Help icon

Maintenance links

Memory Alpha talk pages are for improving the article only.
For general discussion on this episode, visit the TNG forum at The Trek BBS.

Removed text Edit

I removed the following text:

A few fans of the show also thought that this was a moment where Riker/Troi were sharing a telepathic moment and he sent a rather obscene thought to Deanna hence her facial reaction and the way she playfully smacks Riker...

POV: do we really care what a few fans thought in this particular instance? -- Renegade54 14:00, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

My assumption was that he had thought something a bit naughty (not necessarily obscene). I don't see why this was removed as it seems just as valid as the idea that remains on the page (for which there is no reference given). - Caducus
Assumptions and what fans thought are all good and suchnot... but not things that have a home in an encyclopedia. Especially when it says "A few fans." How many is a few fans? 3? 1000? Regardless, it's fan speculation. That's also the benefit of fiction. Everyone takes away their own interpretation. :) -- Sulfur 15:23, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
I guess my point would be that either both thoughts are valid or neither are, unless referenced somewhere...
Caducus 15:34, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm guessing that you were referring to the bit about the birthday cake? I've tried to reword that one to be less of a "spectacular blooper" style wording, and more of a "to the point" thing. -- Sulfur 15:51, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

I am referring the the cake bit - sorry, new here...but getting the hang of it. My concern is that I don't see why the idea of 'forgetting lines' is any more or less worthy than the idea of 'naughty thoughts', yet one has been removed and one hasn't, unless the forgetting lines idea has been referenced in a canon source. It seems like the naughty thoughts idea was removed simply because an author agreed with one idea, but not with the other...Caducus 15:56, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Riker as the first officer to negotiate peace with the Romulans Edit

I was wondering why you removed the notice about Riker making first peace negotiations in Star Trek: Nemesis. Although there was an alliance in DS9, that's exactly what is was, an alliance. Would you please explain your edit. Thanks --Nmajmani 23:27, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

The entire 6th and 7th season of Deep Space Nine focused on the end of the Dominion War and showed several negotiations with the Romulans that happened well before Star Trek Nemesis. In one episode, Sisko met with a Romulan Senator to discuss a Federation treaty and in another, Doctor Bashir actually went to Romulus as part of a medical conference/peace envoy. So, Riker wasn't the first Starfleet officer to approach the Romulans about a peace treaty/alliance (i.e. you sort of have to be at peace first to have an alliance) which is why I remove dit from the article. -FleetCaptain 23:47, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Ok. Thanks. I have not seen all of Deep Space Nine, just scraps of seaon one and two (I'm working on it. I own them). Thanks for clearing this up. --Nmajmani 00:27, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Prescience/relation with other episodes Edit

The following: "Admiral Picard states that the peace talks with the Romulans originated in an event four years prior, the same time period as Nemesis." is listed as the episode being 'prescient' - could it not be said that the date for Nemesis was partially based on Admiral Picard's statements in this episode? In that case, this episode would not have been prescient, but merely canonical.

Also, the background info for the DS9 episode "Shadowplay" refers to an earlier plot idea that would have revolved around a virtual prison that could never really be escaped from. I haven't seen Future Imperfect for a while, but doesn't it also have a "you haven't really escaped" element? -Etoile 20:04, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Taking thing from a different angle, that entire "list" really doesn't belong because 99% of the bg should really reflect upon events up to that point in production, and not ponentially spoil potential readers on whats to come. --Alan 20:16, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Worf's Rank Edit

I have not seen this in a very long time and need to know was Worf a Lt. Jg in the future? Data was XO but for Worf's rank isnt there ScarletScarabX (Talk) 02:57, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

This is a talk page, not a forum... *Jasper* 09:54, September 17, 2010 (UTC)
...and the answer to the question could lead to changing article content. How about someone who at least knows how to sign their name answers for the question? --OuroborosCobra talk 10:56, September 17, 2010 (UTC)
I'm sorry to have to disappoint you, but I do know how to sign. Also, I am terribly sorry for forgetting to do so.
Personally, I believe there to be a difference between "how's [x] in this episode?" and "I believe [x] should be in this article, but don't know what it is, does someone else know?" - namely only the second belonging on a talk page. Nevertheless, I don't see the article contradicting the question, nor do I see a reason to include that information in the article. *Jasper* 11:09, September 17, 2010 (UTC)
Discussion continued at Forum:Worf's Rank in Future Imperfect.
Talk pages are not for "idle" discussion - but if someone has a question that would be a valid "Reference Desk" entry, and manages to ask the question on the correct page, then who are you to shoot down that question? -- Cid Highwind 13:28, September 17, 2010 (UTC)
You are right, Cid - or actually, Sulfur is. I am sorry for shooting down the question and I won't do it again. Also, I must say I wasn't aware of the "Reference Desk" (I was acting more on general wiki conduct than on specific knowledge of memory alpha). How about just calling this discussion closed? (the one about talk pages and questions that is, the original question can freely live in the Reference Desk). -- *Jasper* 15:48, September 30, 2010 (UTC)
It basically was closed already. There hadn't been a comment in this discussion for nearly two weeks until you just added one. --OuroborosCobra talk 01:59, October 1, 2010 (UTC)

James Garner teleplay Edit

This is a teleplay of the James Garner movie 36 Hours.The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

We need evidence of that other than the fact that the plots may be similar in order to include such a statement in the article, such as a statement from Trek staff that they had that in mind.--31dot 23:11, December 17, 2011 (UTC)

Titan Edit

In the continuity section, I changed this -

And Riker's ship was in charge of the task force handling discussions with the Romulans.

To this -

And, in the Titan book series, Riker's ship was in charge of the task force handling discussions with the Romulans.

Because I thought that it was a bit unclear. Wondered if I should put that the books were non-canon? 09:18, January 3, 2012 (UTC) Non-registered user.

I reverted it; that line has to do with Riker's comment at the end of Star Trek Nemesis, as the paragraph indicates, not the books. Even if it did, non-canon materials go in an Apocrypha section, not Background. Also, it is unnecessary to state you are a "non-registered user", signing with your IP address does that. --31dot 09:52, January 3, 2012 (UTC)

Sorry! My mistake. Thought that the Romulan part was just in the books, didn't remember that line.

Sorry. Odin Norse 18:27, January 4, 2012 (UTC) Odin Norse

This text in many pagesEdit

In 2367, while exploring a cavern on Alpha Onias III, Commander William T. Riker was rendered unconscious by gases. While unconscious, neural scanners scanned Commander William T. Riker's brain. The scanners used elements of Riker's reality and constructed a holodeck simulation with those elements interspersed throughout, so that it felt real to him. What Riker wanted, the scanners made possible.

If we can find all the pages where this text appears verbatim, I think in most cases it's not necessary and confuses the page. Altarian encephalitis, for example, doesn't really need all that context - it's better off on Alpha Onias III or Alpha Onias expedition. --LauraCC (talk) 17:34, March 20, 2019 (UTC)

pages where it appears on -- Capricorn (talk) 11:07, April 4, 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for adding that. Your thoughts on where it belongs and doesn't? --LauraCC (talk) 16:23, April 8, 2019 (UTC)

I don't really have deep thoughts on that. Honestly I was just responding to the "If we can find all the pages where this text appears verbatim". -- Capricorn (talk) 21:54, April 8, 2019 (UTC)

Ah, okay. --LauraCC (talk) 14:42, April 9, 2019 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-NC unless otherwise noted.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Stream the best stories.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Get Disney+