Talk:Rejoined

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Rejoined/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: J Milburn (talk · contribs) 19:12, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Happy to take this on. Josh Milburn (talk) 19:12, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

• I realise that this is slightly contradictory, but, first, the lead is a little long per WP:LEADLENGTH, and, second, the plot description in the lead does not seem to provide enough context. "In this episode, Jadzia Dax is reunited with the mate of a former host, Lenara Kahn, and the two struggle with their feelings for one another. During the course of a series of wormhole experiments, they rekindle their romance but Kahn decides not to pursue the relationship because of the taboo in their species against it." The whole "mate of a former host" and "taboo in their species" thing is unclear to people who aren't already fairly familiar with the subject.

• I've trimmed the production and expanded the plot summary. Miyagawa (talk) 17:17, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

• I'm sorry to push this, but the lead section guidelines are specifically mentioned in the GA criteria. It's still a little long, and I still think it's lacking some context; even people familiar with Star Trek who are not really knowledgeable about the subject (I include myself in that category!) are going to struggle with the whole "host" thing. Josh Milburn (talk) 18:26, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

• I've expanded the plot to contain some background, and shrunk the third paragraph a little more to keep the overall length shorter. Miyagawa (talk) 18:56, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

• I think the plot section, too, needs more context on Trill and the whole symbiont thing.

• I had played with the idea of adding a background section, but it seemed too short and so I worked it into the first paragraph of the plot instead. Miyagawa (talk)

• Better, but is the Trill species (as an aside, Trill (Star Trek) is a redirect to Dax (Star Trek), so maybe not the most useful link!) the symbionts, or the symbionts and the host combined? This article suggests the latter, while Dax's article suggests the former. Josh Milburn (talk) 18:26, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

• Kinda both. I would call them both Trill, as they both originate from the same planet. Kinda like the Xindi. Just one is a host and one is a symbiont. I'll have to take a look at the Trill article because if its just a redirect to Dax then it could do with quite a bit of an expansion into something of its own. Miyagawa (talk) 18:56, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

• As before- perhaps cast could be mentioned in the plot section. This would prevent the "out of the blue" introduction of Farrell and Thompson in the production section (though mentioning who they each play in the production section would not be a bad addition.)

• I've added them to the plot - I'm going to go back to doing this in future articles. Miyagawa (talk) 17:17, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

• There's some inconsistency concerning whether you refer to characters by given name or surname.

• Was this related to referring to Kira Nerys as Kira? The Bajorans switch around the first and family names, so her first name is actually Nerys. Miyagawa (talk)

• Lenara, too- I assume you're sometimes referring to Lenara as opposed to Kahn, but in some of those cases, I think you should probably call her "Kahn", for consistency with how you refer to Dax. Josh Milburn (talk) 18:26, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

• Sorry, I should have spotted that one. I've fixed it now. Miyagawa (talk) 18:36, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

• "A similar story had been approached during the first appearance of the Trill in The Next Generation episode, "The Host", but when the symbiont is transferred to a female host, she is rejected by Beverly Crusher." I don't follow.

• I've expanded this. Miyagawa (talk) 17:17, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

• "Farrell suggested that the symbiont could be moved to a male character resulting in a similar situation as "Rejoined" between the new Dax host and Worf.[6]" Presumably, because Worf and Dax were a couple? This could be spelt out a bit more clearly.

• Amended as suggested. Miyagawa (talk) 17:17, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

• "As such, The Associated Press dismissed the kiss in Deep Space Nine as "extenuating circumstances" because one of the characters was an "alien who used to be a man"." Personification. Also, you don't need to italicise "The Associated Press".

• Modified and removed the italics. Miyagawa (talk) 17:17, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

• The personification remains- could it not be avoided? Josh Milburn (talk) 18:26, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

• How does it read now? Miyagawa (talk) 18:37, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

• "one of the well received episodes of Star Trek which dealt with homosexuality" What does this mean? Also, what do you mean by "such issues"? Sexuality? LGBT issues? Or just homosexuality specifically? (Similar in the next sentence- it all feels a bit euphemistic. Just say which "issues" you're referring to!)

• I've made it more specific. Miyagawa (talk) 17:17, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

• I'm still unclear what "was one of the well received episodes of Star Trek which dealt with homosexuality" means. Are there multiple groups of ST episodes which deal with homosexuality, and this falls into the "well received" camp? Josh Milburn (talk) 18:26, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

• I've changed "well received" to "better received" - but yes, there are several ST episodes which used LGBT themes as part of the plot/moral, and this was one of the more positively received episodes. The two TNG episodes which dealt with the subject matter were probably the worst. Miyagawa (talk) 14:15, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

• Is The Mary Sue a reliable source? Also, why the speech marks around the name?

• The Mary Sue forms part of the Abrams Media Network founded by Dan Abrams. Miyagawa (talk) 17:20, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

• Did "Little Green Men" air twice? (Check the ratings section.)

• Corrected - that was a stupid mistake! Miyagawa (talk) 17:17, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

• Could you check again? I'm not seeing any change. Josh Milburn (talk) 18:26, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

• No idea why the edit didn't appear - I've made it again. Miyagawa (talk) 18:35, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

• "Jordon Hoffman commented in a review on his website" Is he a professional critic?

• He has a column which is still published from time to time on the Official Star Trek website. Miyagawa (talk) 17:17, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

That's all for now- may have a bit more when I come back! Josh Milburn (talk) 19:57, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the fixes so far- I've replied to some comments. Josh Milburn (talk) 18:26, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Ok, I've done some more copyediting. The only thing I'm waiting on is a clarification of the sentence "David Greven, literary critic and author of Gender and Sexuality in Star Trek, said that "Rejoined" was one of the well received episodes of Star Trek which dealt with homosexuality, but that the franchise overall had typically avoided LGBT issues." Josh Milburn (talk) 11:37, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Great, I'm happy that this is now ready for promotion. Nice work! Josh Milburn (talk) 14:44, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Alien kisses

We've got a whole subsection devoted to a video artist whom doesn't seem to be notable enough for an article, and is cited solely to the same critic. I'm not sure it's relevant except maybe to add to the earlier paragraph from Bruce. Thoughts? Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 17:00, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

I wrote the paragraph because the piece was given a large amount of analysis in an article by a professor of media/film. Here is another brief discussion. Analysis in the academic literature of this episode more broadly is pretty minimal, but we do have a lot of analysis of that piece- I think it's an important part of the academic literature on this episode, even if Star Trek fans might see it as a bit of a nothing. (Also, I strongly suspect that Gellman is notable, but, naturally enough, queer feminist Canadian video art is not something which is covered as well on Wikipedia as it could be!) Josh Milburn (talk) 17:25, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

I've added in some material from the new source, which I hope establishes the significance of alien kisses- to reiterate, it seems to be a part of the story here. While it may not be of interest to many ST fans, it's something that has received some attention in serious academic literature. Josh Milburn (talk) 17:42, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 18:40, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Reliable sourcing

If the hope is to take this article to FAC, I think some questions need to be asked about the sources. Given that most of the analysis section is made up of discussion in academic sources and given that it doesn't really add much, I think The Mary Sue needs to go. I'm also unclear about the Jordan Hoffman source, but I appreciate that a dearth of sources for critical reception may necessitate going for some not-ideal sources. Josh Milburn (talk) 18:28, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Hoffman has written (and writes) many freelance movie reviews for reliable sources, so I feel like he's established his reviewer credentials well enough for a SPS. I'm wary of the Mary Sue and other blog-focused sites in general. The author has written for other publications,[1] but none at the level of The Guardian or similar sources. I can see her not falling into the "high quality" criterion. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 19:16, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Quite importantly for Hoffman, he actually writes for the official Star Trek website in a column called "One Trek Mind". Here's a link to the 56th posting of it: here. Miyagawa (talk) 22:57, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Good to know. Are you fine with cutting the Mary Sue paragraph? Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 01:21, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Yep, I was trying to be thorough, but in hindsight, I don't think it is needed. Miyagawa (talk) 12:57, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

One of the first televised lesbian kisses?

If you ignore the 1974 BBC drama Girl, and the 1994 episode of Brookside. This article stinks of Americancentrism. GimliDotNet (talk) 19:49, 30 October 2021 (UTC)