Talk:Home (Star Trek: Enterprise)

Home (Star Trek: Enterprise) has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Home (Star Trek: Enterprise) is part of the Star Trek: Enterprise (season 4) series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
October 23, 2014	Good article nominee	Listed
May 25, 2016	Good topic candidate	Promoted

Current status: Good article

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.

Fair use rationale for Image:Home (ENT episode).jpg

Image:Home (ENT episode).jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:13, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Considering the Trivia section

I deleted the bit about the people who were at the awards ceremony. I felt it was, pun not intended, illogical. Of course only the bridge crew will be there, that's who the actors are being paid to portray. Also, the sentences about how Phlox deserved less recognition was very confusing, he did many heroic things.

NX-02 Columbia page

Why was the Columbia page removed!!?? I had contributed a lot on it!!

Considering the Trivia section II

This is not the first apperiance of Enterprise's syster ship Columbia. It was seen in at least one earlier episode.

Robert1980 00:04, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Home (Star Trek: Enterprise)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Zanimum (talk · contribs) 18:47, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It seems I'm making a habit of reviewing Enterprise articles. -- Zanimum (talk) 18:47, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Passing infobox, Plot, lead. Having never watched past season 2 (the series was taken off broadcast television in Canada, I believe, and only shown on Space) I can still follow the references to past plotpoints.

Production

"how do they readjust": are you sure there's no hyphen in re-adjust?

Yep - fixed. Miyagawa (talk) 19:33, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"It was directed by Allan Kroeker": Are we talking solely about "Home" being directed by him, or was "Innocence" also his? By starting with "It", my mind automatically refers back to the previous sentence about the Fire Plains and Voyager.

I've redrafted that line to distance the mention of "Home" as far away as possible as the mention of it in the previous sentence. Miyagawa (talk) 19:33, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reception and home media release

"a general plot - the latter": you need an en dash or em dash.

I've run the dash tool and fixed it. Miyagawa (talk) 19:33, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You've used [19] four times in a row, within the context of reception. I think readers will get that it's all from the IGN Filmforce, just based on your prose, no need to repeat, but I'm not picky either way.

I've dropped one which wasn't needed - but left two in as they're citing quotes. Miyagawa (talk) 19:33, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Passing References, but I'll note that Checklinks always gets caught up by trekweb.com links, declaring them "Heuristics resolved as likely dead". They've obviously got something screwy with their server or software.

Passing "External links", and the two free licensed images. -- Zanimum (talk) 17:16, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks for reviewing as always. I'd recommend you pick up season 3 and 4 on Netflix or something, as they're a complete step up from the first two seasons. Especially season four... if only they'd started with that season... Miyagawa (talk) 19:33, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly, I don't have Netflix. I tried signing out one of the seasons at the library, around the first time you did an Enterprise review. After I checked it out, I noticed it was missing a disc. #hardcopymediumproblems (Passing, by the way.) -- Zanimum (talk) 21:44, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Home (Star Trek: Enterprise). 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/art-main.html?2004-10%2F22%2F10.30.tv
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140811081825/http://abcmedianet.com/web/dnr/dispDNR.aspx?id=110904_04 to http://abcmedianet.com/web/dnr/dispDNR.aspx?id=110904_04
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141010224559/http://abcmedianet.com/web/dnr/dispDNR.aspx?id=111604_05 to http://abcmedianet.com/web/dnr/dispDNR.aspx?id=111604_05
Corrected formatting/usage for http://tv.zap2it.com/tveditorial/tve_main/1%2C1002%2C272%7C91256%7C1%7C%2C00.html
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://trekweb.com/stories.php?aid=41792bd88775e

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) 09:56, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Home (Star Trek: Enterprise). 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/20090601194225/http://abcmedianet.com/web/dnr/dispDNR.aspx?id=101904_12 to http://abcmedianet.com/web/dnr/dispDNR.aspx?id=101904_12

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) 20:16, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ratings

I'm not clear on the Ratings. Zap2it (a source used in various other articles in this series) said: On UPN, "Enterprise" had a 1.9/4 and edged "What I Like About You" and "Grounded for Life" on The WB. [1] But the other sources seem to be saying the ratings were 1.7/3 and not 1.9/4. Maybe Zap2it were reporting earlier ratings and the other sources were reporting the finalized ratings? Can anyone clear this up? -- 109.79.65.11 (talk) 23:37, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe someone accidentally included the ratings for Storm Front part 2 October 15, 2004 instead of this episode? -- 109.79.65.11 (talk) 23:37, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

TVTango has a list for the whole season, they put the rating at 2/4 [2] which unfortunately doesn't help clarify anything. -- 109.79.65.11 (talk) 01:08, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]