Talk:Star Trek: Deep Space Nine/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Braga and DS9

From the article:

"Think of it. Four years ago no one had ever heard of Bajor or Deep Space Nine. Now all our hopes rest here. Where the tides of fortune take us, no one can know." - Gowron, voicing Rick Berman and Brannon Braga's thoughts in "By Inferno's Light"[citation needed]

Braga and Berman didn't write this episode according to its credits. Hell, Braga didn't even write a word of DS9, so how can this be true? I was going to delete it, but thought I'd ask here just in case someone could come up with a source. Davhorn 22:15, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Old discussion

Sorry about the edit in triplicate. Wikipedia kept giving me a non-response error, and I thought the edit hadn't gone through. --Paula Sandusky 09:15, July 24, 2005 (UTC)

I'd like to know about the space station itself. I can assume there are at least 8 other Deep Space stations? --Sketchee 20:22, Jan 7, 2005 (UTC)

See Deep Space Nine, now prominently wikilinked from the article. --Mrwojo 20:38, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Thanks!--Sketchee 00:05, Jan 8, 2005 (UTC)

Isn't it "Terak Nor", not "Terok Nor"?

Nope, it's 'Terok Nor', using startrek.com (maintained by Paramount) as a reference. See link:[1]--Chairboy 15:21, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Abbreviations

While I know Deep Space Nine is often shortened to DS9, I don't think we need to explicitly state it. Or if we must have it, DS9 is fine on its own. Having ST:DS9 and STDS9 does seem a bit over the top. (We could be here all day: ST-DS9, DSN, STDSN, ST:DSN, ST-DSN...) It just seems pointless for an encyclopedia article. When we're listing episodes/characters etc., we use DS9 as a handy short code, but I don't think it should be part of an article text. An exception to this would be if we first put Star Trek: Deep Space Nine (DS9) then later on we could just refer to DS9, rather than typing the whole lot out again. Same goes for TNG (and yes I am using TNG here as it's an 'internal' comment ;-)), Voyager etc. Comments? Marky1981 22:39, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

How about "(ST:DS9 or DS9)" then? The two most used (the WP accepted TLA of "DS9" and then with and without the "ST:"). I think you're running down the slippery slope there with the list of abbreviations. :) Cburnett 00:18, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
We could just have ST:DS9, as just the "Deep Space Nine" bit would be shortened to "DS9" - I would put "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine (sometimes shortened to ST:DS9)"... Then we can talk about ST:DS9 to mean the series and DS9 to mean the station. Marky1981 15:08, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Images

I have created Category:Star Trek: DS9 images (would've made that a link, but it would just categorize this page), so from now on, please categorize accordingly. I was blindly uploading before and... well... there's a note on the category page about that. Oh well.

Also, on List of Star Trek: DS9 episodes season one is almost complete so maybe someone wants to contribute there. I missed four of the season one eps on Spike. Thanks. -Schrei 22:11, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

Non-canon information

Where is the firstnames of for example Dukat and Damar coming from? They were never stated onscreen, so it seems dubious to have them stated on a page about the series. Or are they from scripts or something? -TheSisko (link added by Schrei)

Probably from the Star Trek Encyclopedia...Existentializer 15:12, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
I agree with TheSisko in that this article has no source information. While that's understandable to an extent (unless you want to do it Memory Alpha style and cite every episode reference). If there is information added from books, someone needs to list them. -Schrei 08:23, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure even information from the Star Trek Encyclopedia belongs on this page, since the people writing it typically have nothing to do with the writers on the show. I know Star Trek is a franchise and all, but consider if there was a Friends Encyclopedia, claiming that Joey's middle name was Herbert, would that information be valid for the "Friends"-show page? I bet the writers of the Star encyclopedia made the names of Dukat and Damar up, I doubt Michael Piller and Hans Beimler were consulted. TheSisko 12:59, July 29, 2005 (UTC)

Actually the Encyclopedia is officially recognized by Paramount, and was compiled by various writers and workers on the series (such as the Okudas). [2] Existentializer 14:03, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
Though you are right about Paramount recognizing it, I doubt any of the writers had input on it (probably because they were uninterested). From what I've read in the DS9 Compantion, the writing staff didn't have much communication with technical staff. TheSisko 09:09, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
Actually, that's a good point. Over at Talk:Cranky Kong there's been a dispute about canon vs. non-canon (I didn't know Donkey Kong had a canon...) and I think it's a good idea to limit the page to canon. However, as I haven't seen the whole series, I wouldn't know the difference (ie Dukat's first name). Schrei 12:39, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
Well, I have seen the whole series and I can say with certainty that Dukat and Damar's first names never were mentioned or credited. I am also 99% certain that Kai Opaka's first name wasn't mentioned. If someone else can confirm this, I suggest we make the changes. TheSisko
I don't think there's that much info in here coming from books to justify taking it out. Existentializer appears to be right (thanks for backing it up with a link unlike people on a certain other talk page :P) but considering we're only talking about first names I think it only serves to benefit the page. -Schrei 18:48, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
Maybe those first names can be found in the official ST:DS9 Companion (ISBN: 0671501062) which does include writer interviews and information taken from the scripts. Robert John Kaper 13:02, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

The first names of Dukat and Damar come from the DS9 Relaunch book "A Stitch in Time" writen by Andrew Robinson who played Garak. Kai Opaka's first name comes from the DS9 Relaunch book "Rising Son." Hope this helps. Willie 08:56, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

explanation of rewrite

"As the third installment in the Trek saga, DS9 disregarded many established formulae and was unabashedly original. It tackled many darker issues previous series had shied away from, such as religion, racism and politics, and relied heavily on continuing story arcs. In spite of its debut in the shadow of The Next Generation and direct competition from UPN flagship Voyager, DS9 remains the most critically acclaimed Trek to date."

I have quoted the second paragraph of the intro as it currently stands. I'm going to do a rewrite, and I wanted to explain my thinking. I love DS9, but there were plenty of episodes about religion, racism, and politics on TOS and on TNG, so to say that they shied away from those issues is misleading. Also, Voyager did not start until DS9 had already been on for a while, so the comment about "direct competition" is misleading. Finally, while a lot of critics loved DS9, many hated it, notably Slate's David Eddelstein. I don't think we can say it was the "most" critically acclaimed. Rick Norwood 21:34, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

I agree with most of your changes to that and the rest of the article, although I do think it's safe to say DS9 tackled those issues in a different way, and it did disregard established traditions for better or for worse. The religion thing is the best example, because the Bajorans and the Prophets weren't seen as inferior or automatically wrong, and the Maquis as it notes were a big departure from previous attitudes. I'm going to restore the unabashedly original part because it's true, whether you want to say it was a breath of fresh air or it destroyed the Trek universe. Cheechie Chung 08:48, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

I think it is important to mention in the intro that DS9 overlapped TNG, otherwise a reader will assume that they were sequential. I agree with "unabashedly original" but added a specific example. I've left your "worst episode" edit, but it needs a source. Rick Norwood 14:21, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Actually, that wasn't mine - I just added the note about the other episode because the review of Let He Who Is Without Sin was recently released when I checked that page. I could do without the worst episode part altogether but I haven't had time to really work on this. Good job with the intro, you're right about it being an important note. Cheechie Chung 05:08, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
Maybe somebody could rewrite the first sentence of the last paragraph under Taboos. It begins with "Other pert issues..." Pert issues? I think somebody needs to look up the word "pert." From the Free Online Dictionary: pert (pûrt) adj. pert·er, pert·est. 1. Trim and stylish in appearance; jaunty: a pert hat. 2. High-spirited; vivacious. 3. Impudently bold; saucy. I don't think the issues are trim and stylish, I don't think they're vivacious, and, since the paragraph is about racism, I find the issue neither bold nor saucy. I would fix it myself, except that I suspect the author has a particular idea in mind to describe the issue, and I have no idea what that original idea was.Kjdamrau 00:17, 14 October 2007 (UTC)kjdamrau
The editor probably meant "pertinent", but since the phrase didn't really add anything, I took it out when I cleaned up the section. Clarityfiend 08:35, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Cast listing

In the Main Cast section, it lists the characters and the race (species technically), while the Recurring Characters section does not. Should it be added to the latter or removed from the former? On the one hand, it tends to look a little cluttered with an extra box, but on the other, diversity was one of the key elements of DS9. Yelgrun 21:08, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Rom and Nog are in the cast, but they were never in the actual starring list. Vegfarandi 08:22, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I find this offending.

"...intentionally portrayed as a powerful Holocaust allegory, though there are also striking comparisons to be made with the Serbian occupation of Bosnia or the Japanese occupation of Korea. The Cardassians had put the Bajorans to work in forced slave labor camps under terrible conditions, killed them with impunity, and now refuse to acknowledge the atrocities that occurred during their reign." So,Serbs occupied Bosnia,placed Bosnians to work in forced slave labor camps under terrible conditions, killed them with impunity, and now refuse to acknowledge the atrocities that occurred during their reign.I don't know what you ment by writing this but this is realy offending to every Serbian,not to mention that those "facts" have never been proved.I expect that those lines shall be changed soon.Thanx.

It HAS been proven. It HAS happened. Everyone in the world KNOWS it happened expect for the serbs who contiune to deny. Even after a VIDEO was realeased of prisoners in Srebrenica. They were thin and starving just like the jews in the the camps. There was also a second video showned where teenagers who were muslim bosnians were forced to dig their graves. The serbs killed a few of them and then forced the remaining to throw them in the grave and then shot them. Is that real enough for you?

Yes I agree with the person above. I therefore suggest we get rid of the Holocaust article as it may offend the pro-Nazis that refuse to believe it happened. People like you who refuse to believe things like this actually happened are incredibly ofensive to me. I therefore suggest you do not post your comments on a bloody star trek article again!

The Serbian "occupation" of Bosnia was a relatively recent occurence. Bosnia-Herzgovina was a region that 'belonged' within Serbia long before "Yugoslavia", long before the 1990s, and long before the Turkish/Muslim invasion of Serbia. one of Serbia's most historically potent eras (see, the War of Kosovo -- in which Serbia lost to and was occupied by Turkish rulers) is outlined in history as well as in verse as one of the low points in Serbian history. the Turks occupied Serbia and Bosnia for 500 years after that war. arguably, the Turks were fairly benevolent. however, the history of Turkish-occupied Serbia is not bereft of violence and injustice on the part of its Muslim rulers.

just tracing a bit of the history of the region here. when we think of Kosovo, Bosnia, Serbia, we might do well to remember that history and politics in most of Europe is a fluid occurence wherein "The Past" is not just that of this century and the previous one, but of thousands of years of perceived wrongs on BOTH sides of the given issue. thanks :) Indranee 15:20, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Babylon 5 additions

I have removed some Babylon 5 additions pertaining to the reports about the B5 bible and creator's opinion, but I would like to state that I have no trouble believing either of these things is true. The only problem is that, like the part where it mentions Worf's being brought on board for ratings, such claims need to cite a specific source in the article. Thanks. Jibbajabba 06:30, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

I've found references to some of JMS' comments on the B5/DS9 similarities. I have added these links to the similarities article. I also modified the content of the paragraph in which these links appear. I considered modifying the relevant paragraph in this article, but couldn't come up with appropriate wording. I may make changes later when I do. Val42 05:36, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't think the Critique and Plagiarism section is NPOV. It should at least be cleaned up, I'll fix the link to link to the 'similarities between B5 and DS9' page, and (if nobody objects or beats me to it in the next few days) reword this stuff. I'm thinking specifically of taking out the examples of similarities (they're all listed in the 'similarities' page anyway), and turning this section into a discussion of the JMS "bible" vs. artistic necessity leading to similar ideas (e.g if you're on a space station you need a ship if you want to go somewhere) vs. pre-existing ideas that predated, and inspired, both series. Kickaha 04:32, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Except that you're too late. The Similarities between Babylon 5 and Star Trek: Deep Space Nine article was deleted on Halloween. The vote was two keep (including mine) and nine delete. The place for the similarities is now the Babylon 5 or Star Trek: Deep Space Nine article. So the only alternative left is for you to clean up the information and leave it in this article. Val42 20:54, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Very Literal Space Western

DS9 can be interpreted as a very literal space western thus:

ds9 = frontier town/settlement quarks = the saloon (dabo = poker) odo = sherrif bajorans = native americans cardassians = spanish conquistador sisko = british commander and starfleet crew = his unit wormhold = mountain pass

though the spanish/english part could be contentious it's still an interesting theory, perhaps worthy of a stub page?

That's interesting, but a British commander in the Old West would've been beaten and hung. Probably even in that order depending on the day. Sisko is/was more like a Federal US Marshal and the rest of Starfleet act as Federal Deputies keeping the peace in the area. Or you can say he's the mayor, but that isn't really accurate either given his Federataion duties on the station. Also, the wormhole is more like a new trade road leading into the new frontier. Everything else looks categorically appropriate. Eluchil 11:35, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
yeah i was just lobbing the theory up here for discussion, another thing i realised is the nearby "badlands" cycloid 11:30, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
That sounds interesting, although it might be interpreted as POV-ish by some elements of the Wikipedia community. I remember the producers talking somewhere in the DVD extras about what they had intended the characters to represent and whatnot. Unless that's where you're getting this, a section on the series' Memory Alpha article might be more appropriate, as articles there are written by fans, for fans and have more leeway with representing fan POVs. MA articles often delve into similar issues, such as the historic parallels in the Occupation of Bajor. --Vedek Dukat Talk 03:34, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

"a British commander in the Old West would've been beaten and hung" Hardly. Even Oscar Wylde had a very successful tour of the American Old West. Many a British commander was made of sterner stuff - just look at the Indian Mutiny or Afghn Wars. You don't get any wilder or more extreme than the Northwest Frontier of India Rick Norwood 14:17, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

In one of the DVD featurettes, they discussed the fact that it was intended to be a space western. If I get time later I'll look up the info. Moulder 21:14, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

The Series "Firefly" actually takes the theme of Space Western to the extreme if any one is interested. Good show...just very, VERY enthusiastic on the space western side

Nearly every Sci-Fi can be interpreted as a western - why include it here? Reid 15:59, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Because it's not a theory. As Moulder noted above, it was part of the creative concept behind the show. I forget where, but I've also seen definite quotes from the folks who created DS9 saying "Gene Roddenberry envisaged Star Trek as Wagontrain-to-the-stars. We carried that idea across to DS9 being set in a frontier town. Odo's the sheriff," and so forth. If someone has a copy of the Deep Space Nine Companion or the documentaries on the DVD releases (I don't currently, or I'd provide the reference), it's probably in there. Kickaha 21:11, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Rom as Grand Nagus

Not sure if I agree with Centrx's reasoning behind not listing Grand Nagus as one of Rom's occupations. Dogs of War was in the current DS9 timeline, and for the last few seconds of the episode and all through the finale, Rom was de jure Grand Nagus, even if it wasn't acknowledged in the finale. Nog was only a Lieutenant for the last few minutes of the finale, but it wouldn't be argued that the rank is a look into Nog's future after the series, since the promotion occured during the series. Any other opinions? RexTraverse 05:53, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Rom is made Grand Nagus at the end of the second-to-last episode and is never seen again. The purpose of this and similar character stories is to state where the character is going after the series, to wrap him up before all is done (the writers could have just as well placed it at the very end of the last episode if he had been a more important character). While it is appropriate to state that Rom was made Grand Nagus or that Nog was made Lieutenant in a full section or article on the character, it does not make sense to say that the Role of Rom as a Recurring Character was as Grand Nagus, and the same for any other character in similar circumstances. - Centrx 02:48, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

References

There were a number of places where generalizations or "common knowledge" were discussed, but I'd like to see some (scholarly if possible) citations for things like the comparison between the Japanese, Serbian, etc situations and the Occupation of Bajor, the controversies section in general, and a few other places. I'm saying this because I love the show and want to see it at FA status, not because I'm a stickler for "fancruft". Moulder 09:02, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree. These comparisons just look like speculations, especially when people keep adding to them, and without a quote from Rick Berman or some substantial comparison in some book or major magazine, they should be removed. —Centrx→talk • 07:31, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Questions

  • Were the Vorta and the Jem Hadar created or just modified from existing species?
  • The Vorta definitely worshipped the Changelings as gods, but I don't recall any Jem Hadar indicating they thought of them that way. Did I miss something? Clarityfiend 07:36, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
The Vorta and Jem'Hadar were brand-new species created as part of the "anti-Federation" (as Robert Hewitt Wolfe put it) that became the Dominion. The idea was that it wasn't just "the Romulans" or "the Klingons" but a power that like the Feds was comprised of different species (e.g. Karemma, later Cardassians and Breen).
As for the Jem'Hadar, they definitely believed the Founders were gods. Hippocratic Oath (DS9 episode) revolved around a group whose leader dared to question the Changelings, for example. I can't think of any other specific episodes but there are lots of references (maybe not as subtle as Jeffrey Combs' "the Founder knows all, the Vorta kisses butt" ;)) to it. Here's a quote from the aforementioned episode, courtesy of Memory Alpha:
"I have fought against races that believe in mythical beings that guide their destinies and await them after death. They call them gods ... The Founders are like gods to the Jem'Hadar. But our gods never talk to us, and they don't wait for us after death. They only want us to fight for them... and to die for them."
Moulder 08:45, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
As luck would have it, the Prophets sent me a vision (I saw an episode today on Spike), the one where one of the Weyouns defects to the Federation. In it, he tells Odo that long ago, the Vorta were much different. Then a family of primitive Vorta sheltered a changeling from angry solids. In gratitude, it promised to make them into an important species. Clarityfiend 22:21, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
Weren't the Vorta originally small apelike creatures that were modified by the founders? --PiMaster3 talk 15:22, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Yes, that's the backstory explained in the episode where there's a runaway Weyoun clone who actually talks to his 'successor' clone in one scene (but neither is apparently the one we saw before, as he was killed!). Can't remember which episode it was. Seems better left explained on the Vorta page though. Moulder 20:17, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
For the curious, the episode is "Treachery, Faith, and the Great River". BryanG(talk) 01:28, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

"DS9" vs "Deep Space Nine"

The usage throughout the article needs to be standardized. Which one should it be? --PiMaster3 talk 15:26, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

It's used so much, DS9 gets my vote. Of course, there's always my favorite: Deep S IX. Just a thought... Clarityfiend 19:36, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
For those who aren't familiar with the show Deep Space Nine would probably be a better choice though. ––PiMaster3 talk 21:41, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
The way Star Trek: The Next Generation handles it is writing it out in full only in the first sentence, then using the acronym afterwards, so this is what I've done:
  • standardized all references to the series, after the initial sentence, as DS9
  • when the station itself is mentioned, I left it as Deep Space Nine
  • formatted all references to other Star Trek series as follows: Star Trek: The Next Generation, etc. Unfortunately, this sometimes means a single sentence will have another series written out alongside DS9, but I can't think of a better way to handle it. I don't think using acronyms for the other series is reader-friendly.
I hope I fixed all the occurrences, but I may have missed a few.Clarityfiend 05:15, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Well, it may be fine for a star trek web site to use DS9, but is that appropo for wikipedia?
Apparently so. The wikipedia manual of style states "The standard writing style is to spell out the acronym or abbreviation on the first reference (wikilinked if appropriate) and then show the acronym or abbreviation after it." (bolding is mine) It then gives an example which pretty much matches what I've done. Clarityfiend 07:35, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
I never found anything to confirm this - but, I thought there may have been some link in the choice of name DS9 or Deep Space Nine with the fact that the show was in syndication on WGN-TV Channel 9 Chicago, and I think though not as sure it was on WOR/WWOR-TV 9 New York market. Or just that the channel number matched and they could promote it that way, nothing to do with the name.????kidsheaven 23:58, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

GA Collaboration

Since this is the current GA Collaboration does anyone want to suggest how we can improve this article? Should we merge the "Awards and distinctions" section "Criticisms" section into a general "Reaction" section? Tarret 00:58, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Less a suggestion than a solicitation for further opinions, I mentioned in my peer review request (which I didn't intend to be going on simultaneously with the GA thing) that the references aren't standardized, which is my fault. The PR doesn't seem to have generated any responses on that issue though. Perhaps someone could weigh in on this here? Essentially the issue is that the style I did them in isn't consistent and, as Wikipedia doesn't have a set-in-stone policy, I wanted opinions on the best way to do it since I haven't been active in the WP community for a long time and am not up to date on the changing conventions being used. Moulder 20:24, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Recurring characters

it is amazing to me that Gul Dukat, played by Marc Alaimo, is not mentioned by name in this section. he and his character were an integral part of Deep Space Nine and its evolution. I've remedied this lack. if anyone wants to take it back out, there better be an explanation. ;) Indranee 14:57, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

He should be included, of course, but the entire "recurring characters" sections needs work. Jeffrey Combs and Marc Alaimo, for instance, have their own Wikipedia articles. The information on their background or other roles doesn't really belong in the DS9 characters section, IMO. What would serve the section best is for each entry to briefly describe the character's role on the series and link to the actor/character's main article. I've done some re-writing to the Dukat entry. I added some character background and removed the stuff that seemed either extraneous or POV. Some more brief stuff could be added on his later life, but I thought it was a good start. Feel free to polish it if you feel it's appropriate/necessary. -- Fru1tbat 17:57, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Titles...

If anyone is interested...

  1. 03:07, 30 October 2006 Ned Scott (Talk | contribs) moved The Alternate (DS9 episode) to The Alternate (WP:TV-NAME) (revert)
  2. 03:06, 30 October 2006 Ned Scott (Talk | contribs) moved The Adversary (DS9 episode) to The Adversary over redirect (WP:TV-NAME) (revert)
  3. 03:06, 30 October 2006 Ned Scott (Talk | contribs) moved A Simple Investigation (DS9 episode) to A Simple Investigation (WP:TV-NAME) (revert)
  4. 03:04, 30 October 2006 Ned Scott (Talk | contribs) moved Talk:Armageddon Game (DS9 episode) to Talk:Armageddon Game (WP:TV-NAME) (revert)
  5. 03:04, 30 October 2006 Ned Scott (Talk | contribs) moved Armageddon Game (DS9 episode) to Armageddon Game (WP:TV-NAME) (revert)

also Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(television) .. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 08:23, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

BSkyB

Someone removed the Sky programme category which I've now put back, but I thought I would check to see if British Sky Broadcasting still has the rights to show DS9. It hasn't been on for a while. -- Tough Little Ship 16:43, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Good Article nominee at last!

This is such a great and informative article!

Lunakeet 14:31, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Eh? Look at the top of the page :-\ thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 14:39, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

References in popular culture section

At the top of that section someone added the "toomuchtrivia" template. What does this mean and what is needed? -- Tough Little Ship 14:04, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia:Avoid trivia sections in articles. As a side-note, mentioning DS9 things in other Star Trek production as part of a "DS9 in popular culture" section seems utterly bizarre. Morwen - Talk 14:08, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Possible image?

I think this image is of very good quality, and is relevant to the article. If someone can find a spot where it looks best, go ahead and add it.

Image:Star trek voyager communicator pin.jpg
Starfleet Communicator Badge from Voyager and Deep Space 9

Steevven1 (Talk) (Contributions) 20:56, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I like it, nice blending and angle (-: thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 20:58, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:DS9 navigation

Template:DS9 navigation has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. --Illyria05 (Talk • Contributions) 23:08, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Deep Space Nine / Babylon 5

I seem to remember something about the two shows being related to each other after the Death of Gene Roddenberry. IN TV-Guide or some other TV column source at the time that the remaining writers wanted to go different directions with the series - and that Babylon 5 was done by some who did not like the direction DS9 was heading. The fact of similarities could be the only truth to this.

But somewhere I remember this and have often found I have eventually found the answer to these type of things at some point in the future. It may take a few years to find a source that I had read. IT has happened in the past with missing episodes or movies and such I remember, but can't find. Then one day I find it.

Would be interested in any comment, source, or views on if I am correct or not.......need to dig out my old TV guides preview issues and check...kidsheaven 00:06, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Babylon 5 was planned long before DS9 started, and was only delayed until after the other started due to a lack of funding --Mnemeson 09:52, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Genetically Modified Human?

Is it too spoilery to list Bashir as a genetically modified human? When I went through a few minutes ago and added a species listing for everyone on the chart of main characters (I couldn't believe it hadn't been done already!), I erred on the side of caution and left his as simply "human" with a link to the Human (Star Trek) page. I'm leaning towards leaving it off, opinions? CrashCart9 03:06, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

There are spoiler warnings throughout the article so if anyone is spoiled, it is their own fault. Wikipedia "strives first to inform, spoilers or not." See WP:SPOILER. Gdo01 03:09, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
You should omit the Genetically Modified part because it is too detailed for this particular article, regardless of it being a spoiler or not. His modification is a factor in one episode; aside from that he's a normal human. Koweja 04:01, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Regarding Category:1999 television program cancellations

Please do not remove this article from Category:1999 television program cancellations. That category holds all programs which ended their original series runs in 1999 regardless of reason. Some editors apparently are misreading the category to think that it is only for "network cancellation", which is not the case. Category:Television program cancellations by year houses all series articles sorted by year of series end.

Thanks, and if you have any questions please feel free to post them, but do not remove this category. Dugwiki 15:22, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Removed, do not give orders, k? -- "cancellations", the operative word - Wikipedia:Verifiability: "Editors should provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is challenged or is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed.", the addition of said material category is challenged and has been removed, you may provide a verifiable source if you like to prove it was cancelled. A series coming to natural closure != cancellation. Matthew 15:41, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Again, please read the category description for the scheme before deleting this. The description reads "Television programs whose last original episodes were broadcast in the year 1999." It does not specify why the episode was last broadcast in 1999. The article already possesses ample references indicating that the last episode was broadcast in 1999 (or are you disputing those references?)
Reverting the change. Dugwiki 15:50, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Reverted, again. The title is "cancellations", not "finales". The show was not cancelled, unless you can prove otherwise, as stated a natural end is not a cancellation, it matters not if the category's creator set that at a goal, if anything its goal is disputed, yea? OK. So, conclusion: do not reinsert without consensus, yea, Good! Matthew 15:52, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Not good. You are clearly ignoring a fairly well established categorization scheme that is part of the broader scheme of including years of establishment and years of disestablishment of entities within articles. If you don't like the title of the category, take it up at WP:CFD. But the clear instructions and goals of the scheme are to provide the year of series end regardless of the reason. Dugwiki 16:02, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
February 2007, not very well established, in my opinion. I'm not very interested in categories, you may submit a renaming if you wish, I will not, as I believe it would be clutter at the end of the day, none the less I would not remove it. Matthew 16:08, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

So the issue here is the name of the category not the fact that DS9 should be included in the "categorical intent" which is to categorize shows by when they end which is indicated by the category description:

Television programs whose last original episodes were broadcast in the year 1999.

I suggest renaming the category to reflect what the intention is. Just because a show isn't renewed it doesn't mean the show was cancelled. Letting a contract lapse doesn't mean it was terminated. Additionally, a show could be cancelled at the end of a year but still have the remaining already-produced episodes aired into the next year (further showing the category name doesn't align with the intent). Cburnett 16:05, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

That said, I disagree with putting this category on this article until the category is renamed. Cburnett 16:06, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Tell you what, then. In the spirit of compromise, and so I don't get into an edit war, I will personally nominate these categories for renaming at CFD to "Category:Television program series ending by year". That should eliminate any ambiguity over what they're for. Sound ok? Dugwiki 16:12, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
FYI, the categories in question above have now officially been renamed to "series endings" instead of "cancellations" to eliminate any confusion over their use. Now that the rename is in place I have added Category:1999 television program series endings to the article to tag the year the series ended (again, without implying why it ended one way or another). Dugwiki 21:35, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Sexism/Mysogeny

Hi all. I just added (and cleaned up, a bit) a new sub-section in "Themes" that I entitled Sexism, Mysogeny and Women's Liberation. I saw this as one of the major themes in the DS-9 series, particularly against a backdrop of women being equal to men in almost all societies in the other Star Trek series. The several disjunct episodes that explore Ishka's gradual transformation from repressed "female" to major power broker and reformer I think deserve to be recognised. As it's my first foray into actually authoring a whole section, please feel free to comment/make changes as needed.

Actually, the relationship between Zek and Ishka has a minor sub-sub-theme within. Geriatric love, anyone? --Esseh 03:07, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

References in popular culture

Isn't it just a little bit stupid to list intra-Star Trek references to DS9 in this section? If they must be in the article at all, shouldn't they at least be somewhere else? Vegfarandi 08:29, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Themes

I cut this material as uncited WP:OR. Please return in part or in whole with citations. I left the bit about religion because I saw a citation somewhere in there, but I'll migrate other parts of that section that are uncited here once I have time to take a closer look. --EEMeltonIV 17:57, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

DS9 sheds some of the Utopian themes that permeated the previous versions of Star Trek,[1] leading both to praise and criticism from both fans and general viewers. Some fans, in particular, hated how the show seemed to imply that the utopian society of the Federation was merely a sort of hypocritical disguise hiding its true "Borg-like" character. Its darker setting—being based on a station in a region of space recovering from sixty years of brutal occupation—focuses more on war, religion, political compromise, and similar issues.

Religion

The most prominent theme is that of the deeply religious Bajoran people attempting to rebuild their world and their economy after sixty years of Cardassian occupation and oppression. The relationship between the Bajorans and the Cardassians is intentionally portrayed as a powerful Holocaust allegory mixed with other themes such as Soviet-era Russia.<ref>Herman Zimmerman in the 1993 documentary ''Deep Space Nine: Behind the Scenes'' hosted by [[Terry Farrell (actress)|Terry Farrell]] said: "The Cardissians are a mix of German Nazis and Russians before [[Glasnost]].</ref> The Cardassians had put the Bajorans to work in forced slave labor camps under terrible conditions, killed them with impunity, and now refuse to acknowledge the atrocities that occurred during the Occupation, which is explored in episodes such as "Duet", "Necessary Evil", and "Waltz".

Religion plays a very important role in DS9's unveiling and plot structure. Initially individuals wish to associate Sisko with religious archetypes such as Jesus, Moses or Mohammed who were all speakers of a monotheistic deity. Sisko is neither religious nor does he believe "the prophets" to be gods. Sisko is recognized by the community as an emissary between the material world and "the prophets." He however does not actually maintain this too well. From time to time he gets visions from the prophets that are ambiguous and almost meaningless until put into a proper context. This however does not occur until he comes into contact with something that the prophets created. His relation to these gods is hands off and he does not believe in such a relation until the last season when he makes Bajor his home.

The nature of the Prophets varies considerably from the typical conception of gods. They care for the Bajorans, but do nothing about it but let them see the future. They know the past and the future, but do not understand them. They are omnipotent but have to be pushed to use that power. When Sisko is brought into non-material existence with them he finds the prophets speaking through his mind using the bodies of people he knows to communicate with him. In this form they ask very simple questions that people usually know a priori. How do you explain to someone that cannot experience time, what it is? How can you explain to someone what senses are, when they feel no sensations? These are the sorts of answers the prophets wanted from Sisko and questions that do not easily have answers. This reinforces early pragmatist thoughts on key epistemological questions, that is understanding comes from long experience, not from knowledge.

There are many unanswered issues with these prophets. Sisko was asked by the prophets to make leaps of faith in areas which would normally require explanation. The Pah-wraiths, a group of evil prophets challenged the authority and home of the prophets wherever possible. Yet the nature of this conflict and/or the purpose of it remains questionable. In a battle between the two they used human vessels to resolve their conflict. The internal workings of this conflict are very doubtable. How can beings that exist outside of time possible be killed in time? The unanswered questions add to the mystique of the prophets and allow the audience to feel the choice Sisko has to make between taking blind leaps of faith or resolving to rational Federation protocol.

Colonialism

The relationship between the Cardassians and the Bajorans is colonial in nature. The Cardassians believed themselves both technologically and culturally superior to the Bajorans they had subjugated. According to Dukat (in "Waltz"), at the time of first contact, Cardassia was at least a century ahead of Bajor "in every way", and the brutality of the occupation would not have happened "if [the Bajorans] had accepted their place in history." The Cardassians strip-mined Bajor for resources and set up forced labor camps under the guise of civilizing a backward people. Guerrilla tactics by Bajoran fighters led to their freedom in the same way that many colonies gained their independence in the 1960s and 1970s. [citation needed]

As with many former colonies, Bajor struggles to establish a stable democracy and is wary of the involvement of the "well-intentioned" United Federation of Planets. Kira Nerys in the pilot episode states "We finally drive the Cardassians out, and what do our new leaders do? They call up the Federation and invite them right in!" The planet, thrust into the galactic spotlight after languishing in obscurity, nearly plunges into civil war on several occasions, most notably the three-part arc of "The Homecoming", "The Circle" and "The Siege", and again in "Shakaar".

Politics

The universe portrayed in DS9 is one of power politics practiced by the galaxy’s great powers. Prior to the series, the Federation had been depicted as a near utopian society guided by human rights (or rather sentient rights). In contrast, as depicted in DS9, it tries to balance its high ideals with practical political realities. Episodes revolving around this theme include "Improbable Cause" and "The Die is Cast", where the major powers sit by while a joint Cardassian-Romulan fleet attempts to obliterate the Changeling homeworld; "The Way of the Warrior", a two-part tale of political intrigue and conflict between the Klingon Empire, Cardassian Union, and Federation; "Homefront" and "Paradise Lost", in which the Federation risks turning into a military dictatorship; and "In the Pale Moonlight", which focuses on Sisko, who, in his own words:

"I lied, I cheated, I bribed men to cover the crimes of other men. I am an accessory to murder. But the most damning thing of all... I think I can live with it. And if I had to do it all over again, I would. Garak was right about one thing: A guilty conscience is a small price to pay for the safety of the Alpha Quadrant."
Idealism

Another theme DS9 visits on several occasions, including Sisko's struggle in "In the Pale Moonlight", is the idea that the universe is not perfect and there is often no right or wrong answer to difficult situations. This theme is embodied by the Maquis storyline; members of the Maquis are neither enemies nor criminals; they take up arms against Cardassia in defense of their homes. A quote from Sisko in the second-season episode "The Maquis, Part II" embodies not only the Maquis but also the stark contrast between DS9 and its predecessors:

"On Earth there’s no poverty, no crime, no war. You look out the window of Starfleet headquarters and you see... paradise. Well, it’s easy to be a saint in paradise. But the Maquis do not live in paradise. Out there in the Demilitarized Zone, all the problems haven't been solved yet. Out there, there are no saints... Just people. Angry, scared, determined people who are going to do whatever it takes to survive. Whether it meets with Federation approval or not."
Sexism, misogyny, and women's liberation

Themes of sexism and female liberation are explored in several episodes with Ishka (Cecily Adams and Andrea Martin), Quark (Armin Shimerman) and Rom's (Max Grodénchik) "Moogi" (mother). In Ferengi society, women have strictly enforced roles as homemakers. Although the Ferengi take pride themselves as being shrewd businessmen, Ferengi females are forbidden to wear clothing and are strictly prohibited from engaging in commerce of any kind. Despite these strictures, Ishka in one episode is revealed to have been more successful in clandestine business dealings than Quark. Further, she revolts in smaller ways by not pre-chewing her sons' food and daring to wear clothing, albeit only within the family home on Ferenginar. In later episodes, she becomes lover and, more importantly, chief financial advisor to Grand Nagus Zek (Wallace Shawn), thus forcefully demonstrating that Ferengi females do, indeed, have the "lobes" for business. In this position of power, she takes to openly appearing wearing clothing and acts as a powerful source for female liberation and other reforms within the Ferengi Alliance.

Exile

Many of the characters on Deep Space Nine were outcast from their own societies for some or all of the show's run, and many issues dealt with the consequences of their exile:

  • Garak was a disgraced operative living in exile on Deep Space Nine.
  • Odo originally knew nothing about his origins, and his shape-changing nature separated him from others he interacted with. Once he discovered his people, he rejected them and refused to rejoin the Great Link; he was eventually forced to spend several episodes as a "solid" after killing another changeling. He was also viewed with suspicion during the Dominion War, as a representative of an enemy race.
  • Worf sided with the Federation during the Federation-Klingon war, and was without a House until being "adopted" by General Martok.
  • Quark was forbidden from doing business with other Ferengi after violating a contract (Body Parts).
  • Bashir is a genetically engineered human; genetic engineering has been banned and feared on Earth since the rise of Khan Noonien Singh.

Bad Language

"you son of a bitch" was used in Star Trek IV, so it's not exactly unprecedented when it appeared in Enterprise 72.68.92.53 00:13, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Son of a Rigellian bitch-creature! Clarityfiend 05:38, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

link to st rules

EEMeltonIV reverted this page, removing a link I put in to a non-existent page for the star trek rules laid down by gene rodenberry. This subject is an important one and, as far as I can see, is not covered elsewhere in wikipedia. According to wiki policy, redlinks (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:REDLINK) should be created for needed, unwritten topics, and their removal should not be done without careful consideration of their importance or relevance.

Accordingly, I will revert the changes made by EEMeltonIV. Any objections to this should be raised here and discussed before any more reverts are done.84.66.220.48 00:33, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

"Rules (Star Trek)" is not an encyclopedic title for an article. It is in and of itself OR. What would the content of such an article be? Please do not add such a vague redlink article that will never be written. --EEMeltonIV 00:35, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Firstly, the subject is not original research, only the contents of the subject may be OR. The contents of the wouldbe article are clear from the context of the sentence in which the link (on rules) is contained - "...DS9 often broke the rules laid down by Roddenberry, such as the prohibition against interpersonal conflicts between the main characters." Just to make it completely obvious though, the contents of the page would be the rules laid down by Roddenberry. If you don't like the title, why not make it better, rather than throwing the whole thing away?

Since you keep removing the link and cite a different reason each time, in the interests of avoiding multiple edits, I won't change the article until others have a chance to voice their opinion. Do people think this is a worthy subject for inclusion? and, if so, what would be suitable title? 62.136.110.78 01:11, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Rules say no to Star Trek Rules. I haven't been able to find any third-party publication dealing with the subject, only fan sites, which means this potential article either violates WP:OR or is WP:Fancruft or both. Can you produce any Roddenberry quotes about these rules? Maybe mentions of it in this article should be rephrased. Clarityfiend 02:51, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm not an expert on st and so would not have seen any quotes from Roddenberry if they exist. I think I'd heard something about st rules made by Roddenberry before now, and when I saw them mentioned in the article, with an example given, I assumed they existed. If they don't exist, the reference to them should definitely be removed from the article. The question is, do they exist? Any experts out there with an answer? 81.79.229.139 18:45, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

The Deep Space Nine x Babylon 5 polemic

Useful links with plenty of material

Section made a serious charge, without citation of evidence, of Paramount stealing the entire concept of Deep Space Nine from the Babylon 5 series pitch. There is controversy and there are accusations, but this section made no effort to prove or cite a resource indicating that Paramount did, in fact, steal Deep Space Nine from the Babylon 5 series pitch.

The available evidence, formed by messages posted by Straczynski himself, ( links are posted right below) suggests that there was indeed some kind of "poaching" of the original pitch of B5.

http://www.jmsnews.com/msg.aspx?id=1-7652&query=shapechanger

http://www.jmsnews.com/msg.aspx?id=1-13041&query=berman

http://www.jmsnews.com/msg.aspx?id=1-3367&query=Grand Theft, drama

http://www.jmsnews.com/msg.aspx?id=1-9256&query=berman

http://www.jmsnews.com/msg.aspx?id=1-15165&query=berman


http://www.jmsnews.com/msg.aspx?id=1-7616&query=shapechanger

http://www.jmsnews.com/msg.aspx?id=1-7614&query=shapechanger

http://www.jmsnews.com/msg.aspx?id=1-7730&query=shapechanger

http://www.jmsnews.com/msg.aspx?id=1-13041&query=berman

A list of the similarities between DS9 and the original proposal of B5 made by Stracznynsk himself

An explanation of why Warner Brothers didn't tried to litigate ( also found in the first link)

I think that these quotes about the Deep Space Nine controversy can be useful

The original post of JMS cited in the review whose relevant piece is transcribed right below can be found here

[ http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/ds9season1.php]

Though I was only dimly aware of the controversy at the time, crossfire between partisans of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine and Babylon 5 has raged hot and heavy ever since these similar shows first competed in the television marketplace. J. Michael Straczynski had "pitched" the full Babylon 5 concept in 1989 to many places, including Paramount, and soon began production of that series pilot, and a mere two months later the Star Trek: Deep Space Nine concept was in turn presented to Paramount brass. Though Babylon 5 had the early start, Paramount brought the Star Trek: Deep Space Nine pilot to air January 3, 1993, just weeks before the bow of Babylon 5 on February 22, 1993.

Ever since, the debate has raged as to whether one show "poached" off of the other. Aside from the most fanatical Trek partisans, no one seems to accuse Babylon 5 of that crime, but some credibly make the point in the other direction. However, to be absolutely clear, at no point has J. Michael Straczynski claimed that the Star Trek: Deep Space Nine creators (Rick Berman and Michael Piller) knew of the detailed Babylon 5 "pitch." Quite to the contrary, he describes both men in highly positive, ethical terms, though he fails to describe Paramount executives in such a manner. Of course, anyone in Hollywood is familiar with concurrent development patterns, though in such a gossip-riddled town, one can easily imagine how word of a hot project can soon spawn imitative fruit (and hence create the appearance of purely coincidental concurrent development). Though a truthful accounting is unlikely, Straczynski has his own measured but firmly stated view:


There's little question in my mind that the suits at Paramount wanted to co-opt what we were doing with B5. I know that they *resented* the show because it was, at that time, their belief that they pretty much owned the space SF genre. I feel that they guided the development process in order to co-opt what we were doing. And nothing I've heard from my sources inside the studio has given me cause to think otherwise.


J. Michael Straczynski (posted on Usenet 2/19/01)

added by PauloIapetus• , 31 May 2007 (UTC)


Is there a way to edit the references for the respective section in the main article? The links to www.JMSnews.com don't work due to inexact separation of URL and comment, all but one. ~mandragora —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.49.243.253 (talk) 17:52, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Split proposal

Since the article is getting rather long, and lacks a real introduction to the main characters, I believe it's time to at least split off the Books, Games, Music and Other merchandising sections into a separate article. References in popular culture should either be deleted or moved to its own article too. I'm not sure what should be done with Connections with other Star Trek incarnations. Comments? Clarityfiend 17:31, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Probably the first step is to go through and trim some of the OR-ish and wordy detritus and indiscriminate list-ish stuff. --EEMeltonIV 18:22, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Non-Starfleet cast

Under the heading cast is the following paragraph:

Featuring a diverse cast, DS9 was the first series to include main characters who were not members of Starfleet: Kira Nerys, Odo, Quark and Jake Sisko.

Is this entireley accurate? If I remember correctly, Wesley Crusher of TNG was not involved in Starfleet in any way until the middle of the first season when Picard made him an acting ensign. He did not truly become a member of Starfleet until the end of the third season when Picard granted him a commision and later when he joined Starfleet Academy. -- Redfarmer 16:31, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Point taken, "crushed" the offending text. Clarityfiend 16:41, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Why is Tartikoff mentioned?

I thought he worked for NBC, not paramount? - Theaveng (talk) 22:59, 19 November 2007 (UTC)