- MA files from this episode (35) • MA remastered files from this episode (13)
- Episode data module and titles check:
| |||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For general discussion, please visit Memory Alpha's Discussions feature, or join the chat on Discord.
FA status[]
Nomination (23 Sep - 19 Dec 2015, Success)[]
I noticed that no animated series eps were nominated yet according to the page, and this one is particularly comprehensive. --LauraCC (talk) 18:20, September 23, 2015 (UTC)
- Support --Defiant (talk) 10:19, September 27, 2015 (UTC)
Oppose the wording and picture of the blurb, for the record, just in case anyone though this was going to work as is.- Archduk3 05:25, October 13, 2015 (UTC)- With the blurb issues dealt with, Support overall. - Archduk3 04:29, October 17, 2015 (UTC)
- Support. Tom (talk) 21:07, October 19, 2015 (UTC)
- Support - Sennim (talk) 10:56, October 23, 2015 (UTC)
Character Names?[]
I don't mean to throw a monkeywrench into things, but after seeing this episode several times, where are you getting the names for the incidental characters like Aleek-Om, Bates, Grey, etc.? They aren't mentioned in the episode. If they come from a script, Bjo Trimble's Star Trek Concordance, or Alan Dean Foster's Star Trek Logs, then this needs to be mentioned somewhere.--Julianbaischir 13:45, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Peer review[]
Hard to Understand[]
The following sentence is quite hard to understand:
--unsigned
- It should probably read something like this:
- If it hasn't been fixed already, I'll fix it. --Commodore Sixty-Four(talk) 09:13, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- Looks like it's already been done in more direct prose. -C64
This is a bit confusing[]
Since Billy Simpson voiced young Spock, it seems odd to say that his voice was never recorded. A tape made during an audition is still a recording. I'm going to change this to what I think it means, but I'm leaving this quote here for easy reference, if I am mistaken.
--Commodore Sixty-Four(talk) 09:08, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Best Animated episode?[]
I'm sorry, but comments such as:
Strike me as one writer's opinion rather than a statement of fact - for example, the whole premise of the story - he was in the past at the time therefore he couldn't go back to the past to save himself - seem pretty logically questionable to me to begin with. By all means, note that it's cool that this story allows the show to give us a lot of Spock backstory, but I don't think it's right to have "This encyclopedia believes this was the best episode" here. AndroidFan 21:59, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
- I removed the two opinion passages quoted above.– Cleanse 11:17, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Peer review[]
I think this article has the potential to become an FA. I know the summary section's a bit short, but so is the episode itself and its act structure is extraordinarily hard to figure out! I believe the bg info section sort of speaks for itself. Any constructive comments would be much appreciated, however. --Defiant 11:05, July 15, 2011 (UTC)
Any questions, etc. would also be appreciated. I'd particularly be interested to find out if anyone thinks the summary is too short for FA status & whether the act structure is completely necessary, etc. --Defiant 15:05, July 15, 2011 (UTC)
- I have no problem with short summaries – they are meant to summarise after all. As you noted, TAS episodes are only half an hour, so we shouldn't expect a summary the same size as a live-action ep. As for background, "comprehensive" doesn't really do it justice! :-) I'll have a look through it later and make some comments.–Cleanse ( talk | contribs ) 23:36, July 15, 2011 (UTC)
- I second that, going through the article takes more time than actually watching the episode, which in this case is meant to be a compliment :) The work you have done and the BGinfo is truly impressive. I'm not well versed in judging episodes for its FA merits, but from what I've seen and read, I think it should attain the status without much difficulties. I've taken the liberty to finetune the "LaserDisc" link..Sennim 12:31, July 17, 2011 (UTC)
- As promised, I read through the article and I think its really well done, and I would support it as an FA. The only thing that really jumped out was how the text commentaries were cited, but that was easily fixed. –Cleanse ( talk | contribs ) 08:19, July 24, 2011 (UTC)
Thanks very much for the comments left so far, Cleanse and Sennim, and for your improvements to the article. Are there any more constructive comments to be had; can anyone spot any other ways the article can be improved? --Defiant 08:27, July 24, 2011 (UTC)
Removed items[]
Doohan voices[]
If it's noted below we shouldn't need to note it again -- DhaliaUnsung 00:46, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Le-matya roar[]
I removed the following note:
This was because it requires a citation. --Defiant 11:02, June 3, 2011 (UTC)
Paramount+ subtitles[]
Do the Paramount+ subtitles give a name to the crewman who accompanies Kirk through the Guardian (Erickson in the script)? Do they also give a name to the crewman who researches Spock's family history (Bates in the script)? I need this information for a list that I'm working on that shows various contradictory non-canon names for canon characters. I'm not currently subscribed to Paramount+ so I can't check myself. --NetSpiker (talk) 08:54, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
- I just checked; neither is named in the Paramount+ subtitles. I have not checked the subtitles of the DVD/Blu-Rays, though; I don’t know whether they are any different. —Josiah Rowe (talk) 18:54, 16 January 2022 (UTC)