FA status Edit

Nomination (19 Dec 2011 - 03 Jan 2012, Withdrawn)Edit

Partly a self-nomination, I've added to the bg info section, while I also believe the in-universe portion of the article is admirably up-to-scratch. --Defiant 00:24, December 19, 2011 (UTC)

When nominating articles, please use the format described above, not one that hasn't been used since mid 2005. This also requires a FA blurb. - Archduk3 00:49, December 19, 2011 (UTC)

How's that? --Defiant 03:45, December 19, 2011 (UTC)

Comment: (inb4 this gets a bunch of concise support votes) - at first glance, I didn't find anything that is particularly wrong with this article - but at the same time, I didn't find anything that makes this article particularly impressive either. Is there anything besides being "up-to-scratch" alone that makes this article "FA material"? -- Cid Highwind 20:27, December 19, 2011 (UTC)
While the blurb is good, I have to echo Cid's comment about the article. It seems there should be more information for a species seen in two-ish episodes, even if some of that information comes close to being episode summaries. The article just isn't particularly interesting to read. While I'm not going to oppose it over something like that, I won't support it either as is. Also, is there no other bg info on this species? - Archduk3 21:03, December 19, 2011 (UTC)
I'll third Cid's comment. Like Archduk, I won't outright oppose it, but I won't support it either.--31dot 21:18, December 19, 2011 (UTC)

I relate to what you're saying, and I agree the article could use some more work/some extra material added to it. The bg info is very rare and far between for this species. I remember, years ago, that the "Storm Front" script(s) was/were available online; this is, sadly, no longer the case. I've scoured the official magazines, Trekweb, the official Trek website, the blogs of both John Eaves and Doug Drexler, the DVD special features, the script of "Zero Hour" (which is also not available on-line), and relevant interviews online as well as listed on IMDb. I believe the article is well researched (including the bg info that is either rare or not publicly available at all) and well-written. However, I'm not entirely sure what could be added to the article, never having written any species article personally. I'd be open to suggestions. --Defiant 00:51, December 20, 2011 (UTC)

I'll be taking a look at this in detail soon, as I plan to rewatch the episodes in the next few days, if not sooner. - Archduk3 00:24, December 22, 2011 (UTC)

Cool! I've always personally liked this species, so I'm not just flippantly nominating the article; I'm prepared to try to make it as good as it can possibly be. I've thought of some possibilities of more info that could be added; how the Na'kuhl were viewed by the resistance fighters of the time (shock, etc.), and the Na'kuhl technology. --Defiant 11:07, December 22, 2011 (UTC)

The article should cover everything we know, since that isn't a lot. We could also cover the color of their blood, maybe with a picture, since I remember one of them being shot. - Archduk3 23:38, December 24, 2011 (UTC)
Uploaded File:Na'kuhl blood.jpg; not sure where to place it in the article though since most of the physiology is currently in the lead in. - Archduk3 19:16, December 28, 2011 (UTC)

I've made the suggested changes. Since there's clearly more work to be done on this article than I estimated at the time of nominating it, I suggest we let the nomination procedure slide (with the possibility of later renominating it). I think we should decide first, however, what the boundaries are for in-universe species info; for example, it seems just as speculative to attribute the color of Ghrath's blood to his entire species as to being merely the result of a personal genetic enhancement or whatever, since his is the only Na'kuhl blood ever shown on-screen. I've recently been warned against assuming a once-only fact to be true of the individual's entire species (in that case, it was that the commonality of two-syllable names of several El-Aurians should not be applied to their species). Here, it seems to have been advised that the Na'kuhl blood should be assumed to be indicative of the Na'kuhl species as a whole. So, there appears to be some contradiction here (though I admittedly may simply be misunderstanding the similarity between these two cases). --Defiant 21:30, December 30, 2011 (UTC)

Names are far more subjective (see Vulcans and Saavik) than blood (excepting STVI), and without a reason stated in canon to suggest that the blood wouldn't be that color for everyone, we shouldn't outright state otherwise. A bg note can always be added about the issue as well if wording some ambiguity into the in universe text is problematic. As for a renomination, that takes at least four weeks now, so unless you think more than a month of working on this is required, I'd recommend keeping the nomination active, since the only issue right now seems to be wording (I'll be reading the whole article again shortly). - Archduk3 02:24, December 31, 2011 (UTC)
I do suspect it'll take more than a month to improve this article to the point where it's ready for FA status, as I have considerably underestimated the amount of work it needs. One reason why I nominated the article here is that the peer review hasn't seemed to be working well; the Saavik PR process had only 1 contributor, despite being quite a lengthy experience! I wasn't aware of the new 4 weeks policy, and I believe that's far more than what is appropriate, so if someone could direct me to how to go about protesting to this new rule, I'd be much obliged (I find it really hard to keep track of the many, many policy pages). --Defiant 14:42, January 2, 2012 (UTC)

Lenin Edit

Do we know that the Na'kuhl assassinated Lenin? It was said in the episode that they arrived only recently on Earth. -- EtaPiscium 11:40, 17 Oct 2004 (CEST)

Lenin was assassinated in 1916, before the Na'kuhl arrived so the suggestion is that it wasn't them. Malcolm says that the witnesses reported that the assassin seemed to disappear afterwards. It can't have been Silik or another Suliban as they have no means to travel back in time on their own. Alex Peckover 12:27, Oct 17, 2004 (CEST)
The implication in the episode was that the Na'kuhl assassinated Lenin, however. The reason I say this is the whole "chicken and the egg" discussion that goes on.
Vosk and his men became trapped in an alternate version of WWII when they traveled into the past. They enlisted the aid of the Nazis to build a temporal conduit. Now the way things unfolded before Daniels interfered, the Na'kuhl returned to their time with the knowledge of what would irreparably alter Earth's history (and likely give their people a major boost in the Temporal Cold War). They returned to the past and assassinated Lenin, thereby allowing the timeline they were previously trapped in to take place, a timeline where the Nazis quite likely came to control the planet.
However, once Daniels brought Enterprise to the past, Archer was successful in destroying the temporal conduit. This prevented the Na'kuhl from ever traveling back to assassinate Lenin, and thus restored the timeline to its original status.
If it were not the Na'kuhl who assassinated Lenin, then the destruction of the temporal conduit would not have been enough to restore the timeline. Daniels still would have had to stop the assassin, because that is where the true damage was done. The Fallen 00:18, August 27, 2005

Keep in mind that Vosk actually started the whole Temporal War. So by killing him before he could return to the 29th century, Archer prevented the war from having occured. In other words, it doesn't make any difference who killed Lenin, as long as it happened during the war.

This is all speculation, or course. - Mitchz95 03:53, August 29, 2011 (UTC)

Name Edit

I was recently surprised not to find the name "Na'kuhl" anywhere in the final draft scripts of ENT: "Storm Front" and "Storm Front, Part II" (post-production versions), as I read through them. Larry Nemecek had this to say about the matter, "I do know the name was used early on because *I* found it (and likely the Memory-Alpha anals) got it off its use on the call sheets. It was invented out of nowhere… Mike & crew likely took it from early drafts & production meetings & notes, and never changed it in their own notes. Why would they? Go from a specific to a generic alien? There’s enough of those." I've therefore tweaked the 1st sentence in this article to say, instead of "script sources," "behind-the-scenes sources." If anyone knows anything more about the origins of the name, I'd be interested to learn more. --Defiant (talk) 05:42, March 25, 2016 (UTC)

Move suggestion Edit

I'd like to suggest that this entry be moved to Unnamed non-humanoids (29th century), due to the policy page stating, "Script versions take precedence in order of date." The final draft scripts of "Storm Front" and "Storm Front, Part II" leave this species unnamed, so we probably should too. --Defiant (talk) 22:28, January 27, 2017 (UTC)

Seems reasonable...--LauraCC (talk) 21:08, January 29, 2017 (UTC)
The Star Trek Encyclopedia uses this name, so we can too. Oppose. - Archduk3 18:48, January 30, 2017 (UTC)
Does the policy page have that caveat? --LauraCC (talk) 18:49, January 30, 2017 (UTC)
Yes, the policy page mentions Livingston as an example of the kind of name that can be used as an article title. Livingston wasn't mentioned in any script either. --NetSpiker (talk) 00:10, January 31, 2017 (UTC)
What?? No, this doesn't have anything to do with why Livingston is permitted. Rather, the Star Trek Encyclopedia is an acceptable source for the name. -- Capricorn (talk) 21:11, January 31, 2017 (UTC)
That's what I'm saying. The source for the name Livingston is the Star Trek Encyclopedia, rather than a script, which means the Encyclopedia is an acceptable source for Na'kuhl as well. --NetSpiker (talk) 00:25, February 1, 2017 (UTC)
I misread your comment. Sorry -- Capricorn (talk) 00:14, February 3, 2017 (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+