Talk:LV-426/Archive 1

Archive 1

Moon or Planet?

This article says that LV-426 is a moon, but the plot synopsis for Aliens says it's a planet. Whoops. So which is it? --65.97.2.33 (talk) 03:10, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Cold

I've removed a phrase:

Prior to terraforming, the atmosphere consisted mostly of nitrogen, crystallised carbon dioxide, and methane, and its temperature was well below the Celsius line.

and put in details on the melting points of the two compounds. "Below the Celsius line" makes no sense. --Waerloeg (talk) 10:32, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

atmosphere processors

"They make the world habitable with the aid of an enormous, fusion-powered atmosphere processor and established a terraforming colony called "Hadley's Hope." ... There were more than one processor, according to the book. There was a whole network of processors, and one blowing up only made the work harder for the remaining ones. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.119.2.60 (talk) 12:03, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:LV-426.PNG

Image:LV-426.PNG 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 ensure 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 12:56, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Chris Foss Pyramid Book of Alien.JPG

The image Image:Chris Foss Pyramid Book of Alien.JPG is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --23:05, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Diameter of LV-426

It is mentioned in the first Alien movie: 1000 m! (Or 1200 m as in the article, I can't remember exactly) It is a ridiculous value and would make it tiny even compared to most asteroids. That should be mentioned in the article. --JyriL ^talk 20:40, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

The Alien Universe Timeline has a nice discussion of LV-426's size (near the bottom, italicized text). Apparently, the novelization and the Director's Cut give a diameter of 1200 km. The "Official Alien film magazine" and a certain comic adaptation give a diameter of 1200 meters. The Colonial Marines Technical Manual gives a diameter of 12,201 (almost, but not quite, Earth-sized). The site draws the conclusion that 1200 km (the diameter stated in the Director's Cut) is the correct diameter; however, with a gravity strength of 0.86 (also stated in the film), the CMTM's diameter seems more realistic to me. --Teflon Don (talk) 10:22, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

If the comic says 1200 m, then that is the value mentioned in the movie. I watched the movie (original version) some time ago after reading the comic book (published by Heavy Metal, drawn by Walter Simonson) and heard the crew mention that value. 12,000 km value is realistic, the planet (or moon?) would be about the size of Venus (12,100 km), whose gravity strength is ~0.9 gees. --JyriL ^talk 15:57, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

In the movie, they mention that the derelict ship is 2000m away. If the moon was only 1200m in diameter, then it couldn't be more than 1800m away, no matter which direction they took! :) --Erissian (talk) 03:22, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

They never actually explicitly state the unit in the size estimate. In fact, in the extended cut, they didn't even say whether they meant radius or diamater. So the diameter of the planetoid could be anything between 1200km and 4400km (radius 1200 nautical miles). Either that or it was a gaffe on the actor's part. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.156.228.176 (talk) 12:21, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

LB-426?

Where is the movie referred to as LB-426? AFAIK, it's always referred to as LV-426 on screen and in dialog. I've seen LB-426 in some TV guide style listings, but that's non-canon. Any canon source for LB-426? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xsmasher (talk • contribs) 03:36, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

This article should be merged into the movie articles.

LV-426 is a fictional construct and as such doesn't merit its own page. When a real planet is discovered orbiting Zeta², we'll make an article for that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68Kustom (talk • contribs) 17:50, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

I agree, but merge discussions kind of stalled. I believe Alien (film) already covers everything related to the planetoid in that film, I'll look over Aliens (film) and the other articles to see if there's anything that needs to be merged there. --IllaZilla (talk) 18:45, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

I disagree, the planet is as fictional as the Alien character. If the character deserves an article, so other objects. The rationale given for "merging" is not sufficient, IMHO. Kind regards, DPdH (talk) 01:32, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

There are numerous reliable secondary sources to verify information about the Alien itself, and with which to establish its notability to the realms of film and science fiction. There do not appear to be such sources available to support an independent article about LV-426, which is merely the setting of about 1⅓ of the films in the series. If such sources were to appear and be cited in the article, and if that information went beyond just what belongs in the articles about the films themselves, then it'd be a different story. But the article's been tagged for sourcing, notability, & cleanup for nearly a year & no such sources have come to light. --IllaZilla (talk) 01:41, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Removed the redirect I see no consensus at all for this to be redirected. --97.102.240.59 (talk) 08:28, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Then clearly you need to read the above comments a second time. In over a year, two editors (myself included) have argued for merging on the basis of there being few to no secondary sources available around which to base an article on this topic, and it being adequately covered in the main film articles already. Only one editor has argued against merging, and his argument is a WP:OTHERCRAP defense. In any case, consensus matters little in the face of no secondary sources. Either there are sources or there aren't, and you shouldn't just restore the article without addressing this concern in any way, shape, or form. --IllaZilla (talk) 08:51, 20 May 2010 (UTC)