Talk:The Aenar/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: J Milburn (talk · contribs) 15:31, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to offer a review. Josh Milburn (talk) 15:31, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"collaborate to stop the unknown drones from causing further havoc" What unknown drones?
"one of whom has been taken to pilot the drone Romulan ship" What do you mean by "taken"? What Romulan ship? What's a "drone" ship anyway? I think the lead assumes a little too much knowledge.

I've linked through to Unmanned combat aerial vehicle for drone, as this is effectively what they were - just space ship versions. I guess Enterprise was a little bit ahead of its time for once.

I think "installment" is standard in American English

Corrected as noted.

The plot section introduces "drone program" without any real context

I wasn't sure whether to add a background section or not. For now I've simply added that it was in the previous two episodes.

"from inside the drone" Again!

I've changed that to clarify that it was the Romulan ship.

"but Tucker requests to leave the ship as well." Just requests or actually leaves? With the Aenar, or independently? This isn't completely clear.

I've added a clarification.

"Shran appeared to be impaled" Was the character actually impaled?

Changed simply to "was" rather than "appeared to be".

I hate to say this, but you're relying on some pretty weak sources- to the extent that I'm left thinking that the episode is barely notable. A quick Google is throwing up a few passing mentions... Is there really nothing better? Josh Milburn (talk) 16:22, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's problematic because I know that better reviews etc are out there, but will be in print magazines. Undoubtably there are also articles related to the three part episode in those magazines as well, but the only ones I can access are the Starlog archives on archive.org. I just double checked that one and there isn't any mention. Enterprise never had any proper source books produced (unlike that fantastic DS9 one), and only has a section in the back of the Broken Bow novelization (this only covers the first few episodes) and occasional mentions in general franchise summaries. Miyagawa (talk) 18:28, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I just double checked the sources I had through the Wikipedia Library's worth with McFarland publishers and managed to find an extra source on the Aenar, which I've added to the reception section. Miyagawa (talk) 18:46, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Query

It's been 17 days since both review and article were edited. J Milburn, Miyagawa, where does the review stand? Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:46, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I will get back to this soon. Josh Milburn (talk) 12:07, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Second look through

The lead strikes me as too long for an article of this length.
"He added that the Aenar served a further allegory as the blindness of the race "reflects whiteness to itself has no ability to see itself."[10]" Could you check this quote? I understand what is being claimed, but it's grammatically all over the place.

I'm still wondering if the episode is actually notable, but I am starting to feel that this is about as good as the article's going to get- there are a couple of hits on Google Scholar that look like they have a line or two, but certainly nothing substantial. Josh Milburn (talk) 12:32, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly it is one of the least talked about episodes of the series. I've trimmed the lead and completely re-written that line with the quote so that it makes at least a little sense. Miyagawa (talk) 13:18, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is about where it needs to be for promotion, and so I'll push it through now. My sincere apologies for the delay. Merry Christmas and all that! Josh Milburn (talk) 15:46, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks J, I always appreciate your thoughts on my articles. Miyagawa (talk) 16:32, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]