Talk:Stargate (device)/Archive 5

message: I was wondering if its true that "gates from separate networks cannot be chained together by the macro". I haven't seen this mentioned in "The Return" part 1. My technical guess is it has to do with software differences between the gate (assuming there are any and assuming the statements correct). Any references? Wiki Fox 22:24, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure if it was ever explained why you can't go straight through, but it was definitely shown that you have leave one system and then enter the other. My guess is that it's because you would have to dial an 8-symbol address when you move between the systems (whereas getting out and travelling between two nearby gates from the two systems through normal space only involves 7-symbol addresses). Travelling from Pegasus to the Milky Way wouldn't work because only the Atlantis DHD has the appropriate crystal to dial 8-symbol addresses. I don't think we've ever been told if Milky Way DHD's can dial them, we've only seen the SGC's "McGyvered" dialing computer do it, so it might be possible to go the other way without stopping or it might not, but if you have to have a midway station anyway, you might as well stop there. --Tango 14:01, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Or it is possible to go all the way and the station is just a checkpoint (stop wraith, signal Deadalus class ships between galaxies). Either that or a technical problem such as what I suggested in my first message. After looking at my copy of the episode and not seeing any external power sources my guess is the midway station is there either for issues I've mentioned or for power issues (if power initially obtained from the puddle jumper DHD was sent gate to gate it would dissipate over time). I'm pretty sure though that (assuming theres enough power) you should be able to go straight through, if it were a software issue in the gate you should be able to get around that with a macro but if its a technical limitation thats a little different. The whole gate cant be chained all the way thing appears to be an assumption for the moment. Wiki Fox 14:24, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Some kind of software issue is very much possible. The problem I mentioned with 8-symbol addresses is almost certainly a problem, though. As for power, I think space gates get their power from attachments to the gates themselves, which probably contain a similar power source to DHD's. The jumper DHD is just a remote control, I don't think it provides power. --Tango 16:26, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's pretty much established that you need some kind of uber-power source like a ZPM or something similarly jury-rigged (as O'Neill did in "The Fifth Race") to dial an 8-symbol address (proximity in space makes no difference, since you still need to dial that "long-distance" code). Hence, the need for both the bridge and the way station, since the last gate in the Milky Way chain would have to dial into the Pegasus network, which it would be unable to do so without such a power source. (And if it did have such a power source, then the need for the bridge would be vitiated) --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 16:39, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There are 34 gates between here and Pegasus, mitigating the need for a large power source. What does not having a ZPM have to do with entering the other gate network? If it were a power issue it could be mitigated using a small power source attached to the gates. If its a software problem a patch could be designed. Either way you would be able to go all the way through so the decision of not doing a full chain was probably made by someone on Earth, which means its not impossible to make a macro to travel through all the gates. Proximity in space is important as well. Farther distance means more power and the reverse is true. Chevrons dialed isn't too important either since the coordinate system can be changed. The macro handles dialing of gates, dialing 8 chevrons normally is point to point while the macro dials each gate sequentially. Wiki Fox 19:58, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You're not quite getting the point: it's not proximity in space that's the issue. If it were, then it'd be easier to get to a "nearer" system than a further one, and that's never been the issue in the series: it takes the same amount of power to reach a nearby system as it does a distant one. The only problems they've had is when trying to reach another galaxy, so it's dialing the 8-chevron address required to go between "networks" where the power issue comes in. It's like trying to dial from a US number to a UK number without a long-distance service. It doesn't matter if you bring the telephones closer together; you still need the long-distance connection. To repeat: dialing into another galaxy's network requires a ZPM or equivalent. You can argue that it isn't logical, but them's the rules the series set up, and they've been largely consistent with them. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 20:07, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All of that I already know, which is why it probably shouldn't have been mentioned since I'm disputing the claim that you cant do a full link through the bridge (actually I asked if there was any bases for the claim). This would also explain the confusion caused by your other edit since it was only somewhat related to what I was talking about. Wiki Fox 20:27, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, if it helps, the basis is simply that it's established (since "The Fifth Race" and reiterated in "Rising") that you can't dial an 8-chevron address without a ZPM. Perhaps that should be added to clarify the situation. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 21:07, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Article is still inaccurate, standard 8 chevron address's require a ZPM because of intergalactic dialing, the gates that are being used though require less power because there relatively closer and used sequentially. You don't need a ZPM to dial to relatively close gates from different systems, only for extra distance dialing. I'm mentioning that you can go all the way through and disputing the contrary thats written in the article. If I had the right tools and knowledge I could set up a milky way gate in the Pegasus galaxy that works fine, so long as I substituted the dhd symbols and coordinate system, and set a new point of origin. BTW there are mistakes in the fifth race summary. Wiki Fox 21:36, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You don't need a ZPM to dial to relatively close gates from different systems, only for extra distance dialing. No, you're wrong. Physical distance has nothing to do with it; it's an extragalactic network that needs the ZPM. If you're asserting that it's physical proximity, please provide a cite for it, because that's never been the way the gate system works. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 21:49, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My source is the fifth race, I'll quote Carter and Daniel - Carter "Sir the computer indicates that the wormhole is leaving our known network of stargates, its going outside of our galaxy, far out." Jackson "Thats why the gate needed all the extra power." <--more power needed to dial outside galaxies which proximity wise are very far away. Wiki Fox 22:26, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: None of which indicates that it is possible to dial a Pegasus galaxy network gate with a Milky Way galaxy gate just because you move them close together. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 01:20, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

text: You must also take into account the fact that the Atlantis stargate and the Earth stargate are special cases because they are designed to link to each other (there is a set of Milky Way-design chevrons that link up with the Atlantis gate, and it has been stated multiple times that the Atlantis gate is the only one that can link up directly with the Earth gate due to a special control crystal). There is no direct evidence that Earth can dial any gate in the Pegasus galaxy even if they had the power. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 03:27, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Incorrect. The atlantian gate has an extra crystal, required to allow inter-galactic dialing. This crystal has been removed and reinstalled successfully in other gates (rodney mentioned this can be done, and that atlantis can only dial 8-chevrons because of this crystal, Season 1 I believe). The earth gate has a dialing program written with ancient knowledge that also allows 8-chev locks. This program can also be installed on other DHD's (seen in season 3 volume 2 episode 6 of SG-1 where its taken to an alternate reality and installed in alternate-alternate earths dhd)(I've been re-watching entire seasons due to being home sick) although modification would be necessary to install into standard DHD. Also while there is no direct evidence earth can dial any gate (which I fail to see how it is related to the point of my discussion) it can probably be done with very precise calculation, although I doubt this will be achieved easily if at all. Also the earth gate is not special it was brought to earth by a gould, Ra I believe, hence why I mentioned in my last message the earth gate is not the original one used by the ancients to dial atlantis (in season 10 episode named "The Pegasus Project" in SG-1 an ascended being says they traveled to the gate at the earths southern pole when evacuating atlantis. This was the second stargate recovered by the SGC in an episode called "solitudes" and was destroyed by Anubis using a weapon of apparent ancient design, maybe season 7 or 8 (teal'c was the one who said its apparently ancient design) leaving the one found in a dig in giza for use, rented out by the russians). Wiki Fox 04:13, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

text: One, berating me for using gate and DHD interchangeably that one time, accidentally, is rude, second, we don't know if the OS's are different and if they are its a limitation that can easily be over come. Also the gates OS's are fairly basic so besides the coordinate system and maybe new failsafe mechanisms there probably the same, theres no reason to reinvent the wheel (programming term). Wiki Fox 05:42, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All this is still speculative, though. Ultimately, all we know for sure is that the midway station is required and you can't jump from one network to another with a normal gate. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 06:01, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree, the macro can go gate to gate, so a conscious choice was likely made by someone on earth to stop half way. The gates being from different networks doesn't matter and saying you cant jump networks is inaccurate assuming your talking in the context of this discussion, a network is a group of Stargate's so literally your correct but this is unrelated, i'm referring to the bridge which is a collection of Stargate's in a straight line that are traveled through sequentially. What we do know for sure is two macros have been used and there current set up requires stopping at the midway station. This doesn't mean you cant travel through all the gates though. For the moment I'll put that two macros are used and there current set-up requires a pause, this is in line with what is known about the bridge so far. The paragraph seems a little awkward now though since I used part of the original and re-wrote the other part but my concern was with current knowledge so.. Wiki Fox 07:31, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

text: McKay called the other half of the bridge of a network, I regarded a network as the large collection of gates in a galaxy so slight wording issue. I mention this because of my last edit, it doesn't sound right now that I look at it. Other then that what I wrote in earlier edits should be fine, thanks for rewriting the two paragraphs I edited Khaos and being the only active participant. Looks much better :) Wiki Fox 08:55, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Part of it is somewhat speculatory (not all) which is why I support the current detail in the article, for the moment the detail about the intergalactic gate bridge is in line with the current cannon. I agree with some of your points. For the co-ord system it is obvious they are using a custom or special version, or modified version, the chevrons wouldn't match any stars because of the lack of stars between galaxies. A macro is a program that expands on a program, the jumper DHD could be set up to dial an 8-chevron address or not but the important part is for the macro and DHD to make sure the gate is dialed and you go point to point to point to 35 more points. Theres nothing in the current cannon to prevent it and as I've said before if a limitation were invented it should be easy to overcome but since its merely never been done it shouldn't be mentioned, what we do know for sure and have seen in the show is two macro's are used and there setup is what requires a pause. Also 8-chevs are used for long distance and any full through macro that may be used could be set up to mitigate 8-chevs or not depends on how its setup. My final point is the article has whats been proven for sure in it (for the bridge), and with current cannon there is nothing to prevent full travel with preparation of the gates (if necessary). Article is for fact about this fiction so yet again I agree that this shouldnt be explained, and that the article is fine in respect to the bridge. may have been repetitive as i just woke up. 72.184.236.101 18:18, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

text: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Session time out don't know if I should just stick my name in or not Wiki Fox 18:20, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question about intergalactic gate bridge macro 

message: I was going to add a reference to C. J. Cherryh's Gate of Ivrel et seq. to this section when it struck me that:
# it's a mess;
# it sits awkwardly among the detailed discussion of the Stargate Stargate.
The proper (?) thing to do would be to rename this article Stargate (Stargate) (which does exist but redirects here) and have the Stargate (device) article, based on this section, discuss the concept in science fiction in general... Would that be too radical?
If it is, then what would be the generic article name? Stargate (non-Stargate)?
--Ant 00:40, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How about merging it all into Wormholes in fiction? That's a nice generic name that covers pretty much everything mentioned in this section, and it has the advantage of already existing. Bryan 00:51, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree with your proposal.  But wait for one or two more agreements, or three days with no responses before you do it. Val42 01:06, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I definitely agree that calling all interstellar magic doors "Stargates" is inappropriate. Not so sure about "portals in fiction", though. "Portals" is more generic and would cover all sorts of other things from fantasy stories, for example. This isn't necessarily a bad thing but between this section and the stuff in "wormholes in fiction" there's already a lot of material so expanding the scope even more might result in an article in need of splitting anyway. Still, it'd be progress in the right direction IMO. Bryan 19:39, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Portals in science fiction? That reduces the scope back to something manageable. --Tango 21:30, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That works, though lowercased for Manual of Style reasons. :) Bryan 22:57, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree: Part of the definition should be that there is a doorway (or other such) that remains in place and the persons/things teleported move through it.  That would distinguish it from a tranporter/teleporter that has a device at one or both ends.  It also distinguishes it from being that can teleport themselves from place to place or dimension to dimension.  Val42 01:04, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move "Other uses of the concept" section? 

message: i know than they haven't ever been seen but it's obvious than exist stargates in the ori galaxy. if not how the priors arrive to the milky way?. JDeus01 04:31, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They have them but only have 1 or few of them seeing as how priors visit the various worlds through the ring transporters. Judging from the rings, the Ori stargates are probably white with pale yellow chevrons.
Faris b 04:56, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like speculation, we can't put it in the article. There's very little information at all about what the situation in the Ori galaxy is like. Bryan 09:44, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, in one episode in Season 9 (I think) they mentioned dialing the Ori galaxy and stated that they were being locked out. So, they must have at least 1 Stargate. And Supergates are technically Stargates, only bigger. Proven by a Season 10 episode where they were able to jump a wormhole from a Stargate to a Supergate. Sabre Knight 11:53, 09 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If we're talking about the episode Beachhead, I think that they were trying to dial the stargate on Kallana, where the Prior had set up a beachhead.  The gate was being held open (somehow), so they tried dialing in anyway.  We've seen the Priors use the ring transporters for (apparent) interplanetary transport in the Ori galaxy.  We've also seen them arrive via stargates in our galaxy, but we've never seen them leave that way.  We can't speculate, so we can only report what we've seen. Val42 03:45, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ancient/Ori Stargate 

message: Support
# Bryan Derksen 20:02, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge of Wormhole physics (Stargate)

message: Wormhole physics is not a fictional field of study!  There are plenty of scientists who theorize about wormholes.  This article talks about how Stargate descrbies wormhole physics, which is mostly fictional (but is taken from real scintific theories), but saying that wormhole physics itself is fictional is clearly wrong.  Tobyk777 04:53, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Can't this article be moved to Wormhole physics (Stargate)? That would seem to solve the problem you're raising. Metamagician3000 12:35, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That would be fine Tobyk777 23:15, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done! Metamagician3000 04:40, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I deleted the tag.  The issue is resolved.  Tobyk777 04:55, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good, and I've done some work on the opening sentence that might help a bit. Metamagician3000 05:06, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Talk from Wormhole physics (Stargate)

message: This article (Wormhole physics (Stargate)) survived an Articles for Deletion debate. The discussion can be found here. -Doc ask? 23:49, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Articles for Deletion debate

message: The article indicates two: the one Ra brought that was originally at Giza, and the Antarctic gate. The Giza one was eventually destroyed, leaving only the one. In "Rising", we see the Atlantis expedition leaving from Antarctica, but in "The Return," both Sheppard's new team and the Atlantis team go through the gate at the SGC. Did they move the Antarctic gate to Colorado, or is there a third gate? nmw 00:35, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The second gate has a long history.  NID had it, Russians had it, SGC (on loan from the Russains)... I can't keep track but I think there is currently just one (but there were two for a period. Morphh  (talk) 01:29, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: How many gates on Earth?

message: The article mentions two times for the duration of gate travel: 0.3 and 0.03. Someone please fix the wrong one. --M.A. 00:08, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Where's that from? The MALP takes more than a second, and the going-through-jingle is two seconds long! Repairing the Red Sun, Carter interrupted the beam after 6 seconds before her device would have arrived at the other gate... --FlammingoParliament 08:25, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, it's a flaw in the Ripple Effect episode. Contradiction solved (ie. shown in article) now. --FlammingoParliament 08:40, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inconsistency in gate travel time 

message: Up to "The Shroud" (after which this is not possible) there was a "funnel-shaped" wormhole from Pegasus to the Milky Way. Any theories what would happen if one were to travel through such a wormhole? This wormhole went into the supergate, so probably no problem that way. if one were to dial from a supergate to a small gate and send a large object (larger than a reguler gate) in, what would come out in the other end? A smaller object(shrinking), a core cylinder of the object (as big as the event horizon of the receiving gate), if so would the small gate rematerialize the rest of the object later(segments), lose the information(e.g. dump it in subspace), or maybe it would refuse to accept a transmission of an object it cannot materialize in one piece. any ideas?--Edgjerp 14:18, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This would be pure speculation so IMO the subject is moot, anything we came up with couldn't be added to the article anyway. Bryan Derksen 19:59, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

text: We have absolutely nothing to go on with that. A similar question is what would happen if you stepped through the wormhole that was connected to every gate in the galaxy when they were killing all the replicators. It's never been discussed or shown on the show, so we have absolutely no idea. --Tango 17:18, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Travelling between a normal gate and a supergate 

message: Why not The Ancients called them Astria Porta (a Latin-esque word for "Star Gate"; in Latin, it would really be either porta stellae or porta in astria) ??? --FlammingoHey 21:09, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably because it's unsourced; as such it constitutes original research.  —  pd_THOR | =/\= | 21:26, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Right ;-) Well, I did know THAT, what do you think about Longman's Latin Dictionary, astrium/stella? --FlammingoHey 22:04, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Latin 

message: I made a minor edit to correct the number of possible gate addresses for both the Milky Way and Pegasus stargate networks.  I don't have a clue where the original numbers came from, because they were off by BILLIONS. In the case of a hypothetical 9 digit Milky Way address, the total was off by more than a TRILLION. If you do the math properly (and windows calculator proves very helpful for double-checking the pen-and-paper method), the numbers listed previously are wrong, and I couldn't even determine how they'd been calculated.  And I didn't even bother to calculate the possible numbers if the 8 and nine symbol addresses are capable of reusing a symbol one or more times; if they are, that drive the numbers up significantly further. It has never been established in the show whether the eighth symbol must be a unique one, or if one of the other seven can be reused. And 9 symbol addresses have never been established, period. Toroca 04:22, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Number of Gate Addresses 

message: The names and numbering of the Atlantis glyphy are wrong. In the episode Sateda the following can be seen on McKay's Laptop:
Chevron 1  Arami 12
Chevron 2  Alura 3
Chevron 3  Ecrumio 6
Chevron 4  Salma 20
Chevron 5  Hochi (or maybe Rochi) 25
Chevron 6 (can't make out the glyph) Gilltin 32
Chevron 7  Subido 18
Could someone look into this, fill in the missing information and update the page? I only have a low resolution screenshot at hand, so take the info above with a grain of salt. 130.83.72.144 13:12, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Symbol names from Sateda 

message: Can someone add IPA for words like Chappa'ai aswell as writing "(Cha-Pa_Eye)" next to it? I mean for all words like that, I was just using Chappa'ai as an example. I would do it but I don't know IPAJedi Master Bra'tac 21:23, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: IPA

message: For the gate bridge between Atlantis and Earth, what are the addresses?  Presumably the actual Earth and Atlantis addresses aren't being used by the macro (to preserve the option of using the gate even if the gate bridge isn't working), but has anyone actually seen the addresses for the bridge?  --Tim4christ17 talk 12:26, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intergalectic gate bridge addresses 

message: I've often wondered what would happen if one went in the back of the stargate(non kawoosh side) Was this ever adressed?The Shroud 18:11, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not as far as I know. I'd like to know to... --Tango 20:09, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Entering Backwards? 

message: Clearly there must be different symbols on different physical gates.  If all gates had the same symbols, the SG teams would only be able to go to the number of planets equal to the number of symbols (since an origin must be entered as part of the "address"), and we have seen many more planets visited than that.
A closer analogy than a phone is a map with letters/numbers outside a grid pattern used to locate specific streets in the grid.  The "address" does not define a device, it defines a location (according to Daniel).  The explanation of the "address" is murky at best and doesn't seem to be very efficient (3 symbols are quite sufficient to define a cube, there's simply no need for 6) - but may work well in-universe since it is a system that might be developed by an "alien mind" - or point out Daniel's lack of geometric knowledge, since he is an archeologist.
In our terms, the fact that six (!) symbols are used to define a point in (apparently) absolute spatial terms would tend to obviate the need for a point of origin.  As presented, the six symbols are used to define a cube, the center of which is presumably the destination (or the cube is small enough to usually have only one gate within its boundaries).  If you have that degree of precision at the destination, how does the origin figure into it?  And 38 symbols (or whatever the number is), the order of which are apparently significant - well, you're not really going to be able to specify all that many destinations, considering many combinations are going to be contradictory or nonsequitor (you cannot apply a factoral calculation as a later section on this page suggests - the order of the symbols is significant, while factorals describe combinations with interchangeability as a characteristic).
But the fact that an origin is required suggests that the first six symbols are relative, not absolute; in which case it's not likely that six symbols are needed to define a location as vector-based relative locations would be more efficient, again requiring fewer than six symbols.  Besides, what would absolutes be based on?  How can absolutes become obsolete due to gross planetary movement, as we have seen?
Using six symbols makes the need for an origin starting point rather unlikely (if you have an origin, you don't need six symbols to define a vector; if you have six symbols for destination, you don't likely need an origin).
The explanation of how the coordinates translate is just not very satisfying. Voideater 20:10, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The article doesn't give a very good explanation of the co-ordinate system simply because the show has never given one. As you say, the explanation given by Daniel in the film doesn't really work, for all kinds of reasons. It is, however, the only explanation we have... It's worth pointing out, though, that we do know different gates have different symbols - when they find the Antarctic gate they recognise the point of origin because it is a symbol they've never seen before. --Tango 16:25, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Symbols on Gates - SG-1

message: If stargates can exchange electromagnetic waves between the two ends of a wormhole, then how is visible light shielded?  Isn't it just as possible that the singularity of the wormhole would stop us from visually "comprehending" the traveling light?  The Wormhole Physics section does not address this.
71.165.198.49 06:02, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not addressed because the show has never addressed it. Wikipedia articles don't contain speculation and original research. However, for the sake of idle conversation, I would guess that it has something to do with the fact that the event horizon emits light itself, so any light coming through the wormhole is too dim to be seen against it. --Tango 16:01, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Statements on Wormhole Physics: Radiation Exchange 

message: Why have so many images been deleted from the page? And I noticed that wiki is becoming more uptight about the images (the whole "non-free" templates introduced recently).
Vala M 14:47, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think most of them were deleted for not being low resolution, which is a requirement for images to qualify under Wikipedia's definition of fair use (which is intentionally much stronger than the legal definition). --Tango 15:58, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleted images? 

message: When they are trying to get the Gate to work in Solitudes, Carter makes a point of pointing out the point of origin symbol on the Antarctic gate. The symbol is not the same as the one on the Giza Gate, yet when the Antarctic gate becomes the main (SGC) gate, the symbol is the same as the original. Has this ever been addressed?--Irishboi 00:16, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That isn't the only example of them using the wrong props for stargates. I think it counts as a continuity error. As far as I know, it has never been mentioned on the show. --Tango 14:00, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Different Symbol

message: The article states that Daniel's theory is that the Pyramids (plural) were not created by the Egyptians, but I believe this is in error and his theory only relates to the Great Pyramid, not all pyramids.
Early in the movie (Daniel's academic presentation scenes) he states that the Great Pyramid is different to  all the others in lacking hieroglyphs (the ones present are forgeries added by their modern discoverer, according to him). The non-stated presumption being the other pyramids are Egyptian-created copies.
58.110.210.45 02:37, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed to be singular. =David(talk)(contribs) 03:41, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Daniel doesn't think ALL pyramids were created by non-Egyptians 

message: Obviously there's TONS of info on the Stargate that can be put into this article, but we must remember that this is a factual encyclopedia, not a fansite. Something on wikia or wikibooks could have an exhaustive list of every single on of the Stargate's features, but I don't think this article should go down to that level of detail. I think we should cut down the "complexities" section.
Despite arguments against this position, we have seen at least 3 times that the level of non-factual detail (that is, detail about how the fictional device works) has stopped this article becoming Featured. I'd like to get it there, and I think the best thing to do is summarise and cut down to the basics on the complexities and the sci-fi, and revamp all the factual sections (e.g. conceptual origin, making of).
I just posted this here because I wanted to know what sort of level of detail you all thought was appropriate, before making any changes. --Alfakim-- talk 19:11, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Level of detail 

message: This entire section should be deleted, since the material really belongs in :portals in science fiction:
"Stargate is one name for a class of fictional devices which allow instantaneous travel between places.
This article deals with the Stargates that feature as a central part of stories set in the Stargate science fiction universe." (emphasis added)
 
I just don't want to delete it without letting people know what I'm doing, and giving them a chance to put the information in the proper article. --Orange Mike 16:13, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Other uses of the concept" 

message: Isn't there 7 (seven) chevrons around the gates circumference not nine ? Hence the 7 chevrons being encoded for a gate address...(chevron one encoded..chevron 2 encoded....chevron seven locked) Paulchwd
Nope, there are nine, as you can see to the left.  Seven you can see (and seven typically used), but there are two more beneath the plinth the Stargate is set into - that is, if you looked at it floating in space (such as some are seen on Stargate Atlantis), you would see nine chevrons arranged around the gate.  The eighth chevron is used for travel to other galaxies, and the usage of the ninth chevron will be shown in the upcoming series Stargate Universe.  See Stargate (device)#Addresses for more information. =David(talk)(contribs) 03:42, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Number of Chevrons

message: In the episode Allegiance from Season 6, it got mentioned in the "Wormhole Physics" section the gate openes when you only press the middle button.
As far as I can remember (I just have seen that episode some weeks ago in TV, and I have especially paid attention for this scene), the stargate's chevrons were all lit up but no symbols on the DHD. In my honest opinion, they only have forgotten to make the DHD's symbols lit up and an address has been entered before. They only paused the dialling sequence to say some words to their fallen brothers until they completed it and make the gate kawoosh.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.178.245.147 (talk) 23:06, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Edit: I have watched that episode now today (I'm the same who posted that above). The chevrons were indeed lit up on the gate but not on the DHD. So they dialled the gate before it initialized the kawoosh. It seems like, the producers haven't lit up the DHD's chevrons because it wasn't a main part in the scene (Nobody is perfect). I edited the article now and removed that passage. If anyone is not satisfied with that, please contribute and give proofs.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.178.245.204 (talk) 13:54, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Gate opening when pressing the DHD's middle button

message: Small point, but the Stargate film doesn't start in 1928. It starts in Ancient Egypt, with Ra's arrival. (Though I think this section may have been omitted from some edited versions of the film.) 
--Anteaus 16:40, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Film Opening 

message: :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)
replies: text: Just an FYI to anyone concerned, I have added a rationale so this should be all set.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 01:08, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Midway Station - Stargate Atlantis.jpg

message: tried to work out what the author tried to write, but i couldn't quite figure it out, obviously it was written by someone who does not speak english, if anyone know what the person meant, please correct the thumbnail written tag --AvatarIII (talk) 16:47, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: New Graph

message: In the "known statements about wormhole physics" section, one of the points states that "A DHD can be used to create an event horizon in a Stargate even if it is "buried". ("48 Hours").". From what i can remember this is not the case. The only buried gate that has been dialed (to my knowledge) is the one where it was burried by molted rock while still active, which formed a natural 'iris', there was no material actually within where the horizon actually formed and so to say it was truly buried is incorrect, as there is essentially a "cavity" around the important parts". (it is akin to saying that a Stargate in an underground chamber is "buried" Aamackie (talk) 20:28, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you're right, although if memory serves, it was 100 days, not 48 hours. --Tango (talk) 22:12, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: when the lava and big rocks in 100 days rolled over the stargate, it was still active, the stargate remained active until the stuff on top of it had solidified and tipped it over. i believe they then fired a nuetron beam or whatever to super heat the rock so it come in through the opposite end of the stargate and form a cavity, this allowed the "kawoosh" to form a bigger cavity so teal's could save o'niell and yada yada yada they all lived happily ever after.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.158.45.6 (talk) 04:55, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Error

message: Okay, SGC started out with the 0< (alpha stargate) stargate, then they found the antartic gate ( o|  it's actually an octagon sitting on a thick line). When SG-1 was on thor's ship, they beamed aboard the 0< gate and SGC took the beta gate out of storage at Area 51 and installed it at the SGC. thor's ship went down with the alpha gate, which russia sooned gained posession of. The Beta gate was eventually destroyed with anubis' ancient stargate-go-boom thingy. The SGC then rented and later traded for the alpha gate from the russians. what i want to know is if the point of origin for the beta gate was ever seen in the i think two season gap between usage of the alpha gate.
and you know what? if the activation of the stargate costs so much, why didn't they just rig a DHD up to it? they must have had plenty leftover after pirating ones for the carter-mckay bridge.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.158.45.6 (talk) 04:50, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think they used the wrong point of origin all the time the second gate was being used - they just used the same stock footage of the gate dialling as they'd used before. Why do you say activating the Stargate costs so much? Opening a wormhole within the galaxy doesn't require that much power (the alternators on a couple of jeeps is good enough, as seen in 1969). It's running the whole base which is expensive. That said, it would make sense to have a couple of spare DHD's lying around for emergencies (it looks like they like the convenience of a dialling computer though, hence using one on the Alpha Site despite having a DHD right there). --Tango (talk) 16:47, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hmmm... 

message: Stargate is capitalized throughout the article, but it's not a proper noun, is it? Would anyone object to me changing it to lowercase? Foobaz·o< 21:31, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Stargate, the show, is a proper noun, so make sure you only change it where it's referring to the device. Even then, I'm not sure - what do the official sources say? Official plot summaries saying "SG-1 go through the (S|s)targate and...", for example. --Tango (talk) 21:50, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capitalization