Talk:Mudd's Women

Television: Episode coverage Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force.

Star Trek High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Star Trek, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to all Star Trek-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Star TrekWikipedia:WikiProject Star TrekTemplate:WikiProject Star TrekStar Trek articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Science Fiction Low‑importance

	Speculative fiction portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Plot edit in reference to Sulu and Farrell

I'm editing the following: The three women who accompany him are stunningly beautiful, causing double-takes from the male crew members, especially Lt. Sulu and Navigator John Farrell, to remove especially Lt. Sulu and Navigator John Farrell. The reactions of Sulu and Farrell are no different than that of the other male crew members (save Mr. Spock, of course). The only reason I can see why someone put this in would be because of the one scene on the bridge where Sulu and Farrell talk about the women, but this scene does not indicate that those two are any more infatuated than the rest of the male crew. In fact, in the beam-up scene, Dr. McCoy and Scotty are just as mesmerized as Sulu and Farrell (in fact, McCoy continues to show quite an obsession over the women later on). —Preceding unsigned comment added by P shadoh (talk • contribs) 20:32, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lt. Sulu Comes Out

As pointed out in the comment section of this episode's official YouTube/CBS broadcast, at 10:43 you can clearly hear Lt. Sulu state "Johhny, I'm gay" as the camera cuts away to Spock and Scotty: YouTube - Star Trek, Mudd's Women. PRICELESS. Gives a whole new spin on his behavior stepping onto the bridge - "You're on duty Johhy-O. *sNap!* Back to reality!". It is rather surprising this little tidbit took so many decades to be acknowledge and why it isn't a more significant part of Star Trek lore. Wow, Takei had the guts to say that with the cameras rolling in the 1960's, everyone else stayed in character and they didn't edit it out (unless they re-inserted it with the recent remastering). You go Takei!

I wonder if this has any bearing on the strain between George Takei and William Shatner? Though it was early in the series... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.22.118.22 (talk) 05:54, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

dilithium?

Wasn't it dilithium crystals, not lithium? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.158.48.17 (talk) 21:28, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In other episodes, they talked about dilithium crystals. But in this episode, they said lithium crystals. I'm assuming it was just a continuity error in the script but it's what's in the episode. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.240.213.128 (talk) 01:32, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

They originally used "lithium" in episodes as the primary power for starships in "lithium circuits" but the science advisor to Roddenberry remarked that lithium was a real element, with real properties. He advised Roddenberry to invent a substance that no one could point to and say, "Hey, that element wouldn't do that" and they invented dilithium. Several early episodes refer to lithium before this change was made. Because Spock mentions "lithium power circuits" there has been a definite attempt to maintain continuity by saying this early reference to lithium concerned lithium circuitry and that was different from dilithium crystals that were cut and used whole. Yes, it is weak, but that's the story they're sticking to. StarHOG (Talk) 17:32, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mudd's Women. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080403184255/http://www.cbs.com/classics/star_trek/video/video.php?cid=619493214&pid=fjGKdhyIR1y5y_NkxQZyaACGYqnubR1q&play=true&cc=0 to http://www.cbs.com/classics/star_trek/video/video.php?cid=619493214&pid=fjGKdhyIR1y5y_NkxQZyaACGYqnubR1q&play=true&cc=0

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:07, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]