# Talk:Captive Pursuit

This review is transcluded from Talk:Captive Pursuit/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Viriditas (talk · contribs) 10:14, 20 December 2014 (UTC)


### Disambiguation
OK. Viriditas (talk) 05:25, 22 December 2014 (UTC)


### Images
OK. Viriditas (talk) 07:56, 21 December 2014 (UTC)


### Infobox
Episode no. Season 1 Episode 6
Not this again! It's considered episode 5 (per the official source) because both part I and part II of the first episode "Emissary", are counted as one episode. Viriditas (talk) 07:25, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
Fixed... although you'll find the same issue on Q-Less too I suspect! (I'll go fix that now too). Miyagawa (talk) 15:49, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
Apparently I already had. So instead I managed to submit two episode articles to GAN and both claimed to be the sixth episode of season one of DS9. Not one of my finer moments. :) Miyagawa (talk) 15:50, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
WP:OVERLINK: Jill Sherman Donner. Viriditas (talk) 07:25, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
Fixed. Miyagawa (talk) 15:49, 30 December 2014 (UTC)


### Lead
"Captive Pursuit" is the sixth episode
Fifth episode per the above. "Emissary" parts I and II are officially counted as one episode. Viriditas (talk) 07:25, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
Fixed. Miyagawa (talk) 15:53, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
"Captive Pursuit" is the sixth episode of the first season of the American science fiction television series Star Trek: Deep Space Nine.
Per WP:SEAOFBLUE and WP:OVERLINK, science fiction and television series should not be linked here. Viriditas (talk) 07:45, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
Fixed. I realised now that I used to link science fiction on television. Do you think that's relevent, or should I stop that in future as well? Miyagawa (talk) 15:53, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
It depends.  Sometimes it works, often times it doesn't.  It's best to work on an article by article basis. A more advanced version of Wikipedia would allow every word to link out to every available topic, but unfortunately, we are still in the dark ages. Viriditas (talk) 09:48, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
. The episode was written by executive producer Michael Piller and Jill Sherman Donner
Per the above, no reason to link executive producer. Viriditas (talk) 07:45, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
Fixed. Miyagawa (talk) 15:53, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
It featured Gerrit Graham in a guest role, who had previously been considered for the main cast role of Odo, while Scott MacDonald appeared as Tosk and would later appear in several further roles in the franchise as well as a recurring character during season three of Star Trek: Enterprise.
This kind of cast information would work better as the second paragraph, with the current second paragraph merged into the first. In other words, casting and recurring character info generally comes after the plot in the lead. Viriditas (talk) 07:45, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
Michael Westmore designed the make-up for both Tosk and the Hunters, and while the former was based on an alligator, the latter were changed from the initial designs due to budgetary issues.
This is a clumsy use of former and latter, which should probably be avoided in the lead. Viriditas (talk) 07:45, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
You repeat the words "praised" and "praise", "critical" and "criticism", and the word "forumulaic" is unnecessarily quoted. Try to find relevant synonyms instead; avoid word repetition and only quote when necessary. Viriditas (talk) 07:45, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
Re the above couple of points - I've changed around the lead a fair bit, combining it into two paragraphs instead of three and incorporating these changes. Miyagawa (talk) 15:53, 30 December 2014 (UTC)


### Plot
A damaged unidentified vessel from the Gamma Quadrant docks at Deep Space Nine for repairs.
A comma after "damaged" would help readability. Viriditas (talk) 07:56, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
Its reptilian pilot, who only identifies himself as Tosk (Scott MacDonald), requires virtually no "downtime" as he calls sleep and leisure, does not seem to possess a sense of humor, and he has the ability to become invisible. He is the first known life-form from the Gamma Quadrant to visit the station. Despite their many differences, Chief Miles O'Brien (Colm Meaney) befriends the alienand tries to help him repair his ship.
The placement and continuity here is all wrong.  The first part should be linked with the subsequent part like this: "Its reptilian pilot, who only identifies himself as Tosk, is the first known life-form from the Gamma Quadrant to visit the station. Chief Miles O'Brien (Colm Meaney) befriends Tosk and tries to help him repair his ship."  It really isn't all the important to mention the rest, but it could probably be added in the correct place. Viriditas (talk) 07:56, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
However, Tosk attempts to steal from a weapons locker and is put in a holding cell by Security Chief Odo (René Auberjonois). Uniformed aliens come through the wormhole, beam onto the DS9 promenade and cause a major phaser battle between themselves and a team led by Commander Benjamin Sisko (Avery Brooks).
You probably need to mention previous to this that O'Brien suspects Tosk's vessel was being chased and was damaged by weapons fire, which Tosk won't address as he's evasive about his mission, and that he won't talk about why he was messing with the weapons locker.  We find out later that this because of his code of silence, and these plot points are important to mention.  In other words, no matter how much he would have loved to share information, he was evidently genetically programmed to remain silent on such matters, and found a great deal of honor in remaining silent. Viriditas (talk) 08:02, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
Uniformed aliens come through the wormhole, beam onto the DS9 promenade and cause a major phaser battle
It wasn't that simple.  After coming through the wormhole, the aliens scanned DS9 and then took down its shields.  Then they were able to beam in.  That's an important point.  And Sisko, in many ways, let them, to show that he wasn't their enemy. Plus, he didn't really know what he was dealing with. Viriditas (talk) 08:05, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
After talking to Quark (Armin Shimerman) in his bar, O'Brien realises that he can change the rules of the hunt before Tosk is taken away by the Hunters.
Notice how this idea of "changing the rules" runs throughout the episode.  First, we see  the Dabo girl in the beginning complaining about how her work contract with Quark had a buried subsection about sexual favors that she wasn't aware of when she signed the contract. Sisko tells her that he will have a word with Quark to resolve this (implying the rules will change because it doesn't fit with his moral compass) when we are interrupted by Tosk coming through the wormhole.  There's also the brief scene showing us the female gambler who is escorted out of Quark's for cheating at Dabo, another example of what happens when you "change the rules". This theme is contrasted with the rules of the hunt, and how Sisko weighs the decision to follow the "rules" (or in this case, the Prime Directive) instead of his own moral compass (a continuing theme for the entire series and one could argue the entirety of theTrek franchise {think Kirk's changing the rules in the Kobayashi Maru, one could argue that the "changing the rules" theme was integral to the Trek philosophy as an ethical stand against cultural determinism}; this culminates  with "In the Pale Moonlight" in the sixth season of DS9).  Sisko's position (or rather Starfleet's) is contrasted with O'Brien, who, according to his character, follows his moral compass above all else, Starfleet rules be damned (and you really see this come to fruition when we meet the anti-O'Brien in the parallel universe much later in episodes like "Crossover").  At the end, we see O'Brien anticipate Sisko's decision to help him, as Sisko stretches the rules to give O'Brien time to free Tosk, which Odo picks up on right away, having served with the Cardassians in the past, and likely used to their cunning.  (This isn't your grandad's Trek.)  In any case, the core ideas here seem to be lacking from the plot section.  Try to review the episode again or some reliable plot summaries to get a better handle on it. Viriditas (talk) 08:15, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
He convinces Odo to release Tosk into his care as it is a Starfleet matter and not a Bajoran one.
You neglect to mention that he lied to Odo. That's important because it is followed-up by Sisko's reprimand. Viriditas (talk) 03:31, 22 December 2014 (UTC)


### Production
The episode was originally entitled "A Matter of Breeding",[2] and was intended to move away from the "squeaky clean" Star Trek: The Next Generation plots according to the director, Corey Allen.[3] This was one of the main elements that the producers wanted included in the new series, after the franchise's creator Gene Roddenberry had banned disagreements between characters in The Next Generation.
An excellent and important point that should be briefly mentioned in the lead, particularly the difference between TNG and DS9 that is made clear with this ep. Viriditas (talk) 03:34, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
While this was mainly shown in "Captive Pursuit" by O'Brien's releasing of Tosk, it had been intended for dabo girl Miss Sarda to proposition Commander Sisko during the teaser segment at the start of the episode.
Which you don't mention in the plot.  Link to dabo here or in the plot. Viriditas (talk) 05:17, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
...previous credits on television shows such as Magnum P.I..
Remove the extra period. Viriditas (talk) 05:17, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
Fixed. Miyagawa (talk) 15:54, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
It was the first appearance in the Star Trek franchise for both Scott MacDonald and Gerrit Graham. The former would appear a week later...
Don't use "former" here, use his last name, "MacDonald". Viriditas (talk) 05:17, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
Done. Also changed "would appear" to the more sensible "appeared". Miyagawa (talk) 16:04, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
Meanwhile Graham, had been one of the last three options for an actor to play Odo...
No need for "meanwhile" here. Viriditas (talk) 05:17, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
Removed. Miyagawa (talk) 16:04, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
He later gained the role of the second Q in Voyager, named Quinn...
It isn't clear what "he" refers to here.  Use the last name. Viriditas (talk) 05:17, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
Corrected to Graham. Miyagawa (talk) 16:04, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
Meaney stated that it was his favourite of the first season, praised MacDonald's performance and said that "Captive Pursuit" was a "classic Star Trek story".
"Meaney called "Captive Pursuit" a "classic Star Trek story" and praised MacDonald's performance, naming the episode his favourite of the first season." Viriditas (talk) 05:17, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
Changed as suggested. Miyagawa (talk) 16:04, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
 Michael Piller also said it was one of his favourite of the season,while Rick Berman said it was his favourite out of the first six episodes of the series and said that "The relationship that developed between [Tosk] and O'Brien was charming."
There's no need to quote Berman's statement here when all you are trying to note is that he said the relationship was charming.  So simply say: "...while Rick Berman said it was his favourite out of the first six episodes of the series, noting that the connection between Tosk and O'Brien was "charming"." Viriditas (talk) 05:17, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
Done. Miyagawa (talk) 16:00, 30 December 2014 (UTC)


### Reception and home media release
Too much quoting here and not enough paraphrasing. Viriditas (talk) 05:23, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
You should be able to see the difference now. That's a bad habit I've picked up and I'll need to work on avoiding it in future. Miyagawa (talk) 15:59, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
Captive Pursuit" was first broadcast on January 31, 1993 in broadcast syndication.
A comma goes after the year here. Viriditas (talk) 05:23, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
Fixed. Miyagawa (talk) 15:55, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
In the book Deep Space and Sacred Time: Star Trek in the American Mythos, Jon Wagner and Jan Lundeen said that the episode was an example of Deep Space Nine dealing with cultural relativism.
An interesting point, and it would be nice to see more about this.  It's also important enough to mention in the lead. Viriditas (talk) 05:23, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
I'll go back to the source to see if there is anything else that can be added. Miyagawa (talk) 15:55, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
Since nothing was added, I had to remove it to pass the review.  A single sentence about this theme in a reception section doesn't really work. Viriditas (talk) 10:53, 3 January 2015 (UTC)


### Notes
OK. Viriditas (talk) 05:25, 22 December 2014 (UTC)


### References
OK. Viriditas (talk) 05:25, 22 December 2014 (UTC)


### External links
OK. Viriditas (talk) 07:25, 21 December 2014 (UTC)


### Criteria
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors: 
Copyedits needed in lead, plot section, production
Plot is missing several important elements, and contains several trivial aspects
B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists: 
WP:OVERLINK: infobox, lead
WP:LEAD, should summarize the most important points.  Production point above noted as missing from the lead
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. Has an appropriate reference section: 

B. Citations to reliable sources, where necessary: 

C. No original research: 
Episode count deviates from official source.
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects: 

B. Focused: 

Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias: 

Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc: 
Stable
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content: 

B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: 

Overall:
Pass or Fail: 
Minor issues. Viriditas (talk) 05:25, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the review - I'm back now, so I'll take a look at this and the other reviews you've done for me over the course of the next few days. Miyagawa (talk) 22:37, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
I think I've covered everything bar the plot issues, as I want to sit down and give that a thorough re-write in one hit later today or tomorrow afternoon. Miyagawa (talk) 16:05, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
Not sure if you've done this yet or not, but as time permits I'll do a read through.  I just copyedited the lead, but I'm off to work. I'll be back later. Viriditas (talk) 21:20, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
Copyedited plot. Viriditas (talk) 03:26, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
@Miyagawa:  In the lead it says, "The episode was nominated for an Emmy Award for best make-up for a series, but lost out to an episode of Babylon 5."  And, in the reception section it says,"The episode was nominated for an Emmy Award for make-up, but instead the award went to fellow science fiction television series Babylon 5 for the episode "The Parliament of Dreams"."  Out of curiousity, I decided to fact check this claim, and it looks like the episode won the Emmy award.[1][2]  Could you please check your sources again?  I think you mixed up the years.  This award was for 1993 and your citation goes to the 1994 ceremony.  Please check your sources again, this looks like a major mistake.  For reference purposes, we also have List of awards and nominations received by Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, but I wouldn't rely on it alone.  Erdmann's Deep Space Nine Companion (2000) notes that it won the award on p. 8,[3] as do many other sources, such as Entertainment Awards (1996) on p. 128.[4] Viriditas (talk) 10:20, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
Well I'll be. Yep, DS9 clearly won that award from the first season, and since we have a cite to say it was nominated then we can be sure that it was Captive Pursuit that won it. I think the mix up came because of the timing of the release of the first season - it ran from January 93 into the summer, so normally when you have a 93 release it would be as part of a season overlapping 93/94 and therefore would come up in the awards for the following year. Not in this case, hence the confusion. I guess Babylon 5 beat something from season two then. Miyagawa (talk) 10:28, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
We have the secondary (Erdmann) saying it won and the primary confirming it (see the direct link to the Emmy site which lists this episode).  No guesswork (or extraneous sites mentioning a nomination) needed. I'll bet if you look hard enough, you'll find a published list for 1993 like the 1994 one you found, but we really don't need it per the above. Viriditas (talk) 10:39, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
I ended up swapping out the Emmy site for the Erdmann reference that you noted. I think it's much clearer. Miyagawa (talk) 10:40, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
@Miyagawa: Thanks.  Any particular reason the lead has the  Handlen citation in it?  Since it's summarizing what's in the reception and home media release section, I think we can go ahead and remove it from the lead. Viriditas (talk) 20:45, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
Agreed, I've removed it. Miyagawa (talk) 20:48, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
I think we should link to 45th Primetime Emmy Awards somewhere in the article; my preference would be to dab it like this: Emmy Awards, but as long as it is linked, I don't mind.  FYI... IMDb has the full list here. Viriditas (talk) 20:50, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
  The official Emmy Awards site is terrible, but I finally tracked down the correct page pointing to the award:[5]  As you can see, it was competing against Space Rangers and TNG in the same category.  The cool thing is that this particular page has links to "info" and "awards" that can be used for other Trek pages, such as the above list. It can also be used to fill out the relevant fields in the 45th Primetime Emmy Awards article. Viriditas (talk) 20:58, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
Based on the above, I'm passing the article.  However, there are a few issues to be aware of here: to pass the article, I removed the brief statement about cultural relativism.  It's a discussion about a theme, and is really out of place in a "reception" section.  As I said earlier in this review, it's an interesting point and I would like to see more of it, but adding a single sentence in a section about reception isn't helpful, it's confusing.  Create a theme section and talk about it in more detail and how it connects with the Prime Directive.  Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 10:51, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

This page states it is the fifth episode but, Star Trek: Deep Space Nine (season 1) states it is the sixth? The confusion is due to Emissary being split in two. Which page should be changed, though?Cebr1979 (talk) 10:48, 26 August 2015 (UTC)