Jump to content

Talk:Captive Pursuit/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Viriditas (talk · contribs) 10:14, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Disambiguation

[edit]
Resolved

Images

[edit]
Resolved

Infobox

[edit]
Resolved

Lead

[edit]
Resolved

Plot

[edit]
Resolved
  • A damaged unidentified vessel from the Gamma Quadrant docks at Deep Space Nine for repairs.
  • Its reptilian pilot, who only identifies himself as Tosk (Scott MacDonald), requires virtually no "downtime" as he calls sleep and leisure, does not seem to possess a sense of humor, and he has the ability to become invisible. He is the first known life-form from the Gamma Quadrant to visit the station. Despite their many differences, Chief Miles O'Brien (Colm Meaney) befriends the alienand tries to help him repair his ship.
    • The placement and continuity here is all wrong. The first part should be linked with the subsequent part like this: "Its reptilian pilot, who only identifies himself as Tosk, is the first known life-form from the Gamma Quadrant to visit the station. Chief Miles O'Brien (Colm Meaney) befriends Tosk and tries to help him repair his ship." It really isn't all the important to mention the rest, but it could probably be added in the correct place. Viriditas (talk) 07:56, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • However, Tosk attempts to steal from a weapons locker and is put in a holding cell by Security Chief Odo (René Auberjonois). Uniformed aliens come through the wormhole, beam onto the DS9 promenade and cause a major phaser battle between themselves and a team led by Commander Benjamin Sisko (Avery Brooks).
    • You probably need to mention previous to this that O'Brien suspects Tosk's vessel was being chased and was damaged by weapons fire, which Tosk won't address as he's evasive about his mission, and that he won't talk about why he was messing with the weapons locker. We find out later that this because of his code of silence, and these plot points are important to mention. In other words, no matter how much he would have loved to share information, he was evidently genetically programmed to remain silent on such matters, and found a great deal of honor in remaining silent. Viriditas (talk) 08:02, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Uniformed aliens come through the wormhole, beam onto the DS9 promenade and cause a major phaser battle
    • It wasn't that simple. After coming through the wormhole, the aliens scanned DS9 and then took down its shields. Then they were able to beam in. That's an important point. And Sisko, in many ways, let them, to show that he wasn't their enemy. Plus, he didn't really know what he was dealing with. Viriditas (talk) 08:05, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • After talking to Quark (Armin Shimerman) in his bar, O'Brien realises that he can change the rules of the hunt before Tosk is taken away by the Hunters.
    • Notice how this idea of "changing the rules" runs throughout the episode. First, we see the Dabo girl in the beginning complaining about how her work contract with Quark had a buried subsection about sexual favors that she wasn't aware of when she signed the contract. Sisko tells her that he will have a word with Quark to resolve this (implying the rules will change because it doesn't fit with his moral compass) when we are interrupted by Tosk coming through the wormhole. There's also the brief scene showing us the female gambler who is escorted out of Quark's for cheating at Dabo, another example of what happens when you "change the rules". This theme is contrasted with the rules of the hunt, and how Sisko weighs the decision to follow the "rules" (or in this case, the Prime Directive) instead of his own moral compass (a continuing theme for the entire series and one could argue the entirety of theTrek franchise {think Kirk's changing the rules in the Kobayashi Maru, one could argue that the "changing the rules" theme was integral to the Trek philosophy as an ethical stand against cultural determinism}; this culminates with "In the Pale Moonlight" in the sixth season of DS9). Sisko's position (or rather Starfleet's) is contrasted with O'Brien, who, according to his character, follows his moral compass above all else, Starfleet rules be damned (and you really see this come to fruition when we meet the anti-O'Brien in the parallel universe much later in episodes like "Crossover"). At the end, we see O'Brien anticipate Sisko's decision to help him, as Sisko stretches the rules to give O'Brien time to free Tosk, which Odo picks up on right away, having served with the Cardassians in the past, and likely used to their cunning. (This isn't your grandad's Trek.) In any case, the core ideas here seem to be lacking from the plot section. Try to review the episode again or some reliable plot summaries to get a better handle on it. Viriditas (talk) 08:15, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • He convinces Odo to release Tosk into his care as it is a Starfleet matter and not a Bajoran one.

Production

[edit]
Resolved

Reception and home media release

[edit]
Resolved

Notes

[edit]
Resolved

References

[edit]
Resolved
[edit]
Resolved

Criteria

[edit]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
    Copyedits needed in lead, plot section, production
    Plot is missing several important elements, and contains several trivial aspects
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
    WP:OVERLINK: infobox, lead
    WP:LEAD, should summarize the most important points. Production point above noted as missing from the lead
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. Has an appropriate reference section:
    B. Citations to reliable sources, where necessary:
    C. No original research:
    Episode count deviates from official source.
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
    Stable
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    Minor issues. Viriditas (talk) 05:25, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not sure if you've done this yet or not, but as time permits I'll do a read through. I just copyedited the lead, but I'm off to work. I'll be back later. Viriditas (talk) 21:20, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Copyedited plot. Viriditas (talk) 03:26, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Miyagawa: In the lead it says, "The episode was nominated for an Emmy Award for best make-up for a series, but lost out to an episode of Babylon 5." And, in the reception section it says,"The episode was nominated for an Emmy Award for make-up, but instead the award went to fellow science fiction television series Babylon 5 for the episode "The Parliament of Dreams"." Out of curiousity, I decided to fact check this claim, and it looks like the episode won the Emmy award.[1][2] Could you please check your sources again? I think you mixed up the years. This award was for 1993 and your citation goes to the 1994 ceremony. Please check your sources again, this looks like a major mistake. For reference purposes, we also have List of awards and nominations received by Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, but I wouldn't rely on it alone. Erdmann's Deep Space Nine Companion (2000) notes that it won the award on p. 8,[3] as do many other sources, such as Entertainment Awards (1996) on p. 128.[4] Viriditas (talk) 10:20, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well I'll be. Yep, DS9 clearly won that award from the first season, and since we have a cite to say it was nominated then we can be sure that it was Captive Pursuit that won it. I think the mix up came because of the timing of the release of the first season - it ran from January 93 into the summer, so normally when you have a 93 release it would be as part of a season overlapping 93/94 and therefore would come up in the awards for the following year. Not in this case, hence the confusion. I guess Babylon 5 beat something from season two then. Miyagawa (talk) 10:28, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • We have the secondary (Erdmann) saying it won and the primary confirming it (see the direct link to the Emmy site which lists this episode). No guesswork (or extraneous sites mentioning a nomination) needed. I'll bet if you look hard enough, you'll find a published list for 1993 like the 1994 one you found, but we really don't need it per the above. Viriditas (talk) 10:39, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Miyagawa: Thanks. Any particular reason the lead has the Handlen citation in it? Since it's summarizing what's in the reception and home media release section, I think we can go ahead and remove it from the lead. Viriditas (talk) 20:45, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The official Emmy Awards site is terrible, but I finally tracked down the correct page pointing to the award:[5] As you can see, it was competing against Space Rangers and TNG in the same category. The cool thing is that this particular page has links to "info" and "awards" that can be used for other Trek pages, such as the above list. It can also be used to fill out the relevant fields in the 45th Primetime Emmy Awards article. Viriditas (talk) 20:58, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Based on the above, I'm passing the article. However, there are a few issues to be aware of here: to pass the article, I removed the brief statement about cultural relativism. It's a discussion about a theme, and is really out of place in a "reception" section. As I said earlier in this review, it's an interesting point and I would like to see more of it, but adding a single sentence in a section about reception isn't helpful, it's confusing. Create a theme section and talk about it in more detail and how it connects with the Prime Directive. Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 10:51, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]