Talk:Twilight (Star Trek: Enterprise)

Twilight (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.
Review: June 22, 2013. (Reviewed version).

Television: Episode coverage GA‑class

	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
GA	This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force.

Star Trek GA‑class 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
GA	This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Retrolord (talk · contribs) 00:51, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll do this. ★★Retro Lord ★★ 00:51, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well I see absolutely no problems at all here, a picture at the top would be nice but I understand they are hard to come by. Article passed. ★★Retro Lord ★★ 00:54, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Twilight (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:

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) 20:15, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reception

If anyone is interested in expanding the Reception section with some academic analysis, then you might take a look at the writings of David Greven (Professor of English at the University of South Carolina). He wrote a book called "Gender and Sexuality in Star Trek"[1] and before that an essay titled "The twilight of identity" [2] which includes analysis of this episode.

Based on what I can see from the preview at Google Books the essay appears to be the basis for chapter 6 of the book.[3]

He writes "Twilight gives us apocalypse as the direct result of a woman in command" so in case you hadn't already guessed he is highly critical of the episode. (I am unlikely to revisit this article and do it myself as this is already rated as a "Good Article" and I am trying to improve the quality of the other articles in the series that are more badly in need of work, and I found this while looking for other sources.) -- 109.76.201.161 (talk) 15:05, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]