Talk:Sector General

message: I am going to put some quotes up on Wikiquote, and have a link between the two wikis.  Anyone object?--Freiberg, Let's talk!, contribs 15:23, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikiquote 

message: :Image:HospitalStation1962Paperback.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 02:35, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done --Philcha (talk) 22:29, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:HospitalStation1962Paperback.png

message: I appreciate that someone put a lot of work into this, but I think it's too much detail for a Wikipedia article, and propose to remove it - I've added a link to Gary Louie's The Classification System under "Further reading" instead.
Does anyone known if any other source provides a guide as comprehensive as Gary Louie's or if it was reproduced in any  of the books? --Philcha (talk) 11:02, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Classification system

message: I rated this as a B class article. It seems to cover everything one would expect, and is decently sourced and has out of universe information. GA status would seem to be only a small step from here. The one thing i would change is the list of code letters and species - it seems like too much information, and too in-universe to be of help (having not read the books, the names of the species is useless to me).Yobmod (talk) 14:31, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the mini-review. I agree about the list of species codes and am removing it. In any case the article links to a copy of the list. --Philcha (talk) 00:35, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: rating

message: I'm revising the lead to make it summarise the main text. While doing this, I'm removing the details about the more extreme environmental requirements, which is accurate but IMO unnecessary in an overview of the series, and also the bit about the anthropic principle as this: is never mentioned in the series or any review I've seen; is nonsense, as there at least 3 varieties of anthropic principle, and none of them implies that carbon-based oxygen-breathers are the majority of intelligent species. --Philcha (talk) 00:33, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Lead

message: *I see the posts above, and I think it's important to create an article for the physiological classification scheme, not just for xenobiological purposes, but also because it's referenced in all the Wikipedia articles on each organism.  I just created a new article for a species list: list of species (Sector General). Nicoleta (talk) 03:56, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: article for classification system needed