Talk:Thomas Riker/peerreview

From Memory Alpha, the free Star Trek reference

Haven't read the text itself yet, but what I immediately noticed was the bad image quality. All three images (Image:Thomas Riker (2369).jpg, Image:Thomas Riker.jpg, Image:Thomas Riker 2371.jpg) currently on the page show serious artifacts from either the bad VHS tape this was taken from, or from JPEG compression. If those exact images are to be kept, I would at least like to see them re-uploaded in better quality. Additionally, I could see one of the two similar "2369" images be removed from the sidebar and another one, perhaps showing Thomas with either Will, Deanna, or both, be added where appropriate. Regarding the sidebar in general, a possible "Featured article" might be a good start to think about what's really important to have on a character sidebar. Is "Created as duplicate" or "Affiliation:Maquis" really something we need to have on the sidebar (instead of in the text)? I'll leave another note once I read the article text itself. -- Cid Highwind 20:07, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree on both issues; we need better quality images. Does anyone have the ability to get better screengrabs? I have the TNG DVD set, but not DS9, so I could eventually get new grabs from "Second Chances" but not "Defiant". As for the sidebar, let's lose the "Created as duplicate" and "Affiliation" and stick with the typical Name, Gender, Species, Born, Mom, Dad and Actor. -Humuhumunukunukuāpuaʻa 15:08, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thomas replacing Will

At the time of airing, there were rumours stating that the producers talked about killing off Will in favour of Thomas - Thomas would have stayed on board of the Enterprise as a Lieutenant, while Data would have been promoted to XO. These rumours still pop up from time to time.

I don't know if these rumours are true or not, but if we can find any good source for this, it might make a good addition to a background section. -- Cid Highwind 13:44, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

I found a small note stating this on "William T. Riker", but without citing a source. It should be removed there (because it is more appropriate for this article), but only added here if a source can be found. -- Cid Highwind 20:55, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Interesting. The only other reference I can find to this doing a Google search is in an Amazon.com review of the TNG DVD sets. I'll keep digging. -Humuhumunukunukuāpuaʻa 15:53, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Its from the TNG Companion. Also, Jonathan Frakes said he prefers Tom to Will in the DS9 Companion.

[edit] Opening article quote

i added an opening quote and it was from "Defiant". it was removed, which is fine, but another one should be added. the user that removed it called it unsourced, i hope this does not mean they didn't know where it was from, as they are the major editor on this article and this character is only in two episodes...

I removed the quote, because I'd rather that we discuss what quote would best stand to capture Thomas Riker in a nutshell (since the article is currently under peer review and Featured Article candidate). Should he be remembered as a Maquis first? Or as a "version of Will that was never to be?" A couple possibilities:

"He's not Will. He is, but – you know what I mean."

- Beverly Crusher (TNG: "Second Chances")

"I have found that humans value their uniqueness, their sense that they are different from everyone else. The existence of a double would preclude that feeling."

-Data (TNG: "Second Chances")

"You're trying to be a hero... and terrorists don't get to be heroes."

- Kira Nerys (DS9: "Defiant")

-Humuhumunukunukuāpuaʻa 22:16, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Featured Article nomination comments (failed FA nom in January 2007)

Even though I addressed (in my opinion) the only opposing votes about the article's FA nomination, the opposing votes were not removed, and the FA nomination failed. What follows are the comments from the FA candidacy. Since the article is already being requested a peer review, and the lack of comments both HERE and at the FA nomination page, unless those with concerns feel like returning and re-reviewing the article in question, nothing more can be done. -Humuhumunukunukuāpuaʻa 14:49, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Self-nomination. I've spent a great deal of work on this article, and it was listed as peer-reviewed for 2 weeks without any feedback. I think this would make for an excellent Featured Article, and I welcome feedback and/or thoughts. -Humuhumunukunukuāpuaʻa 16:37, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Support. Well done, to all who were involved with this article. :) --From Andoria with Love 20:35, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Oppose. Haven't read the text itself yet, but what I immediately noticed was the bad image quality. All three images (Image:Thomas Riker (2369).jpg, Image:Thomas Riker.jpg, Image:Thomas Riker 2371.jpg) currently on the page show serious artifacts from either the bad VHS tape this was taken from, or from JPEG compression. If those exact images are to be kept, I would at least like to see them re-uploaded in better quality. Additionally, I could see one of the two similar "2369" images be removed from the sidebar and another one, perhaps showing Thomas with either Will, Deanna, or both, be added where appropriate. Regarding the sidebar in general, a possible "Featured article" might be a good start to think about what's really important to have on a character sidebar. Is "Created as duplicate" or "Affiliation:Maquis" really something we need to have on the sidebar (instead of in the text)? I'll leave another note once I read the article text itself. -- Cid Highwind 20:07, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Comment: Noted regarding the graphics. I'll see if I can acquire better screenshots. I'm going to copy your comment and add it to the Talk:Thomas Riker/peerreview page. Any willing to assist in improving the article are advised to take the discussion there. -Humuhumunukunukuāpuaʻa 15:00, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Comment: I now read the whole text and left another note one the peer review page. If those two points are addressed, I'd support this nomination. -- Cid Highwind 13:46, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Comment: New versions of images have been uploaded, as has a new image of Tom and Deanna. I welcome futher comments/support. I have decided to leave both 2369 images in the sidebar, as other FA have set this precedent (Jean-Luc Picard, etc) -Humuhumunukunukuāpuaʻa 21:57, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Support, very thorough. -- Jaz ^talk 02:23, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Further discussion

I thought I made it pretty clear that "If those two points are addressed, I'd support this nomination.". The points were addresses, as far as I can see, which would make my comments a support vote. Sorry if that hasn't been clear. In any case, though, this would still make it just four votes on this FA nomination - which is pretty sad... -- Cid Highwind 15:19, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

If it is renominated, I will vote for it. I am sorry I forgot to check back at that page. --OuroborosCobra ^talk 15:21, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

No worries, and thanks for the notes, both of you. Perhaps I'll resubmit this for FA in the near future, and we'll see if we can drum up more support. -Humuhumunukunukuāpuaʻa 20:55, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

It's been seven months since the last comment. Is this still up for peer review?--StarFire209 18:04, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Who's the duplicate?

The wording of this article indicates that Will is the original. That may be an invalid assumption. (I say why I think so in Talk:Thomas Riker.) This should be revised to take a neutral stance on who's the duplicate? – StarFire209 18:04, 26 August 2007 (UTC)–