Wikia

Memory Alpha

Talk:Planet killer

37,549pages on
this wiki

Back to page

FA status Edit

FA nomination (June 2004, Failed)Edit

Self-nomination. A fairly long and detailed article about one of the best TOS episodes there was. -- Dan Carlson 17:01, 10 Jun 2004 (CEST)

  • I disagree. This is a good article, but IMO misplaced. Read Talk:planet killer. -- K 17:16, 10 Jun 2004 (CEST)
  • Seconded. Ottens 18:59, 10 Jun 2004 (CEST)
  • Support. -- Michael Warren 22:57, 10 Jun 2004 (CEST)
  • Seconded. -- Redge 10:17, 23 Jun 2004 (CEST)
  • I would like to apologize for not responding. I felt that since everyone disagreed with me, no response was necessary. I still stand by my original comments. However, I am the only dissenting opinion, and my reasons are related to semantics, not content. This article is well-written and enjoyable to read, and should not be held back. If the only thing this article needs for nomination is for me to withdraw my objection, then consider it done. --K 09:33, 27 Jun 2004 (CEST)

FA nomination (June 2004, Success) Edit

Self-nomination. A fairly long and detailed article about one of the best TOS episodes there was. -- Dan Carlson 17:01, 10 Jun 2004 (CEST)

  • Renominated. Previous nomination failed, see [comments in above section] and nominations archive. -- Redge 14:36, 27 Jun 2004 (CEST)
  • Seconded. --BlueMars 00:33, Jun 28, 2004 (CEST)
  • Support before, support now. -- Michael Warren 00:45, 28 Jun 2004 (CEST)
    • Seconded. Dito. -- Redge 11:22, 28 Jun 2004 (CEST)

FA removal (18 Nov - 02 Aug 2008, Success) Edit

Doomsday machine - has been awarded FA status in 2004. Since then parts of it have been shifted around, others have been considerably rewritten (diff), which at least warrants another look at this articles FA status.

I think this article no longer is "one of the best" MA has to offer. One thing that bugs me is the huge Apocrypha section making up about 1/3 of the page. While we do allow some of that stuff, I think an "excellent" article should restrict itself in that regard, and instead link to Memory Beta.

Instead, some more background info about the creative process might be a valuable addition. I think I read about the first designs of that device somewhere, and how it became what we saw due to budget restrictions. Some comparison between TOS and TOS-R might be added as well.

Finally, the structuring of the article could be better. There's just a tiny paragraph about the device (which is the topic of the article, after all), followed by a huge section about the battle against it. This should be restructured to have more of the modus operandi of the machine in the first section, and eventually a less detailed battle depiction in the second. -- Cid Highwind 09:51, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Support - I agree with Cid's reasoning.– Cleanse 10:05, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Support. As with the Dreadnought article, a FA should be more than a summary of the episode it was in(which, for some reason, was why it was nominated, according to the original discussion).--31dot 12:56, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Support - Agree with above comments. -- TrekFan Talk 16:56, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Archived. – Cleanse 06:22, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

ContentEdit

This article is well written, and I enjoyed it. However, it seems to me to be more about the episode and less about the machine. I would suggest that most of this content be moved to the episode summary, while retaining the information specific to the machine. -K 17:11, 10 Jun 2004 (CEST)

How is it misplaced? It's an article about the encounter with the machine. Yes, that's what the episode was about too, but this article is different because it's written in chronological order.-- Dan Carlson 17:32, 10 Jun 2004 (CEST)
What else is there to tell about it, outside the episode? Ottens 18:58, 10 Jun 2004 (CEST)
I haven't seen the episode, so my perspective may be somewhat more fresh. I think there is nothing wrong with this article and it covers the device axactly as it should in a ST database. You can add large portions of it to the episode summary, and it'll be double. But it's surtainly not out of place here. -- Redge 16:17, 12 Jun 2004 (CEST)

Doomsday Machine Definition Edit

I think it should be an article about what a doomsday machine is, with references to this historical encounter with one. There should be references to the origin of the term, namely the nuclear arms races of the middle to late 20th century on Earth. It was theorized that one or both of the arms racers (the Soviet Union and/or the United States) had set up automated systems to fight "all-out" nuclear war even if military command and control were destroyed. The phrase "doomsday machine" was popularized in (I think) the film "Doctor Strangelove." --<unsigned>

wasn't that doomsday device? and how does the general concept of a doomsday device apply here, since this article is about the Trek planet killer? --66.239.55.227 00:03, 23 Jul 2005 (UTC)Reese 7/22/05 18:30

Canon or Fanon Edit

I think that telling us that the berserker (the name coined by Bjo Trimble for the alien planet killer in her "Star Trek Concordance") is a Preserver device used as a last ditch weapon against the Borg is unnecessary. There is no direct proof in any subsequent filmed episode that the device is anything more than Kirk says it is, and he is speculating at that. 170.65.128.6 20:45, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Bjo Trimble did not coin the name Berserker. Actually, Bjo Trimble's book was published over ten years after Fred Saberhagen's first Berserker story. The idea for the doomsday machine owes a lot to Saberhagen's Berserker series, about mankind's fight against marauding machines that have kept looking for targets long after their enemies and creators were destroyed. Bjo Trimble probably used the name as a tip of the hat to Saberhagen. --Yourhums 04:12, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

ConjectureEdit

Why does this page have a section on conjecture? Isn't that contradictory to our policy of sticking to just the facts? Jaz 07:49, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)

the section should probably be moved to Apocrypha, since the first 'conjecture' comes directly from the Vendetta Novel, save for the false referance to the lack of FTL. i've never even heard of the second one before. -207.173.196.177 05:09, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

No FTL drive? Edit

In the conjecture section, it states:

"The Planet Killer's apparent lack of an FTL drive precludes the possibility of arriving far from our galaxy - it may have only been developed a short distance outside the galactic rim. "

We have no indication that there is no FTL drive in the PK, as the machine is fast enough to keep up with and will eventually overtake the Enterprise, I think there is enough indication that it does indeed possess an FTL capability. Furthermore, if it didn't have an FTL capability, it would be years before the neighboring Rigel colonies would be threatened and therefore the PK could easily be outrun, the subspace interference could be escaped, and Starfleet would have had time to assemble a veritable armada to deal with the threat long before it reached Rigel, all with plenty of time to spare. All this is a rather clear indication that it does indeed posses FTL capabilities. I will leave that up for now in case others have points I have failed to consider, otherwise I will remove that in a day or two. Lestatdelc 03:05, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

STNVEdit

Don't forget the appearance of the Doomsday Machine in the STNV episode "In Harm's Way" - this would go under non-canon/apocrypha as well. -Etoile

We don't document fan materials, only acknowledge their existence. – Morder 17:54, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

CGI? Edit

Does anyone have an image from the remastered TOS to add to this article? --TimPendragon 00:38, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Considering that this is supposed to be from the last episode they remaster, and that it is not supposed to air until 2008, I would doubt it. --OuroborosCobra talk 01:35, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
"A little less florid, Cobra" ;) Seriously, though, you could have replied in a better tone than that. --From Andoria with Love 06:41, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
Tone? Sorry, I really did not mean to come off with a bad tone. I really just meant to state that I did not think there would be one yet, and why. I apologize if I came off badly, that was not my intention. --OuroborosCobra talk 06:51, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
Actually, according to the TOS Remastered Episode list site: http://trekmovie.com/tos-in-hd/hdtv-star-trek-tos-episode-order/ , Doomsday Machine is scheduled to air in February :) Capt Christopher Donovan 07:08, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
Hmm. My information was based on the link in our article regarding remastered effects in this episode. Perhaps we should put a link with better information? In addition, I suppose it is possible they have finished the model. I have not seen anything on it, but I don't visit StarTrek.com regularly. Thanks Donovan. --OuroborosCobra talk 07:14, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
I don't think they'll have the model done just yet...the site I linked to above is the best site I know for preview/reviewing TOSR, and it doesn't have ANYTHING up yet about it. StarTrek.com MIGHT have something sooner, being the "official" site and all, but I doubt it. I DID hear an interesting rumor that they were going back to Spinrad's original script notes about what he wanted the machine to look like for ideas, as he was supposedly not happy with the one they used originally.Capt Christopher Donovan 12:16, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Idle thought Edit

Anybody wonder how the encounter might've played out in the Mirror universe? I know I do. -- Captain Spadaro 03:58, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Um, talk pages are not meant for that type of discussion, see Help:talk pages. --OuroborosCobra talk 04:07, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry. My bad. -- Captain Spadaro 04:21, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Fan Films Edit

A note along the following lines has been removed twice:

"Apocrypha" is for licensed Star Trek works only. Not fan films. See our canon policy.– Cleanse 10:52, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Opening Quote? Edit

"They say there's no devil, Jim, but there is. Right out of hell, I saw it!"

- Commodore Matt Decker

How's that for a possible opening quote? - Mitchz95 02:57, February 10, 2012 (UTC)

If it needs a quote, it's a good one. I'm not sure it does- but I won't stop anyone from adding one. --31dot 03:05, February 10, 2012 (UTC)

Considering the length of the article, plus the planet killer's fame in canon and non-canon alike, I say it deserves a quote. I'm adding it to the article, but of course feel free to remove it. - Mitchz95 03:10, February 10, 2012 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki