FA status Edit

Nomination (05 Feb - 21 Feb 2018, Success) Edit

Self-nomination: While this is an article about a minor character that only appeared in a few scenes, there is a wealth of interesting background information about him which contributes to the article as a whole. I have scraped through all of the reference material I can find and I believe this is now as complete as the article is going to get and worthy of FA status. --| TrekFan Open a channel 04:31, February 5, 2018 (UTC)

  • Support. - Archduk3 22:57, February 6, 2018 (UTC)

Homosexual? Edit

In the novel Titan: Taking Wing, it is mentioned that Lt. Hawk was the lifemate of Lt. Cmdr. Keru, un unjoined male Trill who is the tactical and security officer on the Titan. The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

Interesting, but non cannon... AmdrBoltz 19:12, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
Interesting. Novel information like that is often tagged on in a short note at the bottom of the article in italics. Tyrant 19:37, 22 May 2005 (UTC)Tyrant
Interesting.The people who wrote the novel Titan: Taking Wing, should have asked for permission from the studio, and the actor, for permission to portray Lt. Hawk as being openly gay. The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).
Interesting. --Bentbrain 09:47, 27 Nov 2005 (UTC)
Interesting. That was totally pointless. So much so it was... interesting. ;D --Vedek Dukat Talk | Duty Roster 09:49, 27 Nov 2005 (UTC)
I just watched ST:FC for the first time in a couple of years, and I'm just curious: apart from being perhaps slightly camp; what basis in canon is there for him being gay? The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).
Does it matter? Do we say that Picard is 'straight' for example! The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).
Actually, from multiple examples, we know he was straight. The reason fans care about this issue is that for most of Trek, there was an almost complete lack of anything but heterosexual relationships, something that certainly does not mirror real life. It has been hoped for a very long time that they would add a homosexual relationship, or at least a homosexual character. --OuroborosCobra talk 15:14, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
It has been hoped, I wouldn't be against it nor for it for the matter. But it would be horrible if Star Trek denigrate itself to a series like Queer as Folk or some crud like that promoting flamboyance. Trivia: The Castro is less than 5 miles from Starfleet Academy. Dsmith2 19:30, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
I think it more like some fans cared about this issue. I certainly don't, none of the people I know ever did and from all accounts, neither did Gene Roddenberry, who, when asked about this issue said something to the effect of "In Star Trek's time, no one would care about anyone's sexual orientation." Now, I'm not saying this because of any political or personal views, but that what a fictional character's sexual orientation was just wasn't that important in my view. leandar 03:36, December 29, 2010 (UTC)
...and four years on, nobody cares about this conversation. --OuroborosCobra talk 05:13, December 29, 2010 (UTC)
..... but they care enough to reformat it and stuff like that. *raspberry* lol!! leandar 05:25, December 29, 2010 (UTC)
"Formatting" is not reviving an old conversation. It's formatting. Certainly you are intelligent enough and experienced enough on this website to check the date time stamps. I'm the only one of the editors from the old conversation who is even still active. Hell, at least one of them was banned a number of years ago for sockpuppetry. --OuroborosCobra talk 05:53, December 29, 2010 (UTC)
Oh, heavens to Betsy, it was a joke! The date time stamps were there, but I've seen other conversations continued after long periods, so I didn't think it would matter so much, y'know? So.... we be cool? I'm certainly not out to start a fight or anything like that. And now that you've changed your post, I have to go do some research cause I have no idea what sockpuppetry even is! That is, beyond making a puppet out of a sock. I know. I'm old.  :)leandar 05:59, December 29, 2010 (UTC)

Removed text Edit

I removed the following text from the background information:

Coincidentally, (one-time Section 31 draftee) Lt. Malcolm Reed was also intended to be a homosexual, during the early development of Star Trek: Enterprise.

This really has noting to do with Hawk, nor is it cited. -- Renegade54 03:00, August 22, 2010 (UTC)

Hawk's Assimilation Edit

If one could be assimilated that quickly, why didn't the Borg take over the whole USS Enterprise within 15 minutes. Especially since "Regeneration" showed that once fully assimilated, a drone had all of the protections of a normal drone, without the apparently superficial body armor. The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

Why do the Borg let people roam around their ships? Why do the Borg forget any level of adaption? The Borg don't do a lot of things. In this case, assimilation of the Enterprise was not their primary goal, they were under a time constraint to try and break through Data's computer lockout in time to shoot down the Phoenix. Assimilating more organic crew wouldn't have helped, but would have been a drain on resources. --OuroborosCobra talk 20:22, December 28, 2010 (UTC)

Expiration Date Edit

Should Hawk's "Status as of" date be 2063, since he was killed before the Enterprise went back to the future? 03:54, November 12, 2013 (UTC)

For purposes of clarity (as well as avoiding loading down the sidebar with TMI) it should probably remain as the time that he left, as it would be confusing. 31dot (talk) 03:56, November 12, 2013 (UTC)