| Revision as of 07:46, 6 May 2007 editCydebot (talk | contribs)6,812,251 editsm Robot - Updating links to new version of fair us in template.← Previous edit | Revision as of 02:32, 4 June 2007 edit undo24.30.141.251 (talk) ←Blanked the pageNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| == N2 Mine Power == | |||
| '''Continued from ] | |||
| :I'm not ready to accept with 'absolute certainty' that Sachiel is 'percisely' 40 meters tall. However, I think everyone can accept that Sachiel is < 80 meters tall, and certainly >30 meters tall. Now, 40 meters seems a very reasonable estimate (far more so than 80 meters), given say a quick analysis of the missile stopped by Sachiel's arm was the length of a plane (F22-Raptor 18.2m, B2 bomber 20m), and exceptionally large plane would be different such as the B52 (48m), but I think that last comparision can be discarded. Also a 12-15 meter width corresponds well with the ability to stand on an Aircraft carrier, and also have a bredth as great as a destroyer vessels in the case of the Evangelions which are of comparible size. | |||
| : In any case, even if there ''is'' disagreement on Sachiel's height it would only make a factor of 2x error on the part of the ranges guessed. | |||
| : This seems pretty pertainent to this discussion -- http://en.wikipedia.org/Nuclear_explosions#Summary_of_the_effects | |||
| : Again a quick glance at a 1 megaton nuke seems to confirm the impossibility of this. For a larger Sachiel it may be relevant to argue as much as a 100 kilotons, but even that would seem a bit of a stretch. --] 09:20, 22 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::Sachiel is '''about''' 40 meters tall. All evidence I've found supports this. If you wish to challenge this, you'd be wise to find some counter-evidence. I never said '''precisely''', but with confidence I'll assert that Sachiel is definitely between 30 and 50 meters in height; 80 meters is implausibly tall when viewed against all scenes involving Sachiel. --] 10:06, 22 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :::The use of an ''exact number'' such as '''40''' without placing any ranging implies a certain degree of percision, or at least a strong confidence within a range 5 meters. As of yet, the range of accepted at least here is 40-200 meters! If you wish to tackle the size of the Evangelions you need to approach the Evangelion mecha topic itself. I however, certainly agree that an actual range of 30-50 meters is clearly the most reasonable, and is certainly is supported by the ''vast majority'' of evidence. But until you have challenged the height presented on the wikipedia, we must accept that any number within a fairly wide range may be considered ''valid''. Hence, conclusions drawn from any basis of height ''cannot'' be used to draw any direct conclusions without giving an ''absurdly'' generous range for the corresponding height. | |||
| ::::''Incorrect. The range for ''Evangelions'' was, according to the page, 40-200 meters depending on scene. (That's incorrect when just entertaining the first 24 episodes, anyway.) However, in all measurable scenes involving Sachiel, the angel is only 40 meters. The Evangelion was also roughly 40 meters in those scenes in which it appeared. Further, the measure of 1.5 km is also quite consistent with Misato and Shinji having just driven out from nearly under the heel of Sachiel at most a minute or two before the explosion. One does '''not''' need to entertain the notion that the angel was suddenly 200 meters in a scene between the two events, without evidence to support that notion. --] 19:11, 22 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :::However, it is worth noting that even an absurdly generous assumption of height: 80 meters, or even 200 meters ''still'' supports < 1 megaton. --] 10:42, 22 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==Image Tagging ]== | |||
| {| align="CENTER" style="background-color:#FFFFFF; border:8px solid #FF0000; padding:5px;" | |||
| |- | |||
| |] | |||
| | <center><big>This media may be '''deleted'''.</big> | |||
| </center> | |||
| |} | |||
| Thanks for uploading ''']'''. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the ] status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Misplaced Pages (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page. | |||
| If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{tl|GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the ]. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading ], and then use a tag such as {{tlp|Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at ]. See ] for the full list of copyright tags that you can use. | |||
| If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "]" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you. ] 03:38, 25 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Naked ] == | |||
| I think of the word "Naked" as being an ] where as "nude" is, at least within the field of ], more usually a ]. I think that in the United States the word ''Nude'' may be seen as meaning ''vile'' rather than ''naked''. ] 20:53, 9 November 2006 (UTC) | |||