Talk:Kirk/Spock

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

LGBT studies B‑class

	LGBT portal This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBT studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBT studiesLGBT articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

This article was nominated for deletion on 6 June 2006. The result of the discussion was keep.

Epilog to Orion

Alternative: Epilog to Orion appeared in two parts. The 1976 part isn't really fully-realized K/S. It's a tiny thing, less than 100 pages long. Although there are some sketchy line drawings in the last part of the zine depicting homosexual acts, the zine itself is about half gen, and the "slash" part is actually a fuzzy fantasy, mostly told in verse, that occurs during a mind meld. At the end of the zine, Kirk and Spock reject a sexual relationship between them.

The second part of Alternative: Epilog to Orion did not appear until 1979! By then there was a K/S fandom--which contributed some very nice K/S art for the zine. This was fully-realized K/S, although the author, apparently a "Kirkie", still had some problems with K/S. Kirk is emotionally abusive to Spock. There is S/Ch and K/m during the middle of the story. There are physical fights, and some general lack of coping with either the homosexual or bonding parts of the relationship.

There was another K/S zine which came out in 1979, the novel Nightvisions, which was much, much better in terms of handling the issue of homosexuality with sensitivity and acceptance.

I do not understand why a few homoerotic poems published in 1976 attract so much attention when much better K/S was being published concurrently.

Call for deletion!

Christ....'o ta hell mae this article?

An' where is theChecov/Sulu slash page???

I agree. This is not noteworthy. If you must, include it in Kirk/Spock individual pages, but I fail to see why this needs an article of its own.

Oh man, awesome, we can post our fanfictions on Wikipedia now? I thought we couldn't, but this page is here so it must mean we are allowed to. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.191.65.80 (talk) 00:06, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree as well. This should be purged. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.187.80.252 (talk) 21:14, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

as much as i love slash... i have to agree Killemall22 (talk) 19:42, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What this idea implies

Why is it that you cannot have two men be very close friends without implying that they are homosexuals? This very mindest keeps many men from feeling free to have deep relationships with each other: namely, that it is a homosexual thing to do or that they will be labeled as gay.

Closer...

exelent fan made video, contains swearing in the lyrics but quite relevant to this page:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PwpcUawjK0

i love that vid!Killemall22 (talk) 19:43, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This Article is... worthy for deletion

Seriously ti is, what a load of tosh, Deus3xmachina —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deus3xMachina (talk • contribs) 14:41, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed a bunch of the unsubstantiated and self-important "this is such an important sub-sub-sub-genre!" claims. I'm dubious about the cited sources -- at least one of them (Enterprise Women) I think is largely accessible on Google Books; I'll check the veracity of the claims there. One of these sources -- the first one about the coded language in one story -- is to a master's thesis, which generally doesn't meet our WP:RS requirements, except the thesis is citing another study not cited here (and I'd hesitate to duplicate the thesis' citation without seeing the original). I'm not sure how to assess this topic's notability -- there is a cited (and accessible) claim about the genre's importance in the study of slash fiction...but, really I have no idea how to gauge the reliability of most of these sources. --EEMIV (talk) 19:35, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've re-added the commentary from Woledge about the scene from The Motion Picture - it helps with the WP:NFCC, and it's a discussed example (published in a peer-reviewed journal) of why Kirk/Spock. --Malkinann (talk) 07:20, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. There is already a notable mention in slash fiction, which is where I believe this information belongs. If anyone chooses to elaborate more in that article then I don't see why not, however this article itself is unnecessary. Perhaps the information on this page can be placed in the individual character articles?

--Iheartfreja (talk) 00:54, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would regard putting information on K/S into Kirk and Spock's articles to be unsatisfactory, as it would in effect reiterate the K/S interpretation of the characters on both Kirk and Spock's pages. As it is a fandom interpretation of the characters, it would attract less weight, and so may be edited to extinction if it were to be merged to their articles. As it is, I believe this article meets the general notability guideline. --Malkinann (talk) 12:39, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]