Talk:Q Who

Q Who 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.
Review: October 4, 2013. (Reviewed version).

A fact from Q Who appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 12 October 2013 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the Star Trek: The Next Generation episode "Q Who", which introduced the Borg, won two Emmy Awards?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2013/October. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Q Who.

Wikipedia

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 Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

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 (assessed as Mid-importance).

Elaboration on this episode

Not sure if relevant but the book 'Q AND A' elaborates very heavily on the events of this episode, even naming many of the eighteen crewmembers murdered by the Borg. Lots42 (talk) 20:09, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Khazar2 (talk · contribs) 02:33, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Miyagawa, I'll be glad to take this one. Comments to follow in the next 1-3 days. Thanks as always for your work! -- Khazar2 (talk) 02:33, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, on first pass, this looks solid. I've made some prose tweaks throughout; feel free to revert any with which you disagree, and I can explain and discuss. I still need to do some source-checking and independent Googling for this, but my impression is that it's about ready to pass. Two clarity points I couldn't immediately resolve below. -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:51, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"The new race would go on to appear in six episodes of The Next Generation" -- is this counting Q Who or in addition to Q Who?

Quite right! It was six including "Q Who". I've changed it to "five further episodes". Miyagawa (talk) 17:16, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"This may have been linked to the aliens seen in "Conspiracy"" -- I'm not sure what the pronoun "this" refers to here.

I've changed it to "This plot may..." - its been speculated that the aliens seen in Conspiracy had a connection to the hive mind insect race that the Borg idea originated from. There's a couple of websites that present this as fact, but digging deeper I've never found any direct interview etc that has said that it was where it came from. Miyagawa (talk) 17:16, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review - I have all the source material scanned into a single PDF if you want me to email it over to look at. Just the pages used that is, rather than the whole book. I used to use an app on my phone to make quick scans of pages and then email to myself so I can flick between windows on the computer while editing. More recently (starting with Shades of Grey) I've just had the book next to me as it is quicker although maybe not quite as easy. :) Miyagawa (talk) 17:16, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that'd be a huge help. Could you send it to my Wikipedia e-mail? More later! -- Khazar2 (talk) 17:24, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Checklist

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	Pass--nice work as always.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Q Who. 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/20141102142006/http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/3811/star-trek-next-generation-season-2/ to http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/3811/star-trek-next-generation-season-2/

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) 19:57, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Q Who. 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/20141102141814/http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/57992/star-trek-the-next-generation-season-two/ to http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/57992/star-trek-the-next-generation-season-two/

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) 02:41, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Map Request

REQUEST - please add a map of the galaxy overlaid with the approximate location of the: 1) original location of the Enterprise, 2) 7000 light year away location, 3) location of nearest starbase stated by data, 4) edge of Borg known space, 5) edge of Federation known space, 6) any other known space. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 18:08, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]