Talk: James T. Kirk/archive

For previous discussion on this article please visit the archive: Talk:James T. Kirk/Archive.
The link for the peer review can be found at Talk:James T. Kirk/peerreview.

From Memory Alpha:Nominations for featured articles

James T. Kirk

I'm nominating the large article on James T. Kirk for feature status. It's extensive, well cited, and well illustrated. It's broken down in chronological order and consistent in form and format throughout. It's is definitely deserving of feature status. --Bfgreen 11:37, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

~~Oppose~~, if you look at the article history, it is in a state of flux at the moment (and that was before the nomination). In addition, I am not happy with the pictures, particularly the first one in the sidebar. All we can see is a silhouette of some person. It needs to be replaced with one of the great shots of Kirk from Star Trek VI, or something. The information on the movies is very lacking, particularly some of the relationships he had then, with very little on Carol Marcus, and nothing on Martia (who only has one sentence on her, and it is under McCoy), and very little about the events of Star Trek V and VI. I am sure if I read in more detail, I can find more problems. This article is long, but it's not ready, and articles don't just get featured because they are long. --OuroborosCobra ^talk 16:53, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually, the image in the sidebar of Kirk's silhouette was a nifty little addition, IMO. It was an image of his famous entrance in Star Trek II. The image kinda gave it that "Here he comes... you know who this is!" quality... if that makes sense. But, yeah... whatever. :P (by the way, that new image of Kirk from STVI? Yeah... that's gotta go, lol! Do you have a better image of him from the film? If not, I might be able to find one...) --From Andoria with Love 19:10, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

My opinion of the sidebar is that it should be an image of the character that actually shows the character. As for a better image than what I put up, that was done after spending about 5 minutes trying to find something from Star Trek VI. If you can find a better one, go ahead and upload over mine. --OuroborosCobra ^talk 20:10, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Support - Admittedly, I worked a lot on this article. I think it covers the all the major bases effectively, and I'm pleased to see it nominated. I do wish there was more to say about Carol Marcus' relationship with Kirk, but from canon sources, there just isn't a whole lot of hard data to use. Other subjects not covered in lenghty detail have links to their appropriate articles. --Aurelius Kirk 20:24, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Support. Looks good. Seems to cover almost everything (although it could use expansion in some areas). Just because an article is still being worked on now and then doesn't mean it doesn't qualify as a featured article, IMO. --From Andoria with Love 18:46, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Support. Well, the article ir pretty good. Revenge 16:05, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Conditional Support - I did some sp. edits, but otherwise the article seems really good. I would like to see this picture thing figured out before we make it featured though. I know it's traditional to have the "last time we saw them" pic at the top, but why not just have a '60s promotional image of him at the top? It's the first thing people think of about Captain Kirk anyway. (Maybe the one with the PADD, but I'd like to see that replaced.) We do do it sometimes, ie: Uhura.

Also: if we can replace any images of "peoples heads" with images of them with Captain Kirk, that'd improve the article a bit. IE: Janice Rand and Rayna is a persons head, where as the Edith Keeler image is a great example of him actually being involved with said person. And the "2266 and 2267" years have just peoples heads, can't we involve Kirk in'm ala 2268? - AJ Halliwell 16:21, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Support - The article is impressingly comprehensive. The objections are insubstantial and/or subjective. -Skon 22:45, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

- I'm sorry Skon, but you are not yet eligeable to vote here. Per Memory Alpha:Featured article nomination policy#Voting for nominations, you need to have been both registered for at least two weeks (you've only been making edits for 4 days), and have made at least 20 significant contributions to Memory Alpha. --OuroborosCobra ^talk 00:15, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  - Ok! Would be nice if there were an automated notification for that. That would save a lot of work.-Skon 00:58, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

I am changing to support in recognition of all that is here. I still think the areas I outlined above need work, but I am willing to see that done after FA status, as they are relatively minor. --OuroborosCobra ^talk 00:08, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Support. As Skon said above, the article is incredibly comprehensive. It is well-organized, well-referenced and has a plethora of links to complementary articles. I'd like to see the few red links (gang, rehabilitation colony and Jon Povill resolved to a page or removed, but that's just a personal preference. -Dave -TheBluesMan 01:52, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Featured: 8 Yays, 0 Nays --Alan del Beccio 04:37, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Children

The information in the box under Kirk's picture at the top of the page says he has a child who died before birth. However, the article body has no mention of this and I can't rcall ever hearing mention of that on screen. Can anyone shed some light, or is this something that can be removed? Tiberius 11:54, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

This is a reference to pregnant Miramanee in "The Paradise Syndrome". Both she and the child died, only Kirok aka Kirk survived the stoning. --Jörg 12:14, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

The article itself also refers to this event, under the "Miramanee" section under "Family". --From Andoria with Love 19:16, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Kirk's birthdate

If Kirk's birthdate of March 22, 2233 is non-canon, should that piece of information really be in the character info sidebar? -- Renegade54 19:55, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

No. -- Sulfur 20:27, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it is canon. Production artwork seen in "In a Mirror, Darkly, Part II" stated it was 22 March, 2233. Unlike many of the other listings on that graphic, this date has not been contradicted by anything more concrete (dialogue, etc.) You can see the production graphic here. --From Andoria with Love 04:08, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

USS Enterprise

Picture of the Enterprise should be changed to the original still from TOS. In my opinion, using picture of CGI Enterprise from DS9 in this article is just wrong.-Rodney McKay 12:32, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Why? It's still the same ship, in command by the same man. For the record, the Enterprise currently pictured is not CGI, it is the lovingly re-created model used in the episode "Trials and Tribble-ations". --From Andoria with Love 03:07, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

In "e"

This discussion has been moved to Forum:Film and show template bugs. --From Andoria with Love 16:16, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Middle Initial

The article refers to the infamous and incorrect "James R. Kirk" tombstone, created by Gary Mitchell in TOS: "Where No Man Has Gone Before",

The article does not say when "Tiberius" was chosen as Kirk's middle name. If it was chosen before the filming of that tombstone, then the tombstone is indeed incorrect. But if it was chosen after that filming, then it would not be accurate to say that the stone is incorrect, but rather that his middle name had been retconned. Can anyone supply additional info about when "Tiberius" selected, or at least when the "T" initial was chosen? --Keeves 03:17, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

You know, maybe I'm doing some writer a favor in the future, but there's always the possibility that Kirk and Mitchell once joked something along the lines of "In that case, maybe your middle name should be James R. Kirk...", therefore with the R standing for something, and the grave to later be yet another example of morbid "old friend" humor on the part of warped-Mitchell. --ChrisK 23:22, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

There is actually a novel (I can't remember which one) that explains that the "R" was some form of in-joke between Kirk and Mitchell. I don't think it was explained in the novel what the joke was, and IIRC, it was a touchy subject for Kirk. I always thought it meant "Rat-bait", myself (or something similar), since Mitchell had to save Kirk from some dart-shooting rodent creatures during their early Starfleet days. --From Andoria with Love 05:14, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

The first time Tiberius was used as Kirk's middle name was in the episode TAS: "Bem". However, that is not canon. But in Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country, which is canon, during the trial he is named James Tiberius Kirk. I think it was during the trial, but I am sure it was in the movie :-) The retcon... I think that it is only in the second pilot that he is named James R. Kirk. Personaly, I think this is just as much a retcon as Data's graduation year from the Academy, and by that I mean that it is NOT a retcon. Data clearly said that he was in the class of 72. This was just an error. It was the first episode! They can't have figured out how the characters should be. If we would call everything that contradicts the facts shown in the first episode, then we would have many facts that could be disputed.

Data later got a correct graduation-year (can't remember which year it was). Just as Kirk later got a correct middle initial. -- Örlogskapten... Channel Open... 17:43, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Kirk Epitaph

I want to put in an epitaph for Kirk at the start of the article, based on my belief that all major characters deserve one that ultimately defines them. Previously, I had put in part of the humorous conversation between Saavik and Spock in Star Trek II,

"He's so...Human."

"Nobody's perfect, Saavik."

- Saavik, Spock (Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan)

...but one of the admins felt it didn't work, perhaps focusing too much on the humor side. Very well: my new suggestion for the "faculty":

"Second star to the right...and straight on 'til morning."

- (Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country)

...the one chosen by Paramount for Kirk to in fact say at the end of VI, to encompass the farewell to the entire Original Series. Given that he's Kirk, such a phrase would be apt to be applied him, directly...especially beside that excellent shot of him, sitting in the chair. Thoughts? --ChrisK 07:33, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

*Seeing no comments thus far...* If no one objects, I will be putting it in myself soon enough. --ChrisK 23:19, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

In A Mirror, Darkly

Just out of interest, which bit of JTK's biography is gleaned from 'In A Mirror Darkly Part 2' as mentioned in the article? I don't recall that or him being mentioned even in the 'shown onscreen but not read out' bits. Not quibbling, just interested.. Jim Smith 16:09, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

This screen (seen in the episode like this) states that, in 2233, "James T. Kirk is born in Iowa, Earth, March 22." with the exception of the Zefram Cochrane bits, information on that screen has yet to be contradicted. --From Andoria with Love 17:38, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

That's brilliant, exactly the kind of informative, thorough and no-nonsense answer I was looking for. The links great. Thanks very much Jim Smith 09:54, 12 September 2007 (UTC) 09:53, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Youngest Captain

I changed the outdated information on Kirk being the youngest captain in the fleet's history to this date, since TNG's "Conspiracy" makes undoubtedly clear that Tryla Scott has aquired that title at some time in the 24th century. – Ambassador 00:30, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Cannon

I read somewhere that Kirk once made a cannon out of bamboo, sulfur, potassium nitrate & charcoal and used it to fire diamonds into the hearts of his enemies. It sounded too serious to be a simple joke and I think it'a a reference to a TOS episode.--200.83.4.5 19:31, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

"Arena". --Jörg 19:38, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Kirk's Ancestry

I entered a paragraph about Kirk's ancestry. The reference is from the TOS:Spectre of the Gun. Mak Trek 13:04, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

5 year mission?

In this article, the Enterprise's 5 year mission is broken down so that it encompases only TOS. Isn't TOS just the first 3 years of the 5 year mission, and TAS is the last 2 years now that TAS is considered cannon? DaveS86 22:19, 8 November 2007 (UTC)