awareness for the Dalek since is vision is limited to what it can see through the eye-stalk. The theorized purpose of the sensedomes are that they read the data of the surrounding area (ie the shape of a room) and feed that back to the dalek. As for them generating a shield, this is unknown. Though it has been theorized that the vertical plates a the Dalek's Midsection generate the shield and not the domes.
:Please cite sources. 
::First, you need to cite where "sensodomes" or "sensedomes" comes from. AFAIC recall, they were never called that in the television series. 
::Secondly, in Remembrance the Doctod did indeed describe them as little green blobs in bonded polycarbide - and that is already in the article. The connection of bonded polycarbide and dalekanium, however, is an inference that is not explicitly stated. 
::Third, the way the original edit read was that Spencer Chapman designed the Daleks. The Dalek design was ultimately down to Cusick, even if Chapman provided the concept drawings. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 12:45, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Erm - Bumps 

message: The name Dalek - (Dah - Lek) - Is a reversal of the name "Kaled", who were the original inhabitant of Skaro.
scifipedia.scifi.com/index.php/Daleks
As for the sensedomes, they aren't called this, I was misttaken, they're called Sense Globes
11. SENSE GLOBES - Fifty-six of these are positioned around the Dalek's lower casing. These globes react to changes in external conditions and relay data on temperature, humidity, movement and the presence of animal life to the control chamber for analysis. 
Sources: 
http://www.historyvortex.org/DalekAnatomy.html
The Dalek Survival Guide
The Dalek Technical Manual
:The anagramatical nature of Kaled is mentioned in the History section below. It's not in the lead because it's not essential information, and it was a retcon anyway. The diagrams you refer to are of uncertain canonicity and if mentioned should be sourced properly as such. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 14:36, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dalek - where did the name come from! & Er - Bumps! 

message: anyone have a screencap from army of ghosts?--152.163.100.9 21:16, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, but there is the trailer for the next one;  207.202.227.125 21:52, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  they're back! 

message: Since this article is being flagged as long, why not delete the history section since it is reproduced elsewhere?--Keycard (talk) 07:43, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The point is that it's not reproduced: History of the Daleks is the expanded, more detailed form of the "History within the show" section, which is supposed to summarise it so that people who don't want to read the longer article can still get a gist. Without it, people will have to wade through the longer article. A fork to a summary article doesn't work because it forces people to jump to another article to read a summary, which should be within the main page so that the most pertinent information can be kept in one place. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 09:07, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

text: We would do better if we can discuss how to spin off more sections rather than remove them entirely. For example, in the Doctor Who article, the missing episodes section was getting really long before it was spun off into its own article, and a summary left in its place in the main article. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 09:10, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

text: If you feel it's too long, then discuss how to cut it down, not simply cut it out, that's all I'm saying. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 13:02, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, please read Wikipedia:Summary_style - this is how articles are supposed to be written.  It may need cutting down further, certainly. Morwen - Talk 14:14, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Delete history section 

message: I have a theory about the time war version of the Daleks, according to the BCC Continuity guide, the origional series had two different timelines of Daleks, one with Davros, the other without, with Timeline IA, the Daleks that showed up between the first and third doctors, being a grave and growing threat to the universe, so great that the timelords sent doctor # 4 back in time to prevent their creation, and the Timeline II Daleks which resulted from Davros surviving the origional Civil War.  Since the Timeline II Daleks seemed to be consumed by Civil Wars, in fighting, as a result of Davros, they weren't a threat to much of anything anymore..
:So, my theory, after they killed Davros, the remaining Daleks somehow went back in time, and we get Genesis of the Daleks, version III, and they more or less restore the Timeline IA Daleks, so let's call them, Timeline IB Daleks, where the Daleks actually are a potential threat to the Timelords (and slightly more advanced), thus leading to a... wait for it... time war, which also fits with the idea that the Timewar era Daleks have the same color sceme as the origionals, not to mention an emporer--71.249.10.72 17:28, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Time War 

message: After rewatching "Dalek (2005)" I think that it might be safe to say that in the 2005 dalek they are part of the forcefield mechanism.  Their part in the self destruct sequence seemed to have been more (after watching the visual effect half a dozen times) of a containment field for the explosion.  This implies that their current function on a Dalek is a portion of their forcefield mechanism (which may also be what evaportates the bullets).  I don't think it would be innaccurate to say that the Dalek's protective field is currently generated by it on the current models of Dalek armor. Traegorn 17:47, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *btw, they can't be the force field generators, since we get to see another Dalek device that doesn't have any globes anywhere, but still has a Dalek force field--71.247.107.146 21:50, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That wasn't a Dalek device, it was stolen. Bryan 23:34, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I assume you're talking about the Genesis Ark?  I assumed that although it was stolen Time Lord technology, the Daleks had modified it (or at least its exterior) for their own use: otherwise, why would it have the small hemispheres on each "corner", which the Daleks touched with their plungers to "prime" it? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 03:14, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well whatever they did to it, it clearly had a Dalek force field, and at the same time was globe free--64.12.116.9 04:17, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it was only sort of globe free - I mean, it was actually full of Daleks - who are covered in globes. Whose to say the forcefield wasn't generated by the millions of internal Daleks? :P Traegorn 06:47, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, now I know we've taken this too far--64.12.116.9 20:37, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I was clearly making a joke with my last comment. Traegorn 16:02, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Back to the Sense Globes/Bumps/Whatever