Talk:Who Watches the Watchers

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Television: Episode coverage Low‑importance

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.

More information:
/
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.
	This article lacks sufficient references and adequate inline citations. Please provide any citations per verifiability and reliable sources.
	A production section needs to be added to this article, or the current one needs to be expanded. This section discusses the "behind the scenes" aspects of the production process, award nominations, and insights into the casting and staffing where possible.
	A response section needs to be added to this article, or the current one needs to be expanded. This section should be well cited using neutral and reliable sources that discuss the reaction of both critics and the viewing audience to the show. Additionally, document any impact the show has had on society, and merchandise that may have resulted from the show, such as toys, games, etc.

Star Trek C‑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
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Science Fiction Low‑importance

	Speculative fiction portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction 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.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it be moved. --Stemonitis 09:32, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

The page itself notes that the title of the episode does not end in a question mark, so does it belong in the title of the article? I propose moving it to "Who Watches the Watchers". Objections? Goodnight mush^Talk 23:04, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For now I'm going to make the move. I'm only acting on information from the article, though. If the title does have the "?" in it, then it belongs here, but the article specifically notes it doesn't. Goodnight mush^Talk 13:36, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The only non-wiki source cited give the title with the question mark. I assume that startrek.com is usually seen as a reliable source. --Stemonitis 14:26, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was moved to Who Watches the Watchers. --kingboyk (talk) 19:26, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

There's no question mark in the onscreen title, so the article should be moved. 134.117.137.161 03:05, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There don't appear to be any objections to moving this article to "Who Watches the Watchers" per the image above. I am therefore requesting admin assistance for this move --Lox (t,c) 23:47, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support I agree that the correct title uses no question mark. TJ Spyke 03:29, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Major Goof with a Prop[edit]

I don't know if this is relevant, or even worth mentioning, but the "primitive bow" used by the Mintakans is a modern (well, modern in the '80s)compound hunting bow, poorly disguised. It has a pulley on the bottom limb, and a second string is clearly visible. One of the bows was also left-handed (which is funny, since the "archers" using the props are right-handed) and the arrow rest is on the wrong side of the riser. Someone really dropped the ball on that one.

(edit) Okay, I take that back. They use several bows during the episode, all of which appear to be compound bows. What's even funnier, though, is that bow used to "shoot" Stewart with changes during the course of that scene. First, Liko is holding the FUBAR-ed left-hander. The camera briefly cuts to Stewart, who delivers a few lines. When it cuts back to Liko, the actor is holding a right-handed bow.

Furthermore, the Mintakan hunting arrows are made of aluminum, with plastic fletchings and field target points. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.110.152.227 (talk) 10:22, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

-Richard B

On your question whether this information is relevant or worth mentioning: It is neither. However, you might find imdb.com and and similar websites an appropriate place for such insight. --Robinandroid (talk) 10:57, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Personally I found the information about the goof with the bows far more relevant and worth mentioning than the whole article it's self, which is just a spoiler. It is a spoiler and does not give any forewarning that it is a spoiler. It delivers far more information than that is needed for Wikipedia about the episode and no technical information such as what Richard noted above about the goofs. At least I know now not to look up episodes on Wikipedia, the spoiler website. 50.47.140.236 (talk) 09:34, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What you find relevant is not relevant. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. If you don't want to know things, don't read it. -- 71.102.128.42 (talk) 02:46, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Who watches the watchers" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Who watches the watchers. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 November 15#Who watches the watchers until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Izno (talk) 15:24, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is tor.com worthy of being a source for it's reviews?[edit]

It seems that a single person on the site has took it upon thenselves to review every episode of TNG on Tor.com, but I see nothing substantial or noteworthy for that site to be mentioned as a source, especially with the incredibly biased review structure the author is adhering too, seeming to intentionally be contrarian. There are already plenty of established reviewing sites mentioned in this article, and it feels like this tor.com review has been added solely for the site to gain notoriety. I suggest it's removal from this and other articles. Thanatossassin (talk) 00:55, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]