Talk:Babel One

Babel One 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.

Babel One is part of the Star Trek: Enterprise (season 4) series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
January 27, 2014	Good article nominee	Listed
May 25, 2016	Good topic candidate	Promoted

Current status: Good article

Television: Episode coverage Low‑importance

	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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force.

Star Trek 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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Re-worded

I re worded the plot outline for the episode, since the first words were 'The Romulans attack...' and it was kind of a spoiler (which I know doesn't go against wiki policy) but it was also not in chronological order, and it was very short, I added a little detail to it. Tydamann (talk) 12:00, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Babel One/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Taylor Trescott (talk · contribs) 22:57, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was about to review this before, but then you withdrew it, so now it's back, and I'm not missing my chance! Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 22:57, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking the time to review it. The only major change I did to it was to expand the reception section (using the same two reviews), but in the meanwhile they also annouced the publication date of the season four Blu-Ray, so I added that as well. Miyagawa (talk) 13:15, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK, here goes:

The guest star thing in the infobox lists a few who aren't mentioned in the article elsewhere. Consider noting their appearance in the Production section.

What I normally do is to cite the guest star list in the infobox - for some reason although my browser says that I opened the Radio Times site for this episode before, I never added the cite. I also removed one of the actors from the list as it wasn't included in the source. Miyagawa (talk) 17:53, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Filming ran on a seven-day schedule, which started on November 2, 2004 and ran until November 10th." Couldn't this just be shortened to "Filming began on November 2, 2004 and lasted until November 10."?

Much better! Changed as suggested. Miyagawa (talk) 17:53, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Jamahl Epsicokhan at his website Jammer's Reviews," drop the comma

Done. Miyagawa (talk) 17:53, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blu ray should be Blu-ray

Done. Miyagawa (talk) 17:53, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"The Blu ray release of the final season of Enterprise is due on April 1, 2014.[8]" you haven't specified the fourth season is the final - could potentially be confusing

Changed to fourth season. Miyagawa (talk) 17:53, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 00:49, 31 December 2013 (UTC)`[reply]

Going to have to hold up my hand and admit a mistake, mainly because I've fixed it now. I got Lee Arenberg mixed up with Aron Eisenberg. I had said that Arenberg played Nog, but it was actually Eisenberg. Arenberg played a bunch of other Ferengi as supported by the source (and I've now changed to reflect the source). I must have read Ferengi and Arenberg and thought Eisenberg. But it's all sorted now. Miyagawa (talk) 17:53, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Since the concerns are addressed I'm passing this. Stepping in since Taylor noted in another review that his connection/activity has been iffy of late. Wizardman 04:10, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Babel One. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 16:07, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Babel One. 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://tv.zap2it.com/tveditorial/tve_main/1%2C1002%2C272_617%7C93257%7C1%7C%2C00.html
Corrected formatting/usage for http://trekweb.com/stories.php?aid=41fbcb22c5c2e
Corrected formatting/usage for http://trekweb.com/stories.php?aid=420031ceb7c2a
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061110073155/http://www.the-trades.com/article.php?id=3755 to http://www.the-trades.com/article.php?id=3755

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) 20:17, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with "United" and "The Aenar"

I propose to merge Babel One with United and The Aenar.

"Storm Front" and "Storm Front, Part II" are two-parts that are both discussed in a single page Storm Front so why don't we have that when it's a three-part story? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lunchmeets (talk • contribs) 20:36, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merging two episodes into a single article frequently causes some minor awkward issues, and the repetition and overlap makes things less clear to readers. If it is to avoid a deletion then one merged article is better than no article at all, but unless they were originally presented as a double episode I wouldn't recommend it. There are some articles I would like to see improved and expanded and split back out into two separate articles. (eg In a Mirror, Darkly, The Best of Both Worlds (Star Trek: The Next Generation) for starters.) Also even if editors agree to the merge, someone still needs to have enough enthusiasm do the work to improve the merged article, which I'm relieved to see did not happen here. -- 109.76.206.80 (talk) 13:00, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Drone ship

I was watching reruns and noticed the derelict ship from The Fight (Star Trek: Voyager) looked familiar. It is a fairly distinct design and resembles a giant flea. Turns out it was later repurposed as the drone ship in this arc of episodes, minor adjustments were made including adding the many antennas.[1] I'm just adding a quick note now as a reminder for when I eventually come back around to this article but it shouldn't be too difficult to find reliable sources and add Production details about the ship to this article. -- 109.76.206.80 (talk) 13:00, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]