FA status Edit

Nomination (24 Dec 2004 - 25 Feb 2005, Success) Edit

  • Emissary. Extensive and well sorted information on the Emissary of the Prophets. Good work. --BlueMars 18:21, Dec 24, 2004 (CET)
    • Supported. --Gvsualan 01:08, 13 Feb 2005 (GMT)
    • Supported. I see no reason why this shouldn't be a featured article, it's a very good write-up of all we know about the Emissary. Perhaps an image from What You Leave Behind can be included, when Sisko meets the Prophets? Ottens 16:29, 15 Feb 2005 (GMT)

Review (27 Feb - 13 Mar 2014, Removed) Edit

A FA from back in 2005, mostly unchanged as far as the in-universe sections goes, except for a few minor format and wording changes. The appendix sections are "new" though, and while I don't follow the DS9 relaunch novels, I suspect there may be some further information that could be added there. I'll see what I can find about that soon if someone who does follow the novels doesn't get to it before me. Otherwise, I think this FA has held up pretty well. - Archduk3 07:00, February 27, 2014 (UTC)

  • Oppose: Just having a quick scan through it, I think there is at least some information missing from the in-universe section. Off the top of my head, there is no reference to the events of "Destiny" and I just feel as though there is more to say about the role of Emissary that hasn't been included. If I get time at some point, I will sit down and go through some of the relevant episodes, and add any missing info to the article, but for the time being this is an oppose from me, I'm afraid. --| TrekFan Open a channel 18:22, March 1, 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose, for now at least; While the writing is quite good, I have some (minor) issues with the whole, besides the missing info TrekFan mentions. First, a minor one, I think the positioning of the pics, should be reconsidered. With the new skin, the two bottom ones, creep up/dowm in adjacent paragraphs, not too aesthetically pleasing in my opinion. Secondly, and more importantly, as I read it, the background info is actually in-universe info (with the exception of the very last sentence), and should IMO be incorporated in the main text one way or another. It is currently common practice to have real world behind-the-scenes production information (such as writer's intent or concept) mentioned under the appendices "background" section...--Sennim (talk) 13:13, March 3, 2014 (UTC)

72 hours remain...more or less. - Archduk3 21:27, March 10, 2014 (UTC)

DS9 relaunchEdit

I added background information that I attributed to the DS9 relaunch, however, I haven't personally read them. This is what I gathered from what my friend told me -- if anything is inaccurate, I apologize. Weyoun 17:58, 6 Nov 2005 (UTC)


Why isn't this at Emissary of the Prophets or something? It would make more sense to have the episode be here... That's just my take on it, since "Emissary of the Prophets" is what's in bold letters anyway... --Vedek Dukat (Talk) 03:46, 11 Nov 2005 (UTC)

I tend to agree, although it seems like it hasn't become an issue until now so it might not bbe worth the potential confusion caused by a change of venue so to speak. Sloan 04:51, 11 Nov 2005 (UTC)

When was he declared?Edit

When was Sisko declared the Emissary? Did Kai Opaka name him in the episode "Emissary"?

It was really the discovery of the wormhole that made him the Emissary by default. Opaka was all mystical about it when she said, "Ironic that an outsider is to be the Emissary," because she knew it would happen by reading his pagh or whatever. Sloan 02:46, 13 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Season 8 Novels? Edit

The novels published by Pocket books are not canonical and should not be included as if they were. How do we handle this usually? I've never seen another page here where apocryphal events were included as canon in the information.

To what part of the article are you referring? --From Andoria with Love 00:37, 29 Nov 2005 (UTC)
Maybe Cisco's return at the end of the novels? --Ralph 18 Jan 06
You mean Benjamin Sisko (i hope)...
Any event that occurred in a novel should only be written about on the page for that novel -- in this case, there is space to describe plot, characters and references from the event you note, in the article called Unity. Any lengthy description here or in a canon article should be trimmed down to a link to "Unity" -- so that those interested in reading non-canon can go read about it there, and those who wish to skip non-canon don't have to have too much revealed to them here.
In this article, and all of our canon articles, any links like this should be in a clearly marked background section, either by indenting and italicizing the paragraph the link is in, or by defining a subsection called "Background" or "Background information" -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 14:20, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Page title Edit

Should be Emissary of the Prophets; it's more accurate, and I think it sounds cooler. --ChrisK 11:51, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Whatever came of this suggestion? Seems like a good idea considering you could remove the disambiguation link. Having this page be named Emissary of the Prophets instead of just "Emissary" would also be more proper as this is also the full title. -- 05:58, May 4, 2010 (UTC)
Based on what Dukat and Sloan said above, if there aren't any objections it could be moved in a few days. I would have to say that this page should then redirect to Emissary of the Prophets instead of becoming a disambiguation page, as the informal title was used far more than the formal, and it will make linking to the page much easier. - Archduk3 06:09, May 4, 2010 (UTC)

Multiple EmissariesEdit

In DS9: "Sacrifice of Angels", Sisko says to the Prophets, "You can't tell me Bajor doesn't concern you. You've sent the Bajorans orbs and Emissaries. You've even encouraged them to create an entire religion around you."[1] AFAIK, this is the only mention of more than one Emissary, but it seems worth incorporating into the article somehow. Thoughts? -- Connor Cabal (talk) 22:49, July 3, 2015 (UTC)

Someone else claiming to be the Emissary was seen in "Accession"; Sisko could have been referring to that. Or he could have just maintained the plural on the word emissary after saying "orbs". 31dot (talk) 23:22, July 3, 2015 (UTC)