Talk:Wesley Crusher

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

Film C‑class

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Fictional characters C‑class

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Needs out-of-universe stuff

The article's a comprehensive biography of the fictional character, but it lacks any real-life information. I came here in search of any mention of the Usenet newsgroup alt.ensign-wesley.die.die.die and was disappointed. :) Bryan 07:51, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Even Wil Wheaton recognizes that one major feature of the character was the tenacity with which he was hated by many fans and adored by others (particularly women). There is surely plenty of solid source material we can cite as to how the character was received; people who like a different approach can always go to Memory Alpha. Lawikitejana 19:14, 28 July 2007 (UTC) Update: Come to find out, even Memory Alpha recognizes that Wesley was hated! See this ref to read for yourself. Lawikitejana 21:58, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please find reliable 3rd party sources. Memory Alpha is another Wiki. 24.4.253.249 19:59, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Again, I wasn't offering it as a reliable third-party source — in fact, I was contrasting them with reliable third-party sources. I had naively suggested that people who wanted to read profiles that omit this notable detail could go to Memory Alpha, so I was updating my comment to observe that even THEY don't feel the need to whitewash. You'll note that I didn't add anything back into the actual article, but rather mentioned here, where we're supposed to discuss potential improvements to the articles, that there are (a) good arguments to be made that the cult of "Wesley haters" is notable for being far larger than is typical and for having been written about many times and (b) that reliable published sources surely exist out there to show this notability. Lawikitejana 22:10, 8 August 2007 (UTC) (Sheesh ... I liked the character, for the record, but that doesn't change anything.)[reply]

Usenet Group

Hi, I recently removed 59.167.35.88's mention of a wesley usenet hate group: "A number of Wesley Crusher hate sites have been created by fans who despise the character, these include usenet groups such as alt.wesley.crusher.die.die.die ." While I personally do not like Wesley (:P), I feel this is inappropriate for this article.. --Illyria05-- 04:32, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see why, so long as it is supported with citations. It's quite the provable — and notable — fact that Wesley haters were numerous, and even the actor who played him recognizes, even to a point sympathizes with that. He has often written about the extent to which this is a factor of certain writers disliking the character and writing ridiculous material for him. Lawikitejana 19:17, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just about every public personality has a group that hates them. What makes these notable and worthy of inclusion? 24.4.253.249 19:19, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fan reactions aren't particularly notable, reliable sources. If one wants to cite reaction against the character, go ahead and cite the aforementioned actor's reactions. Or even cite Wheaton's recognition of the online hatin'. But citing the existence of newsgroups themselves doesn't cut the mustard in term of reliable sourcing. --EEMeltonIV 19:22, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that I never said that the mere existence of the group constituted a reliable source. Also, with respect to "every public personality has haters," I did note earlier on this page that there are some indications that Wesley Crusher was voted the second-most-hated scifi character in a poll in Maxim, which — if verified — would make hatred of the character considerably more notable than the average. In that case, the existence of the group, if mentioned in reliable sources, becomes a more logical candidate for inclusion in a discussion of the strong dislike many felt for the character. Lawikitejana 06:27, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have to think that the fact there were so many Wesley haters was notable. People 20 years from now seeing the show for the first time would want to know what the public's recation was the first time they saw the show. I guess we just need a good citation for the existence of a significant number of "Wesley Haters" 69.228.240.57 18:41, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apparent factual error

There was an error regarding whom the Traveler "disguised" as. The article impled that the Traveler had disguised as Jack Crusher, while in fact the Traveler had disguised as another Native American Indian. Guest 00:50, 27 January 2007 (EST)

Cubert Farnsworth in trivia

It is stated in the Cubert Farnsworth page that Cubert character is based on Wesley's, but that citation has no source. Would it be worth mentioning that in the trivia section? --Undiente 07:42, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why so short?

I am looking at the archives of this article, and a lot has been stripped out. Why? 208.203.4.140 23:56, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why were all episode and film hyperlinks removed?

I don't see what purpose was served by that. It does hint to us, however, that one should not remove hyperlinks simply because they do not know how to markup hyperlinks. Rcej 05:55, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I simply don't understand the hate.

I mean, really. I kinda looked up to Wesley, myself. Him and a couple other characters in fiction, always inspired me to be myself, to think outside the box, and to be resourceful in a pinch. For example. Closest parallel in television, Lucas Wolenczak, from seaQuest, DSV. And then there's Doogie Howser, of Doogie Howser, MD. Child prodigies, both of 'em. Dr. Samuel Beckett, Quantum Leap. According to that fictional universe, Beckett was a mind that came what... once in a generation, even when he was younger than Wesley. And lest we forget, everyone's favorite genius, Lisa Simpson. I actually admire that, in a way. To rag on true genius like that, is tantamount to mocking Beethoven or Mozart. To my mind, I firmly believe that the fans just hated out of envy... and Wesley Crusher was underrated in fan perception. 24.250.15.19 (talk) 00:16, 8 June 2008 (UTC)GOF[reply]

Wikipedia is not a blog. If you have something to contribute to improve the article, please discuss that. Bytebear (talk) 16:05, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think that 24.250.15.19 may be trying to tell us that the article's section on reception is biased. Perhaps we could quote some prominent fan who does like Wheaton's character to provide balance to that section. Regardless of this, however, when your character is the top reason for jumping the shark on the premiere website for measuring that, it is a notable fact. ShutterBugTrekker (talk) 23:16, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have placed an original research tag on this section, and will delete the unverified information at the end of the section unless it can be validated. Xantharius (talk) 22:38, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fan Reception

"However those who were the same age as Wesley Crusher at the time the show aired tended to like the character but the fan base that hated him made it impossible for those who liked the character to voice their opinions since the older fan base had a far reaching influence on what opinions the young fans could voice." I feel that this line should either be removed or rewritten. I usually have a really tough time rewriting sentences, so I was wondering if someone with a stronger English background could do it.--Kurasuke (talk) 18:07, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Biography

A deleted scene in Star Trek: Nemesis establishes that Crusher eventually rejoined Starfleet and served in Engineering under Captain Riker. It would seem that a delete scene is just that deleted and has no bearing on the fictions history. Better support of the fact Crusher will joined starfleet would be found in TNG s05e06, The Game. A period where Mr. Crusher was in his first year a the academy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Game_(Star_Trek:_The_Next_Generation) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.78.31.104 (talk) 22:02, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Final appearence

The last appearance of Wesley I believe appears in 7x11 Parallels with the rank of Lt. appears first in a senior staff briefing followed by a several brief lines on the bridge. (In the security or tactical position.) Granted this occurs in a alternate or parallel reality. And riker kills riker... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.185.118.103 (talk) 14:04, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Startrek.com

Would the biographical entries there (not just on Wesley, but the other characters as well), be considered a reliable source for Wikipedia purposes?