For general discussion on this episode, visit the VOY forum at The Trek BBS.
Can somebody help me here? I'm trying to remove the thumb from the sidebar wiki image, but when I do the image won't show up anymore. I even coped the wiki from "The Aenar", and I was able to get its sidebar image to show up here; but the one that's already here simply won't work w/o the thumb. -- THOR 11:11, 16 Mar 2005 (EST)
When Janeway is in the mess hall visiting those crew members afflicted by the flashbacks, she sits and chats briefly to an African-American ensign. The same actor plays a bridge officer on the Enterprise-E in the film "First Contact". A coincidence, or a goof as the same person cannot be on Voyager and the Enterprise-E at the same time?
- Tim Russ played a baddie that was killed in "Starship Mine". He's also on Voyager... goof? :)
- As in, no. People play different roles. -- Sulfur 12:12, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
The Inner Light similarity? Edit
I just caught the rerun on Spike and I agree with you completely. This is extremely similar in concept to Picard's experience reliving memories of a culture. I'd like to see this mentioned in the article, too. -Etoile 21:59, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Acts yet again - six acts + epilogue is wrong. Standard Trek episode is teaser + five acts for TNG, DS9, VOY and teaser + four acts for TOS and ENT. -- Michael Warren | Talk 19:08, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Peer review Edit
I think this article is outstanding, but there is barely any background information at all. If anyone knows of anything to add, please do, then the article can take its place as a featured article. DaveSubspace Message 04:46, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
My Lai Massacre reference? Edit
Does anyone know if this was supposed to be a reference to the My Lai Massacre? I've just watched the episode, and from the little I know of it, some of the resemblances were striking.--Indefatigable 23:44, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
Major plot flaw Edit
One major plot flaw in this episode is the fact that everyone on Voyager accepts the version of events as presented by the memorial, as objective, unbiased fact - when at best, the story would be highly subjective, at worst, pure propaganda (cf. Black hole of Calcutta at Wikipedia). The plot flaw is that no one on Voyager questions the veracity of the memorial's account, and at the end Janeway helps to perpetuate it ... when it might very well be as accurate as the historical simulation in "Living Witness". --CoffeeBlack 10:59, April 14, 2010 (UTC)
- Per MA:NIT we do not note "plot flaws" in articles unless they are discussed by a cast or crew member.--31dot 11:03, April 14, 2010 (UTC)
But this is the talk page isn't it? I'm mentioning it here in case I missed something in the episode that explains away the flaw (e.g. a conversation where they verified the source of the historical account). --CoffeeBlack 11:11, April 14, 2010 (UTC)
- Talk pages are for discussing changes to the article, and are not for general discussion of the subject, as we're here to write the encyclopedia. Specific questions about something can be addressed at the Reference Desk.--31dot 11:15, April 14, 2010 (UTC)
OK, thanks. But in this instance I think it does have a bearing on the article's content - I just checked Nakan massacre and there it mentions that the memorial is transmitting the memory engrams of soliders involved in the massacre - this would (somewhat) explain away the above flaw - but engrams aren't currently mentioned in the plot summary. --CoffeeBlack 11:40, April 14, 2010 (UTC)
- I wasn't disputing that your original post was legitimate- I was only responding to your statement about talk pages. :) --31dot 01:09, April 15, 2010 (UTC)
Major spoiler in short synopsis Edit
I'm not sure of the exact standard for the single sentence summaries at the start of episode article, but judging from other ones that I have seen, it is bad form at least to include major spoilers there. In the case of this episode, the fact that the crew was not really the ones responsible for the massacre is not revealed until very late in the episode, but the short synopsis at the top of this article pretty much gives it away with "...atrocity that occurred three hundred years ago." Simply removing the phrase "three hundred years ago" will solve the spoiler problem.
The reason I am writing this is because I just now finally watched the episode after missing it during the original run. I only read the top synopsis sentence to see a preview, but my experience in wondering whether anything involving the crew really occurred was spoiled by the "three hundred years ago". - Schloss Ritter 21:59, August 11, 2011 (UTC)– The preceding unsigned comment was added by 18.104.22.168 (talk).
- Yes, the initial sentence should only give a general description. I'll change it.--31dot 22:22, August 11, 2011 (UTC)