Help icon

Maintenance links

Memory Alpha talk pages are for improving the article only.
For general discussion on this episode, visit the DS9 forum at The Trek BBS.

Background info Edit

Should I add that Shannon Cochrane married the other actor playing the Maquis male? -- Vice Admiral Colorge 06:47, 17 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Riker's previous appearance Edit

Was there any evidence that Riker visited DS9 during Emmisary? I think that line should be removed. -- AndreMcKay 00:24, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)

I thought Kira knew him when they first saw one another, which would indicate he had been in Quark's before. I don't know about the specific context of the mention to Sisko though. -- Broik 00:27, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)
He had previously mentioned that he had been to Quark's before when Riker and Quark conversed in TNG: "Firstborn" IIRC. This doesn't narrow it down to "Emissary" though, but "Emissary" and "Birthright, Part I" are the only canon occasions of the Enterprise-D visiting DS9. -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk

I am going to go ahead and remove it because there is not any hard evidence stating what episode it was in. -- AndreMcKay 18:41, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)

"Firstborn" occured on stardate 47779.4, "Birthright, Part I" occured on 46578.4. Being that Riker would have had to WIN from Quark before he could complain that the latinum vouchers were only good at his bar, he would have had to visit BEFORE 46578.4. This means he could not have made his winnings on Firstborn. There are two possibilities here: One: During "Emissary", which is unlikely as Quark wasn't ready to not cheat at that point. Two: Another time not on an episode. I'd have to lean towards the unaired time. But this leaves us a question: If this happened AFTER the incident creating Thomas Riker, how did Thomas know that will had ever been to Quark's, much less know he'd had won anything? Was he bluffing, hoping he had won something? The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).
I wouldn't think with what was going on during Emissary, that Riker would have spent time gambling. The Enterprise wasn't there for a social call. And Tom wasn't necessarily bluffing... its called intelligence. I don't mean how smart he is... I mean its Maquis Intelligence. Information they would have needed in order to sneak their spy into his position to steal the Defiant. Riker (of either variety) is skilled enough at bluffing to take a story like that, and run with it. Hold to the story when you can, and embellish only when necessary. Hossrex 01:48, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

O'Brien Edit

I don't understand why (Thomas) Riker acts the way he does on the defiant bridge towards Chief O'Brien. There is also no hint in the trivias. Does anyone has anything on this topic? -- Shh 13:34, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

I've often wondered about that myself. I think the idea is he is being really rude to O'Brien so O'Brien won't start chatting to him about the Enterprise, cause if he did, it might become obvious that Riker isn't who he says he is. O'Brien is the only person on the station who really knows Riker, so I guess Thomas just wants to keep him at arms length, and the best way to do that is be horrible to him. – Bertaut 15:27, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

That's sound good! But that's also to much thinking for me ;-) Thanks, Bertaut. -- Shh 18:15, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Remember that Tom Riker was stranded on a planet for years because of a transporter accident. O'Brien is a former transporter chief. -- Indefatigable 01:28, September 9, 2009 (UTC)
...and wasn't on the Potemkin... -- OuroborosCobra talk 01:32, September 9, 2009 (UTC)
Right. As said above, Tom probably just wanted to keep O'Brien off base and away from him so he would no chance of discovering it wasn't Will. I don't think it has to do with some deep hatred of transporter chiefs (which was never seen) -- 31dot 07:45, September 9, 2009 (UTC)
Riker is very smooth tounged so I would think he could have thought of a better way to get the chief off the station. It also seemed like the chief was nervous when he first saw Riker, I think if there was really nothing that happened between them the chief would have been overjoyed to see Riker (Remember when he ran into his friend Boone in "Tribunal"?). Also, after Riker was so hostile the chief would have asked questions, both to Riker on the spot and later when he got off the ship. If you go back and watch the scene again, you'll notice that chief O'Brian seemed nervous talking to will, it also seems like whatever happened it was O'Briean's fault because he was not hostile towards will but it seemed to me like he was nervous and unsure of what he was saying, that is not like the chief we know! One more thing, someone mentioned that Riker might have a deep hatred of transporter operators, but if that was the case do you really think the famous Riker would reveal that hatred so obviously when he was operating undercover? It seems to me that there must be something that happened between them. The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).
You're free to believe whatever you want, but the simplest explanation is what Bertaut and 31dot said. I highly doubt the writers were trying to establish some backstory in such a bizarre and ambiguous way. In hindsight, Tom's strategy wasn't the best, but he was put on the spot and probably did the first thing he could think of to get rid of O'Brien. Like real people, TV characters don't always think of the best solution when faced with a problem. –Cleanse ( talk | contribs ) 02:55, December 16, 2011 (UTC)
All excellent ideas and points, but I think ultimately *something* on the wiki page should address this (perhaps in the background section?), one way or another, such as, "Riker's animosity towards O'Brien seems unusual, as there is no canon for any animosity between them. It is possible Tom wished to minimise contact with O'Brien, since O'Brien is very familiar with Willam Riker,after having served under him for 5 (?) years. Tom may have been concerned that it would be difficult to maintain his ruse in O'Brien's presence." Ouizardus 21:51, December 16, 2011 (UTC)
We do not have speculation in articles, including the Background. If there is some citable comment by Trek staff on this issue, then it could certainly be mentioned, but not our own speculation, because then all speculation would need to be posted as each person would demand their own thoughts be present. -- 31dot 02:34, December 17, 2011 (UTC)

Removed comment Edit

Removed the following "may be" comment as uncited:

  • In this episode, Riker sports a goatee, rather than his trademark full beard. This may be a reference to the original series episode "Mirror, Mirror", in which the "evil" Spock sported one. It has also been suggested that the goatee is an homage to Frakes's character, David Xanatos, on the series Gargoyles. -- 31dot 01:35, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Story Arc? Edit

I added the Thomas Riker story Arc on the 'Sidebar' since I assumed it would be an arc, as it is listed in the Story arcs page. -- R.A.B. 18:48, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

It probably shouldn't be there, as the two episodes (this one and "Second Chances") tell two different stories, and the only common element is the same character. -- 31dot 18:57, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Removed Edit

If it is only "possible", it cannot be in the article- there must be proof that it was a deliberate homage/similarity.

  • Thomas Riker's goatee, instead of William Riker's usual full beard, is a possible homage to the original series episode "Mirror, Mirror" in which an evil Spock also sports one.

-- 31dot 00:27, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Just add, you already removed this August last year. Got to love repeat nitpickers :-( -- OuroborosCobra talk 02:56, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Access to Defiant Edit

This episode shows a console outside the docking port being used by Kira and Thomas Riker (posing as William), to gain access to the Defiant, and also a security officer standing guard. I recall that T'Rul (the Romulan originally in charge of the cloak), stating to Sisko in "The Search" that she had posted security at the Defiant to keep 'unauthorized' people from gaining access. I don't recall ever seeing security arrangements like this for the Defiant after this episode. Any idea why? Did the producers just drop the idea? 20:54, January 12, 2013 (UTC)

Well, just because we didn't see it, doesn't mean it didn't happen. It was probably thought unnecessary to show each and every time, as it would slow down the storytelling. 31dot (talk) 02:27, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

New refs Edit

I’m sorry, but … do we really need all these new refs? At a glance seems like a lot can be redirected. Not that I’d want to curb "anyone’s" enthusiasm ;-) -- Archer4real (talk) 17:17, August 11, 2016 (UTC)

I suppose if any can be determined to have come from an okudagram display, we could put those things in a reference section devoted to displays, as is done elsewhere. -- LauraCC (talk) 17:21, August 11, 2016 (UTC)

Yes but I'm talking about "port nacelle" for instance, where nacelle's hitherto been perfectly adequate. However, something like main viewer could – andfor my money should – be redirected to viewscreen, given its reasonably frequent usage -- Archer4real (talk) 18:07, August 11, 2016 (UTC)

The references are all from the dialogue and the script of the episode. Our aim is to be as complete as possible so yes, we need those references. Sure, some can redirect to a more generic term but should exist as this episode is not the only production which is using these specific terms. Tom (talk) 18:34, August 11, 2016 (UTC)
In lieu of a redirect, you can post the lesser-known term thusly: [[link]] (other term) . --LauraCC (talk) 18:39, August 11, 2016 (UTC)
That's not correct. The term used in the episode should be listed, not an alternative spelling. This is causing confusion. Tom (talk) 18:49, August 11, 2016 (UTC)
Well you can post something in brackets. Seen it done, but I can't recall where. --LauraCC (talk) 18:51, August 11, 2016 (UTC)