Wikia

Memory Alpha

Talk:Samaritan Snare (episode)

37,448pages on
this wiki

Back to page

SummaryEdit

I dont't know if this is a little to much for a summary, please let me know if it is. ;)
Q 14:34, 4 Aug 2004 (CEST)

If you think this is much, you should see my summary for TNG: "Emergence", or Ottens' summary of "All Good Things..."! Anyway, I think this is a nice and compact summary. I'm guessing your native language isn't English (neither is mine, so I recognise some grammar here and there). No big deal, I'll just correct what I can find. -- Redge 15:34, 4 Aug 2004 (CEST)

I looked at the summary's and indeed my summary is not that long ;) I still am not entirely sure of how to write an summary, it is not that easy to keep it short and to the point, so I'll just give it a try. As you've guessed my native language is not English but Dutch, so if you find any misspelling or wrong syntax please correct them.(or let me know) -- Q 17:22, 4 Aug 2004 (CEST)
Summaries don't necessarily have to be short, they just have to be summaries! :) On the "Yesterday's Enterprise" page, I basically put down what happened in each scene in my own words, so follow that directive if you want. -- Michael Warren 19:26, 4 Aug 2004 (CEST)
When compared to the 2 summaries I mentioned, and the one Michael mentioned, yours is actually short. I'm Dutch too, so I guessed right. Goed werk met deze samenvatting! -- Redge 23:17, 4 Aug 2004 (CEST)

Continuity section Edit

There are a couple problems with the first comment in the Continuity section. First, Columbia wasn't launched until 2154, which doesn't contradict the main point, but to say that it was an active ship in 2151 is false. Second, the last sentence doesn't make any sense. Warp 2 to traverse the solar system? You don't need warp at all for that! In fact I think I remember a policy mentioned somewhere (no clue where, though) that ships couldn't even go to warp until they were outside the system. Impulse only while inside Pluto, or some such thing. Either way, I propose the Continuity comment be edited to account for these problems. --Jhawk 04:16, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

  • In response to Ensign Crusher's comment on the ETA to Starbase 515 and the shuttle's lack of warp drive, Captain Picard related it to a "late 22nd century interplanetary journey". This is a conflict in canon seeing as in 2151, Starfleet vessels are capable of Warp 5 (namely the Enterprise and the Colombia). Only a speed of warp 2 is required to traverse the Sol system.
  • Upon entering the shuttle that Picard and Crusher take to Starbase 515, Ensign Crusher says "Shuttle number 2 is ready for departure". However an outside shot of the shuttlecraft clearly shows it as shuttlecraft 01 with the name Sakharov.
Ive removed the section as it would be better placed in an article on the topic. Other than that, "Background" sections aren't intended for critiquing continuty. --Alan del Beccio 04:25, 16 March 2006 (UTC)


I removed the following: This is one of the few (if not only) times Picard is seen drinking coffee instead of tea. This may be notable for Picard, but not the episode. Statements like this should note a truly significant event, and not something trivial like a drink selection. Otherwise the episode pages would be loaded down with "firsts" or what have you.--31dot 23:21, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

Klingons and the FederationEdit

In his recollection of events surrounding his run-in with a Nausicaan in 2327, Picard tells Wesley that the Klingons joined the Federation after this point. I added this information to Federation members, but it was reverted by User:OuroborosCobra on the grounds that "every other shred of evidence from the rest of all of Star Trek says they aren't members." I don't know what those shreds of evidence are, but this mistake in continuity -- if that's what it is -- is interesting to note perhaps in the background section of this article. I just don't know how to word it as I'm unfamiliar with the shreds that supposedly contradict this. — Scott (talk) 03:54, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Throughout Deep Space Nine, the Klingon Empire is considered a separate entity from the Federation. In addition, even in TNG, they are treated that way. Picard is reluctant to be at all involved in the decision of who would be the next Chancellor, citing the Prime Directive, which only applies if they are not in the Federation. When the Enterprise has traveled to the Klingon homeworld, they are treated as outsiders. The Klingons maintain an extremely large military, not part of Starfleet. The Klingons go to war with the Federation in Deep Space Nine. Never is it mentioned that they are seceding, it is treated a two independent powers going to war. When the Klingons have their civil war, Picard is not allowed to directly intervene as it is an internal Klingon matter. Were they members of the Federation, it would have been an internal Federation matter. The list goes on and on, and is far longer than a single line by Wesley. That line is usually interpreted to mean "before the Klingons joined the Federation in friendship", or something like that, not becoming members. --OuroborosCobra talk 04:03, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Interesting. So the line is either a goof, open to interpretation as you said, or meant to have implied that they were once part of the Federation but ceased to be at some time. Thanks for the clarification. — Scott (talk) 04:22, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

by joining the federation it could mean like join them in peace after the war with them finished i know it sounds stupid but its obvious that they didnt become part of the federation--92.2.184.40 17:53, July 24, 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. This makes the most sense both in-universe and out. In-universe, Welsely just missed the word "with". He was saying "This is before the Klingons joined with the Federation." As to say the Klingons and Federation started working cooperatively in an alliance. The real life explanation is the writer just made an error. Euph 22 20:41, March 4, 2012 (UTC)Mike

Goldenberg Compensators Edit

Grebnedlog is "Goldenberg" backwards, though what significance this has is unknown.
Seriously...if there's no known significance does this even belong? – Morder 08:41, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. If we don't know why, it shouldn't be on there. Tanky 10:14, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
Roddenberry's lawyer, maybe? Actually, since the character's an idiot, it's probably named after some guy one of the writers didn't like, lol! Anyway, I agreed, should be removed. --From Andoria with Love 11:10, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Actually, according to this page, Goldenberg is the real name of the episode's writer, Robert L. McCullough. Looking into that. --From Andoria with Love 11:15, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
    • Specifically, the line saying "'Grebnedlog' heißt rückwärts gelesen 'Goldenberg', der eigentliche Name des Autors Robert L. McCullough" rougly translates to "'Grebnedlog' read backwards is 'Goldenberg', the actual name of author Robert L. McCullough." --From Andoria with Love 11:18, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Is that a reliable source? I've done a bit of checking and I can't really find much information on McCullough to make that determination :) – Morder 21:18, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure as to the reliability of the site and I haven't been able to find anything more to verify their claim. Until we do, the note should be removed, IMO. --From Andoria with Love 07:21, 15 June 2008 (UTC)


Geordi's Transport to the Bridge Edit

Was this the only time in the series that we saw both sides (dematerialization/rematerialization) of a transport simultaneously?

It happened a couple more times in TNG and more than few in DS9 (where there was a transporter in Ops.) Lt.Lovett (talk) 11:37, October 15, 2013 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki