Talk:Star Trek canon/GA1

GA Reassessment
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.''

As part of WikiProject Good articles' Project quality task force, all old good articles are being re-reviewed to ensure that they meet current good article criteria (as detailed at WP:WIAGA.) This article has a few issues that need to be addressed before I can pass the article as swept: I am putting the article on hold for a week pending substantial improvements to address the above issues. Keep me appraised on my talk page or preferably in this space. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 13:32, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The lead section does not adequately summarize the article as per WP:LEAD. Given the size of the article, at least another paragraph is warranted.
 * The major issue is simply unsourced or inadequately sourced statements and original research. The following statements are unsourced, possible OR violations, or are not sourced correctly (the reference after them does not support the information:)
 * "However, this policy does not make clear which version of the live action shows is the canon one. Indeed, there exist longer and shorter versions of several episodes. For example, in the 1960s during the original run of the Star Trek TV series (TOS), an hour-long show was actually 51 minutes excluding commercials, and modern DVD releases of TOS episodes are also 51 minutes long. However, as of 2007, an hour-long show on television is only about 42 minutes long. The canonicity of the missing nine minutes of material in modern airings of TOS episodes has never been addressed. Likewise, when special two-hour-long episodes are aired as two one-hour-long episodes in syndication, several minutes of material have to be cut to make time for the duplication of the opening and closing credits. The canonicity of this cut material has also never been addressed."
 * "To further complicate matters, it has been noted that Gene Roddenberry was something of a revisionist when it came to canon. People who worked with Roddenberry remember that he used to handle canon not on a series-by-series basis nor an episode-by-episode basis, but point by point. If he changed his mind on something, or if a fact in one episode contradicted what he considered to be a more important fact in another episode, he had no problem declaring that specific point non-canon."
 * "However, much like for TV series, this policy fails to note which version of the movies is canon. This leaves unknown the canonicity of scenes missing from the theatrical version of a movie but included in home releases or director's cuts. Such is the case, for instance, of a scene revealing that the character of Peter Preston was the nephew of Scotty in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan." (The latter part of the statement is sourced to something that merely mentions the differences. OR to state that "this is the case".)
 * "However, they stop short of naming the books canon, leaving the debate open."
 * "Such an approach would eliminate from canon anything Roddenberry didn't like, as well as everything made after his death, including six movies and three TV series."
 * "Roddenberry clearly never intended Star Trek to be limited to his work, but to include all the hopefully superior work of future generations."
 * "However, despite these facts, there is no exception to canon rules on record for this complete Klingon language. Therefore, only the Klingon words spoken on-screen qualify as canon."
 * As no improvements have been made in the time frame, I am delisting the article for now. Note that you can renominate the article at WP:GAN at any time. If you have any questions or comments for me, ping me at my talk; I don't watchlist old reviews, so notes here won't be followed up. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 20:48, 28 October 2009 (UTC)