The Naked Time suggests his first name may be Ryan as Spock calls him this. Should this be an acceptable first name, and his entry changed to Ryan Leslie? Or should a separate appearance as Ryan be added? --Myko
- I believe he called him Rand, as in Yeoman Rand. She was suppose to be the one to take the helm but somehow it didn't happen and he was put in the place and no one caught the error. --TOSrules 03:43, 24 Nov 2005 (UTC)
- The subtitles for the episode show Mr. Spock saying "Take over here, Rand."184.108.40.206 20:07, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Was Leslie ever called an ensign at any time in the series? You shouldn't go based on rank stripes, since incorrect rank insignia were frequent mistakes on the series. --Shran 10:06, 4 Aug 2005 (UTC)
- Leslie wasn't called lieutenant either afaik. So you might as well accept the stripes. --Myko 11:48, 4 Aug 2005 (UTC)
- His uniform consistantly had Lieutenant rank stripes, and I believe he was called Lieutenant at least once. - AJHalliwell 19:58, 30 Aug 2005 (UTC)
- Leslie's first appearance with rank stripes was "The Alternative Factor" (or thereabouts i believe --i've been sorting a lot of research material dealing with him) -- but i thought that from that time he wore rank stripes only semi-consistently -- excepting "Obsession" and a few others in which he did wear none even after wearing them for a time. I think that there are enough stripeless lieutenants (masters, mcgivers, leslie, hadley, kyle) that we can chalk this up to some sort of error. -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 02:12, 24 Nov 2005 (UTC)
- His uniform consistantly had Lieutenant rank stripes, and I believe he was called Lieutenant at least once. - AJHalliwell 19:58, 30 Aug 2005 (UTC)
- I've reverted an IP edit calling him an ensign for this reason, since crewman, chief, ensign and occasionally lieutenants all wear no rank insignia, it seems kind of presumptuous to assume he was an ensign. He might've been a warrant officer for all we know, so calling him an ensign is pure speculation. -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk
- To clear this up, everytime Eddie Paskey appears in a red uniform in the first season he has no rank stripes. Up until the middle of "The Squire of Gothos" that is. For the first half or so of the episode he has no stripe, but from the scene where he sits in the captain's chair and on he has Lieutenant stripe. Probably because the creators didn't think it would be right for an ensign to be in command. There is no continuity violation AT ALL to have him as ensign up until this point (except maybe a strangely timed promotion). To have him as Lieutenant contradicts on-screen information, but yes there are many examples of stripes not matching. --Myko 17:02, 8 Dec 2005 (UTC)
- Well, having him as "lieutenant" doesn't contradict onscreen information too much -- as we know of several other officers referred to as lieutenant but lacking rank insignia -- meaning that lieutenants don't necessarily wear stripes. Even though calling him "ensign" is one of the possibilities, its not a definite one, and therefore speculation (as "lieutenant" also is, up until that point). The most accurate way to describe his rank is "unclear up until "The Squire of Gothos", lieutenant from then on". I myself happen to think that he should've at least spent some time as a lieutenant junior grade, and that having no stripes might signify this -- but its equally possible he was promoted to lieutenant directly from ensign, as we know that two grade promotions (possibly in quick succession) are rare but possible -- this means he could also have been an ensign in a few appearances, a lieutenant junior grade in others. remember also that in his final appearance he wears no rank insignia, nor does he wear any in "Obsession" (and in an additional indignity to dying, he is on a team led by an ensign).
- Another point supporting a "lieutenant junior grade" supposition -- Spock, Ben Finney, and Giotto all wore insignia that were one grade higher than their actual rank -- meaning that some type of temporary of courtesy promotions might've been occurring (i'd love some military buffs to chip in two cents on this). Leslie might've been Lieutenant JG all along, sometimes wearing no stripes, sometimes bumped up to wear a stripe a grade higher than he was. Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 17:40, 8 Dec 2005 (UTC)
annotated appearances list
didn't want to simply delete this, but its quite lengthy, and (when the article is complete) duplicates every data point in the text of the article
i don't feel that we need an appearances list, as the list is duplicated at TOS recurring characters -- however this version is a good working guide as to what information this article will eventually include: -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk
- -Seen in the recreation room behind James Kirk and wearing an operations division beige tunic
- -Appears outside Gary Mitchell's holding cell as a security guard wearing a sciences division blue tunic
- -Located at the engineering station on the bridge while sporting an operations division red tunic
- -Meets Ruth Bonaventure in sickbay while wearing a command division olive green jumpsuit as an orderly
- -Doctor Leonard McCoy calls him "Connors" in sickbay
- -Seen with the geological landing party behind Hikaru Sulu and sporting a sciences division blue jumpsuit
- -Appears stricken with frostbite on a mobile stretcher in the transporter room while wrapped in a blue blanket
- -Operates the helm on the bridge in a Starfleet operations division red duty uniform
- -Treats an injured Mr. Spock as a sickbay orderly and wearing a sciences division blue jumpsuit
- -Operates the helm on the bridge in a red tunic
- -Spock calls him "Ryan" on the bridge
- -Seen standing behind a table in the recreation room and wearing a red uniform as Uhura serenades
- -Appears in a red tunic at the engineering station on the bridge
- -Seen on the bridge operating the engineering console in a red uniform
- -Shown standing on the bridge near the engineering station in a red tunic
- -Seated at the engineering console on the bridge in a red shirt
- -Operates the helm on the bridge in a red uniform
- -James Kirk calls him "Mr. Leslie" for the first time
- -Seen in a red uniform and performing duties in the engineering station on the bridge and the transporter room
- -Appears in an operations division red tunic at the engineering station on the bridge
- -Seen in a corridor wearing a command division gold tunic as Spock makes a public announcement to the crew
- -Operating the helm on the bridge in a red uniform
- -Appears in a red shirt while performing tasks at the engineering console, the helm, and the transporter
- -Briefly in charge of the bridge while sitting in the command chair and sporting a red shirt
- -Seen wearing a red uniform while at the engineering station on the bridge
- -Appears in a red tunic while operating the helm
- -In command of the bridge for a second time while sitting in the command chair with a red shirt
- -Fires the ship's phasers towards the planet on James Kirk's command
- -Given onscreen credit on the list of end credits as "Lesley"
- -Appears at the engineering console in a red tunic
- -Seen with the Beta III landing party and wearing the attire of the local inhabitants
- -Appears in a red uniform on the bridge, at the dinner table with Khan, and in Khan's row of prisoners
- -Shown in a red shirt on Omicron Ceti III handling parcels and in a line heading towards the transporter room
- -Publicly defies James Kirk's orders to return to his station which Kirk interprets as an act of mutiny
- -Given onscreen credit on the list of end credits as "Crewman" -->
- -Appears in a red uniform with a security team on Janus VI to hunt for the Horta
- -Seen in a red tunic at the engineering station on the bridge
- -Shown at the engineering station on the bridge in a red uniform
- -Appears in the transporter room wearing a red tunic
- -Attacked by Mr. Spock and rendered unconscious by the Vulcan nerve pinch in the transporter room
- -Seen sporting a red uniform at the engineering console and the helm
- -Shown at the engineering station on the bridge wearing a red shirt
- -Appears at the engineering console in a red tunic
- -Seen sitting by Mr. Spock and Hikaru Sulu while wearing a red shirt and performing operations with a device
- -Shown at the engineering station on the bridge sporting a red tunic
- -Performs operations while seated at the engineering console in a red uniform
- -Seen seated at the engineering station in a red uniform
- -Performs navigation duties in a command division gold uniform on the bridge
- -Assists Doctor Leonard McCoy in carrying Montgomery Scott's body to sickbay after Nomad attacks Scotty
- -Seen in an operations division red uniform at the engineering station on the bridge
- -Shown sporting a red uniform at the engineering console in the normal universe
- -Not seen in the "Mirror universe"
- -Seated at the engineering station on the bridge wearing a red tunic
- -Assigned as a security guard sporting a red shirt aboard Deep Space Station K-7 on James Kirk's orders
- -Leaves the lounge in Deep Space Station K-7 as Cyrano Jones enters
- -Standing by the doorway as numerous tribbles fall out of the storage compartment and onto James Kirk
- -Holds a pair of tribbles and assists James Kirk in uncovering the identity of the Klingon spy
- -Seen standing on the bridge near the helm in a red uniform
- -Appeared walking in a red tunic along the corridor as James Kirk walks into sickbay
- -Seated at the engineering console wearing a red uniform
- -Seen sporting a red shirt on the bridge while signing the records tablet and sitting at the science console
- -Appears with a landing party on Argus X as a security guard in a red tunic
- -Attacked by the cloud creature on Argus X and apparently "dies"
- -Seen walking along Enterprise corridor after the attack and passing Leonard McCoy while wearing a red shirt
- -Walks along a corridor in a gold shirt as Christine Chapel enters sickbay
- -Seen sporting a red uniform at the engineering console
- -Faints on the bridge and is treated by Leonard McCoy and a medicial assistant at the engineering station
- -Standing near the science station on the bridge in a red shirt while writing on the records tablet
- -Seen displaying a red tunic near the engineering station on the bridge
- -Transformed into his essential elements in cubic form by the Kelvans
- -Seen sporting a red shirt as a security guard in the transporter room and at the engineering console
- -Shown twice walking along the corridor near the briefing room while wearing a gold shirt
- -Carries Doctor Richard Daystrom to the bridge turbolift while wearing a red uniform
- -M-5 computer lists Leslie as one of twenty crew members deemed essential for the operations of the Enterprise
- -Seated at the engineering console displaying a red tunic
- -Beams down to Omega IV and performs security duties in a red shirt
- -Has custody of Captain Ronald Tracy of the U.S.S. Exeter for his violations of the Prime Directive on Omega IV
- -Displays red tunic at the engineering station on the bridge and in the transporter room
- -Seen sporting a command division gold uniform while walking along a corridor
- -Wears an operations division red jumpsuit in the main engineering room in the presence of Montgomery Scott
- -Performs his duties while wearing a red shirt at the engineering station aboard the bridge
- -Operates the engineering console in a red uniform
- -Offers his seat to the Dohlman of Elas, Elaan, as she visits the bridge when the Enterprise is under attack
- -Seen standing near the engineering station in a red shirt as a Romulan-looking James Kirk enters the bridge
- -Hands to James Kirk a records tablet for him to sign after the Enterprise evades the Romulan ships
- -Posted as a red shirted security officer on the bridge
- -Had difficulty understanding James Kirk's orders as Tommy Starnes transformed Kirk's words into gibberish
- -Seen by the engineering station on the bridge while wearing a red uniform
- -Stands in a corridor wearing a red shirt as James Kirk makes a public address to the crew
- -Accompanies James Kirk as a security officer to prevent the assassination of Ambassador Kollos
- -Last appearance in the Original Series
- -Performs security duties while sporting a red tunic aboard Deep Space Station K-7
Please check this article
I don't know anything about TOS, but someone has recently become obsessed with Leslie and writing what might be vandalism. Someone needs to check the info that's been added/removed. --Vedek Dukat Talk | Duty Roster 23:16, 7 Dec 2005 (UTC)
- I've removed some passages:
- In most of the episodes in which he appeared, he could be seen sitting at a bridge position called the "Engineering Subsystems Monitor" (Franz Joseph's Star Trek Blueprints), which is just to the right of the turbolift doors.
- This is a canon database, so unless the Blueprints appeared onscreen, this is irrelevant here. This information could be added as a background note, to the articles about the engineering station or the Star Trek Blueprints, but isn't actually the name we'll be calling the negineering station, nor do we need to cite the book everytime something referred to in it appears -- the episodes take precedence.
- Additionally, in the beginning of "The Ultimate Computer", Kirk calls him "Lester" when he turns Paskey's character, who was delivering the Captain a report, away stating "Not now Lester." In this case, Shatner may have simply misspoke the name "Leslie" or the word "Mister," or likewise, somehow contracted the two words together.
- I've just watched this and heard him say "Leslie", although there is a lot less emphasis on the "-lie" part of the word. Maybe there's a different edit or soundtrack at fault, but that's hardly attributable to Shatner as this not suggests -- it would mean the sound was re-edited after he said the line. -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 13:54, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- as of now, there have been a lot of incorrect additions, thank you for bringing it up Vedek. I know that Leslie has a lot of data points associated with him, but contiuously reformatting the article is leading to a lot of errors. Please don't "make up" information about Leslie if you havent seen the episodes he was in and can cite or corroborate your entry. This is a database of canon facts, not suppositions. -- Captain M.K. Barteltalk 22:37, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
Memory Alpha Featured Article
I believe this article should be added to the list of Memory Alpha's Featured Articles. The fact that a character, who at best, could say "aye, sir" in one or two episodes, yet appear in more than both Sulu and Chekov and have such a detailed biography here on Memory Alpha is nothing short of remarkable. Anyone agree? Kyle C. Haight 02:07, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- Well, a featured article is not featured based on the number of appearances a character has, but rather how well the article is written and how extensive the information is. Regardless, if you wish for this to become a featured article, by all means, bring it up for nomination here. --From Andoria with Love 17:09, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Shouldn't this article be renominated as a Featured Article? According to the policy, a 14 day waiting period needs to elapse from the date of the initial rejection, which, in this case, was 29 March 2007. The waiting period has now come and gone. Based on the objection raised by one individual, it was suggested that a peer review be conducted because the original text of the article read "too haltingly" due to the abundance of "2 sentence paragraphs". Unfortunately, the one who raised the objection was not "comfortable (or ambitious enough)" to conduct the peer review due to the lack of familiarity with the Original Series and the character. Interestingly, a group of anons apparently took the challenge themselves and conducted a peer review since the day of the rejection by rewriting the text so that it would not read "too haltingly" and by expanding on the "Ambiguities" section. It would be fascinating to see if the original objector, as a courtesy, would be the one kind enough to renominate this article as a Featured Article. -- Anon, 9 May 2007
Is that a picture of Lt. Ryan?
The picture of Leslie at the helm while Sulu points a sword at Kirk, is that a shot of Leslie? I think it's been agreed that that was a lieutenant Ryan (as Lt. Ryan has his own page here on Memory Alpha), and nowhere in the episode does it show Ryan leaving the helm. I may be wrong, it's been a while since I've seen the episode, but I think I may be right.
I love this character, partly because my last name is Leslie (common Scottish name), and I really appreciate this well-written article. I wonder if it is policy to cite sources? When I get to the part in the background about the actor retiring due to back injury, would it be good if someone could track down the source to back up that fact? It appears several times in Memory Alpha but it's not attributed. Also, the discussion in the Ambiguities section is well done, but I wonder if it would be approrpiate to indicate who are the "some people" and who are the "while others." I assume the contributor here has this information and if it doesn't violate the way things are done here it might be useful for later readers to know where to track down this info.
I removed the following for reasons stated at the bottom of the italicized section:
- First Name
There has been much debate over Leslie's first name.
Some believe that his first name could be Connor.  This is due to the fact that Paskey's character, who was wearing a generic green jumpsuit in sickbay, was called "Connors" by McCoy in "Mudd's Women".
While it could be pointed out that Connors was probably intended to be another character with that surname, it should be noted that he was not called "Mister Connors". Even though Connors would be an unusual first name, it could be argued that "Connors" was simply McCoy's nickname for Leslie, just as Kirk often refers to the doctor as "Bones".
On the other hand, some believe that Leslie's first name could be Ryan, based on the script for "The Naked Time" which listed Paskey's character as "Ryan". In that episode, Spock realizes that Sulu is absent from his post at the helm, and says, "Take over here, Ryan". Immediately after Spock issues his command, Paskey, as "Ryan", says, "Yes, sir", and sits at the helm.
Many viewers believe that Leonard Nimoy said, "Take over here, Rand", which is a reference to the character of Yeoman Janice Rand, who was played by Grace Lee Whitney but was not present in that scene. Even the caption written for those with hearing difficulties displays Spock saying, "Take over here, Rand."  While it seems that Nimoy may have committed an error which was not corrected by the filming crew, some think that Spock may have uttered "Ryan" instead of "Rand".
Although it could be argued that "Ryan" was probably intended to be another character with Ryan as the surname, it could also be pointed out that no one in that episode addressed him as "Mister Ryan" or "Lieutenant Ryan". Even Spock, who normally addresses crew members by their surnames, has on occasion referred to Kirk as "Jim" and once called McCoy, "Bones". On this basis, it is possible that Ryan could be Leslie's first name.
Based on this information, some have theorized that Leslie's full name could be Ryan Connors Leslie.  This speculation would resolve the inconsistencies surrounding the name of Paskey's character, who did not have a definitive name on the series until he was called "Mister Leslie" by Kirk on "The Conscience of the King". Of course, this theory is based upon the idea that Connors, Leslie and Ryan are in fact the same individual portrayed by Paskey, and not three separate characters.
- Relationship to Connors and Ryan
There is also some debate over Leslie's relationship with Connors and Ryan. Some believe that Connors and Ryan are indeed one and the same person represented in the character of Leslie.   This is due to the fact that Paskey's character was regularly addressed by the surname of Leslie on "The Conscience of the King" and afterward, and that Connors and Ryan were not definitively established on screen in either "Mudd's Women" or "The Naked Time" as a character surname.
However, others believe that Connors, Leslie and Ryan are each separate individuals.  In the case of Ryan, it should be noted that according to the studio cast list for "The Naked Time", it appears that the episode scriptwriters had intended to make Ryan a character surname.  With regards to Connors, it seems possible that the scriptwriters for "Mudd's Women" also intended to make Connors a character surname since it is an unlikely first name.  On this basis, it is entirely possible that all three characters were, in fact, separate people.
Further supporting the idea that Connors, Leslie and Ryan are three separate individuals is the fact that Paskey can be spotted in multiple places at the same time within the same episode.
In "The Squire of Gothos", Paskey remains behind in the transporter room after he beams up Kirk, McCoy, Sulu, DeSalle and Lieutenant Karl Jaeger. In the next scene, he is sitting in the command chair as Kirk and the rest of the landing party enter the bridge.
For "The Menagerie, Part I", Paskey is seen both at the engineering station wearing a red duty uniform and standing in a corridor wearing a gold duty uniform as Spock addresses the Enterprise crew through the intercom. In the "The Menagerie, Part II", he is sitting at the engineering station and the navigation console when the Enterprise enters orbit around Talos IV.
For "Amok Time", he is walking in the corridor wearing a red duty uniform as Spock heads towards sickbay, and in the next scene, stands next to McCoy while wearing a blue duty jumpsuit. In "Assignment: Earth", Paskey is seen in a corridor wearing a gold duty uniform as Kirk addresses the entire crew through the intercom and, seconds later, wearing a red duty jumpsuit in main engineering as the captain speaks with Scott.
For those who believe that Paskey represented one character and not three, it could be argued that these multiple appearances were the result of simple continuity errors on the part of the film editors. On the other hand, for those who believe that he portrayed three separate characters, these sightings confirm that Connors, Leslie and Ryan are three different people.
If all three are believed to be different people, then the instances where Paskey was seen wearing a sciences division blue jumpsuit after "Mudd's Women" could be understood to mean that he was portraying Connors, despite the fact that he was neither called Leslie nor Connors by anyone in those scenes. There are three notable episodes where Paskey's character wears the jumpsuit afterward, specifically "The Enemy Within" where he was part of the Alfa 177 landing party, and "The Man Trap" and "Amok Time" where he treated Spock in sickbay. Even though the studio cast list identifies Paskey's role in "The Enemy Within" as Connors,  he is listed as Ryan in "The Man Trap"  and Leslie in "Amok Time".  The apparent interchangeability of these three roles seems to suggest that all three characters could be one individual represented in Leslie.
Since all three characters were played by Paskey, there is some speculation whether Connors, Leslie and Ryan, if they were separate people, were clones or blood-related family members, like brothers or cousins, since they all resembled one another.    Assuming that all three characters were addressed by their respective surnames, it is unlikely that they would be brothers, unless they were all half-brothers. However, there is no information to verify this speculation. Nor is there any information to support or refute the theory that the three characters could be blood-related family members or clones.
Given the fact that other Star Trek actors played multiple roles throughout the Original Series, like Majel Barrett, Diana Muldaur and David L. Ross, it is also possible that Leslie was simply nothing more than a coincidental look-alike of Connors and Ryan.
- Death and resurrection
On the other hand, many viewers believe that Kirk called him by name during the first scene of the episode when the captain extended his hand and received a pair of pliers from him in order to collect a specimen of tritanium. Despite the fact that it sounds as though Kirk said, "Leslie," when he extended his hand, it should be pointed out that the written caption for that scene displays Kirk saying, "Let's see,"  which sounds very similar to "Leslie."
Since Paskey portrayed other Enterprise officers, such as Connors and Ryan, it is possible that the cloud creature may have killed either Connors or Ryan instead of Leslie.  Assuming that Connors, Leslie and Ryan are in fact three separate individuals, this would explain Paskey's appearances later on in the episode as well as Leslie's presence in future episodes.
Further reinforcing the idea that someone other than Leslie was killed by the cloud creature is the fact that the uniform worn by Paskey's character in that scene displayed no rank insignia. While it could be argued that Leslie occasionally wore duty uniforms which did not display the lieutenant stripe after "The Squire of Gothos", most notably in the third season, it should be pointed out that this instance is the only time in the second season where the character does not display rank insignia. Given the fact that Paskey is spotted later in the same episode walking by McCoy in a corridor wearing a red duty uniform with a lieutenant stripe, this seems to suggest that someone other than Leslie was killed by the creature.
However, there is no definitive information to indicate that the cloud creature killed either Connors or Ryan. If Connors and Ryan are indeed the same person represented in the character of Leslie, then it is reasonable to conclude that Leslie was attacked and killed by the creature, and later revived in sickbay.
This all boils down to being little more than speculation, theory and what "some fans" think; none of this is supported by primary sources and thus is not fit for this encyclopedia. Also, IMDB and transcript pages shouldn't be considered a primary reference at least in the case of supporting this discussion. --Alan 22:25, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
It's quite obvious that the Leslie brothers were twins who served aboard the Enterprise along side their cousin Connors. While the family resemblance is striking there is no question but that one of the twins was killed on camera. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 220.127.116.11 (talk).
- In Assignment Earth Paskey appears on the Bridge in a red shirt. Shortly thereafter he is seen in the hall in a gold shirt. A few minutes later he is seen in Engineering with Scotty with a red shirt and a few minutes later he is slumped over and stunned in a red shirt in the Transporter Room. It is quite evident that Mr. Leslie did not switch shirts in the middle of a duty day, so Paskey MUST be playing at least two different characters---one of which was killed while on an away team. The resemblance is so striking that one must conclude that the Leslie characters are either brothers or identical twin brothers. Is there a good reason not to recognize this as canon?
- Also, this reference already acknowledges that Paskey played an Ekosian Nazi, so we already know that Paskey played more than one character. Isn't it logical that there was more than one Leslie on the Enterprise? – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 18.104.22.168 (talk).
- Moved from User talk:Archduk3
Please check the discussion notes for Lt. Leslie. I think that the case has been made for twin Leslies, with different first names. Per the canon conventions, "The presumption should be that a conflict does not exist unless no other explanation is reasonable under the circumstances." It's not reasonable to assume that McCoy doesn't know a dead man when he sees one. It's not reasonable that Leslie runs around changing shirts and names. It is reasonable that Paskey plays more than one character. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 22.214.171.124 (talk).
Multiple Leslies (anew)
An anon added this information today, much of which is speculative, but there may be something worth using herein (I'm not entirely certain):
- It is also possible that there were several persons on the USS Enterprise (all of whom were played by Eddie Paskey), who looked very similar. There is no way to conclusively settle this question but circumstantial evidence indicates that there Leslie may have had clones or twin brothers serving about the Enterprise.
- Canon is not completely clear about whether there was one Lt. Leslie or several characters that looked similar to Leslie roaming the Enterprise at the time of the five year mission. The most compelling fact to support the possibility of one Leslie is that at no point are two "Leslies" in the same room at the same time.
- However, it is also well-known over the years many actors have played multiple characters in the Star Trek universe. (Example: Trelane and Koloth.) This makes it is possible that Leslie had twins or clones aboard the Enterprise.
- One of the most compelling sequences indicating that there were twin or clone Leslies occurs in TOS: "Assignment: Earth". Leslie is seen navigating on the bridge in a gold shirt, and then (presumably at the same time) Leslie is seen in engineering in a red jump suit. Just a few moments later Gary Seven stuns a third Leslie in who is wearing a red shirt and manning the transporter. Leslie look-alikes are seen in close succession in three different uniforms and three different places at almost the same time.
- Furthermore, in TOS: "Obsession" a security guard who looks like Leslie is declared dead by Dr. McCoy on Argus X after the creature drained all the red blood corpuscles from his body. However, by stardate 3620.7, one of Leslie's brothers or clones is walking the corridors of the Enterprise. It is possible that Dr. McCoy either grossly exaggerated Leslie's condition or flat-out erred, but Leslie (or his clone or twin) eventually recovered and returned to active duty in the episode(TOS: "Obsession".
- There are many appearances of Leslie, but without names or dialogue it is sometime difficult to determine whether the character is Leslie, a twin, a clones or a triplet or just a guy who looks like Leslie.
- It's a good idea to use the source rather than POV to edit articles. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 126.96.36.199 (talk).
Er... "the source rather than the POV"? Huh? What's that's supposed to mean? -- sulfur 18:42, June 13, 2011 (UTC)
- Is it Memory Alpha policy to revert and delete new edits, or should the fellow contributor edit and correct the new information. I'm referring specifically to new information that I added at Leslie. Last night I watched TOS: "Assignment: Earth" and saw "Leslie" appear in three different places in three different uniforms at roughly the same time. The current article insists that Leslie is all three of those people and that Lt. Leslie rose from the dead and continued to serve on the USS Enterprise. Rather than view the source, or use the source to make the argument the other editor simply deletes the new information.
- What's the best way to handle this? -- 188.8.131.52 18:45, June 13, 2011 (UTC)
- I've locked the article in a pre-editwar version now - please discuss potentially controversial additions and come to a consensus first, before furthering the edit war. For what it's worth, if anything of this is supposed to be added to the article, it needs to be changed to the correct point of view first. Also, phrases like "not completely clear whether" or "is possible that" are often signs of subjective interpretation, which should not be part of the article in the first place. -- Cid Highwind 18:53, June 13, 2011 (UTC)
- I don't really see anything in the removed information that should be returned to the article. As Cid suggested, most of it seems to be speculation and uncited fan analysis.--31dot 19:01, June 13, 2011 (UTC)
- It is "speculative" but only if you define "speculative" to mean bring "brings to light information that you were previously unaware of." Please address these simple facts:
- 1. Fact 1: A person can't be in three places at the same time. (Watch Assignment: Earth. Paskey wears three different uniforms and appears in three different places in the course of about 3 minutes of air time and approximately the same amount of story time.
- 2. Fact 2: McCoy declared Paskey's character dead. Is it not speculation to assume that the security guard which McCoy claimed was dead went on to serve a long and glorious career in Starfleet? You tell me that Dr. McCoy can't tell if a man is dead or not? (Perhaps he's had a little too much Saurian brandy.)
- 3. Fact 3: Numerous actors in nearly every generation of Star Trek have played numerous characters. If Leslie is a multi-tasking hero who can man the helm, operate the transporter, act as a security guard and rise from the dead to do it all again, then I submit that Dr. Pulaski is actually Dr. Mulhall AND Dr. Miranda Jones. Afterall it's a lot easier to believe that Dr. Jones recovered her eyesight and used her long life to pursue a medical career than it is to believe that Leslie regenerated his entire supply of blood AFTER DEATH.
- Facts aside, the question remains why in the world would you leave Sulu, or Scotty at the conn, when you have an experienced officer capable of functioning in engineering, security, at the helm AND in the medical field on the bridge? I mean what the hell does a guy have to do to get a citation or promotion? --- 184.108.40.206 19:19, June 13, 2011 (UTC)
- BTW, if necessary I can reference the exact time point in Assignment: Earth where "Leslie" appears in three places at the same time. If he's NOT three different people then mention should be made of his mastery of the Space Time Continuum. Perhaps he is a Q? -- 220.127.116.11 19:24, June 13, 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry to pile on, but I might not have time to argue later. If Leslie can appear in three places at the same time, perhaps mention should be made of the fact that in the same episode (Assignment: Earth), Hadley is working for NASA. That's right. Hadley is seen repeatedly in the NASA control room in civilian clothes. If every unmasked appearance of Paskey is Leslie, shoudn't the same hold true for Hadley? -- 18.104.22.168 19:26, June 13, 2011 (UTC)
- I'd really suggest you read the above-linked POV and canon policies. As an encyclopedia we don't post personal speculation or attempt to explain away production nuances such as reusing extras without evidence from Trek staff or other sources.--31dot 19:28, June 13, 2011 (UTC)
- Well then, which is it? Is Leslie a character or a production extra? He can't be both. Either he is a production extra, with lots of appearances as various characters, or he is a superhuman capable of working all fields of the ship AND rising from the dead. The article as written purports that he is a character. I suggest that either he is NOT a character or this article grossly exaggerates the character because of the blurry line between his character and the production extras played by Paskey. -- 22.214.171.124 19:32, June 13, 2011 (UTC)
- New ideas are always pilloried by the establishment. New information is not a challenge to your expertise but a chance for you to prove your mastery of the subject. -- 126.96.36.199 19:32, June 13, 2011 (UTC)
- Philosophical statements are nice, but don't help your position and are quite irrelevant, because if we did not want to listen to your ideas we would simply remove them. The fact remains your statements are speculation.--31dot 19:38, June 13, 2011 (UTC)
- Which part exactly is speculation. I laid out three facts, which have not been controverted.
- I just read the whole Connors/Ryan/Paskey speculation. I am not whoever wrote that and I can understand why you don't want to insert speculation. As far as I'm concerned pull out all my speculation about twins and clones, but if you do so, you also need to remove all the speculation about Leslie's shipmate relations, his rise from the dead and his many appearances in many different places in many different uniforms. Are you really going to let it stand that he "rose from the dead"? And that he was capable of working in engineering, security, helm, transporter AND the medical field? That's almost harder to believe than he rose from the dead.
- If Leslie is a character, then he is truly a superhuman and that is worthy of mention. If he is a production extra, then it should be made clear that several Enterprise officers and crew bear a striking resemblance to Leslie. Either way, because it's really just a continuity/production error that should be stated as well. Because the fact is, we don't know jack about Leslie/Conners/Ryan. -- 188.8.131.52 19:45, June 13, 2011 (UTC)
- Please keep your indentations the same throughout the page. It is not speculation to say he was seen alive after he was declared dead, since that's what we saw- it is speculation to come up with a reason why- just as it is speculation to say he had clones or twins or whatever. If you're not going to review our policies to understand why that is, then I really don't have much more to say.--31dot 19:55, June 13, 2011 (UTC)
- It is not speculative to say he rose from the dead? Please reference the episode and seen where they said that Leslie rose from the dead and I'll be happy to retract all my statements. But you won't do that because that never happened. The source NEVER said that Leslie rose from the dead. The source said that Leslie died. It is pure speculation to link Paskey's many appearances and to attempt to explain away his many shirts and names. That my friend is speculation. It is speculation to guess the relationships between Leslie and his fellow crew members. It is speculation to guess why Leslie is called Ryan and Connors. That is speculation.
- It is incontrovertible fact that in "Assignment: Earth" Leslie appears in three different places in three different uniforms at nearly the same time. The current article speculates that this is because Leslie was some sort of uber-officer.
- The real truth is Paskey was an extra who played multiple roles. Why not just admit what the source shows? -- 184.108.40.206 20:05, June 13, 2011 (UTC)
- My point is that if you're not going to speculate about the curious resemblance between numerous crew and officer on-board the Enterprise, then you have no business speculating about Leslie's friends or his name "Ryan/Connors" or the reason he had so many roles on the ship. Just because I don't have an account does not mean that my sources are uncited. -- 220.127.116.11 20:05, June 13, 2011 (UTC)
- Have you read the article?
- 1. Speculation: Leslie is "affable." No one ever said he was affable. Going to the crew lounge does not make you affable. Shy people, jerks and many other types of people go to the crew lounge.
- 2. Speculation: Leslie's name is Ryan/Conners/Leslie.
- 3. Speculation: Paskey plays one character who works in helm, engineering, navigation, security AND medical. This speculation is controverted by the fact that in Assignment: Earth Paskey appears in 3 different places in 3 different uniforms at the same time.
- 4. Speculation: Paskey rose from the dead. This is controverted by the fact that many Star Trek actors played multiple roles, but only one (Spock) rose from the dead.
- Compare this article to the Hadley article which freely admits to speculation. This article purports to be authoritative but is in fact rife with speculation.
- I have reference my sources. Please rebut my source, and explain why these four critical areas are anything less than speculation. Have you read the article?!
- This article speculates that Leslie was a superhuman death-dying multi-talented officer with several names. Please explain how in Assignment: Earth, Leslie is in three places in three different uniforms at the same time. Watch the episode. After you watch that episode tell me how it can square with this article on any level. This article is a huge mountain of speculation built upon the fact that Paskey played numerous characters. If you're going to claim that Leslie was skilled in medical, engineering, helm and navigation AND rose from the dead, then why not assume that Leslie was also and Ekosian rebel? I have read the article, but more importantly, I have watched the show. -- 18.104.22.168 21:19, June 13, 2011 (UTC)
The three Leslies
In Assignment: Earth at 6:43 into the episode Kirk addresses the crew over the ship-wide speaker. Leslie #1 (wearing gold) is stops in the hall as the Captain speaks. At 6:51 (just 7 seconds later) Leslie #2 appears in engineering (wearing a red jumpsuit). At 7:18 jumpsuit Leslie (Leslie #2) is again seen behind Scotty in Engineering. At 9:50 Leslie #3 is seen sleeping on the floor behind the transporter station. Leslie #3 is wearing a red engineering shirt. While there is no possibility that Leslie #1 and Leslie #2 are the same person, there is a unlikely possibility that Leslie #3 is actually Leslie #1 or #2, because 2 minutes allows enough time to change shirts and report to the transporter. It would be easier to remove the gold shirt and put on a red shirt, so under the 2 Leslie theory, then Leslie #3 is actually Leslie #1 who left the hallway and changed his shirt and then went to the transporter room.
If the guidelines here mean anything then, the simplest explanation is the correct explanation. The simplest explanation is that there are at least three people played by Paskey in this episode alone. Either Paskey is playing 2 different people or 3 different people, but there is no possibility that he is playing 1 character. If you stay true to canon it is more likely that he is playing 3 (or more) people because he has not less than 3 names and not less than 4 fields of specialty in the series as documented by others.
That is not speculation. That is canon.
I submit that canon proves that that Lt. Leslie is one of several characters played by Paskey, to include an Ekosian rebel and at least 2 but possibly 4 or more Starfleet officers and crew.
I submit that there is no canon to support the speculation that Lt. Leslie rose from the dead. Surely a crewmember rising from the dead would be worth mentioning. I submit that the article speculates that Leslie was affable because he was hanging out at the crew lounge. We don't know if Leslie, Connor or Ryan were affable or not. The article speculates about Leslie's name(s). – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 22.214.171.124 (talk).
- Yeah, there's no canon to support the idea someone could "rise from the dead".........--31dot 00:04, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
- If you wish to remove "affable", we can as that is a word choice issue. Alleging other roles played is a non-speculative argument, which can be confirmed by his credits, scripts, or other information. I'd need to see the episode again, but timing within the episode is not necessarily the same as real-world timing, though it can be.--31dot 00:10, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
- At the start of "Obsession" the character played by Eddie Paskey is called "Leslie" by Kirk. That character later dies. A few episodes later, in "The Ultimate Computer", Kirk once again calls the character played by Eddie Paskey "Leslie". (He does it again in "The Enterprise Incident", if not more.) Those facts suggest he did rise from the dead. Those facts could also suggest he has a twin brother with the same last name. Or any other of possible explanations. --Myko 08:09, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
- It is impossible to determine which explanation is correct, but we would still be able to document the rest of Eddie Paskey's appearances on some page on Memory Alpha. The Leslie page still seems like the best place to do so. --Myko 08:13, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
@3dot: Doesn't it make more sense to actually watch the episode before you argue? I never said it wasn't possible for someone to rise from the dead, but don't we go for the simplest solution? I keep asking for your sources, but you don't provide any. Paskey's roles cannot be confirmed by credits as his roles were always uncredited. However, the source material makes it clear that Paskey played more than one crew member. Here's why (again):
1. In Assignment: Earth, the timing in the episode referenced represents the exact same amount of time within the show. But then you'd know that ... if you watched the episode. In that episode Paskey is playing at least 2 and probably 3 roles. This is incontrovertible non-debatable on-screen fact. So we know beyond a shadow of a doubt that at least once Paskey played more than one crewman. 2. Paskey is referred to by more than one name: Leslie, Conner, Ryan. It is also an on-screen fact that he had several names. This alone would not mean more than one character, but taken with 1 it is HIGHLY suggestive. 3. Paskey is seen in various duty uniforms. By itself this might not mean much, but taken with #1 and the fact that Paskey like William Blackburn was an uncredited extra in many episode means that Paskey played many roles. In other words, if Lesle, Conner and Ryan are the same person then by the same precedent/logic Lt. Hadley was one of Mudd's Robots and a NASA scientist. 3. Either "Leslie" rose from the dead or he has a twin brother on the ship. If you have a twin brother it might not be worth mentioning. If you rise from the dead, that's worth mention. Isn't the simplest explanation the right explanation?
If Leslie was a superhuman capable of operating the transporter, manning the helm, working in the medical field, working in engineering and working security, then why wasn't Leslie in Star Trek: The Motion Picture or Wrath or Khan? Furthermore, why wasn't Leslie EVER given charge of the ship? As a back-from-the-dead affable multi-talented officer he seems more qualified than Scotty or Sulu. He seems imminently more qualified than DeSalle.
If you believe the speculation in the article as it is written then you must conclude Leslie was a superhuman. My theory requires no speculation, and no leaps of faith regarding superhuman talents or the ability to rise from the dead. Instead, I just ask that the viewer/read accept the fact that Paskey played more than one role in the series. This is not only a fact but this is a fact which is already documented elsewhere by this same wiki. The only thing I'm pointing out is that Paskey not only played Ekosians, he played more than one crewmember.
Lots of other actors in Star Trek have played more than one character. Why not Paskey?
I've put a lot of effort into this argument and I have sourced to the minute my claims. All I ask in return is that those who wish to debate actually use the source rather than the Wiki to back up their claims. All I ask is that you actually know what you are talking about before you tell me to shut up. -- 126.96.36.199 10:21, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
@Myko, Obsession and Enterprise Incident "indicate" that Leslie rose from the dead, but the source does not confirm your speculation. It is also possible that Leslie had a twin brother or clone. It is much more likely that he had a twin aboard ship rather than he came back from the dead. As currently written this article is rife with speculation about Leslie's onboard relationships. The article also speculates that Leslie, Conners and Ryan were all the same person. Whether Leslie rose from the dead or not is speculation, but one thing is for certain: a guy who looked like Leslie was in two (nearly three) places in three different uniforms at the same time. Each of Paskey's characters deserves a page, rather than lumping them all under Leslie. At the very least Conners and Ryan are named characters and should have separate pages. I think the theory of a twin or cloned Leslie has to be given equal weight to the rise-from-the-dead Leslie. Of the three possibilities, a twin brother is the least speculative and thus most likely. -- 188.8.131.52 10:24, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
- The only way to accept Paskey playing more than one role in the series(or even in the same episode) is to find evidence that was intentional, such as a call sheet listing him under more than one role, or the credits of the episode, or Trek staff saying so, etc. Otherwise, we simply present the evidence viewed in canon and let the reader decide. We don't provide an explanation unless such a thing was stated. We certainly don't state he had a twin brother; it might be the "least speculative", but it is still speculative.
- I'm not sure who has told you to "shut up"; I haven't. --31dot 10:38, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
You have repeatedly dropped condescending comments like "Have you read the article?" and you have claimed that my comments are unsourced POV. And yet, I'm still waiting for one source to defend your POV . . .
Now that I have obliterated your remark about my information being unsourced, let me address your new standard of "intentional/accidental". Are you now saying that it was an accident that the same character appeared in three places at the same time? I think that that a show-extra was employed to play "crew-filler" and played different people at different places in the ship.
Now that you are on the "accident" argument . . . do you think it was an accident that Paskey's character(s) has/have three different names? I think an uncredited extra played more than one character---as so many others have done.
Please source the show where Leslie rose from the dead, or concede that the theory of Leslie's resurrection is pure speculation.
If you're going to allow speculation about Leslie's affable character, relationships with other officers and his resurrection, then why not allow other theories of speculation? Maybe Leslie was a big jerk and despite his incredible restorative powers and ability to work anywhere on or off the ship, he was canned when Spock became captain because of his disruptive personality. Since we don't know how or why Leslie returned to duty, why not speculate that Leslie had a look-a-like, clone or doppleganger, brother or twin? No matter which theory of speculation you prefer, you will never be able to source anything that says that Leslie rose from the dead.
I assume that since you choose to argue this subject that you know what you are talking about. Perhaps I have assumed too much. Are you aware that Paskey was a stuntman and a stand-in on the show? How do you square those appearances with the Leslie/Connor/Ryan superhuman theory? More importantly, do you have anything sourced to back-up any of your assertions or are you just standing by the wiki because it was here first? -- 184.108.40.206 13:00, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
BTW, you did not address or acknowledge any of the three pillars of my argument in any way shape or form. Please dispute my source or explain what I misunderstood. I ask that whomever put the block on the page address my arguments, or help me edit the corrected information into the article.
The article has a lot of good information that shouldn't be thrown away. But the article is also built on baseless speculation. Namely, there is no evidence that Ryan/Connors/Leslie are the same person. There is no evidence regarding Leslie's relationships with his shipmates. Most importantly, there is no source that indicates that Leslie rose from the dead. -- 220.127.116.11 13:06, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
- A couple of notes. There is no assumption that Connors is Leslie. None. Also... you are getting your terms and language a bit incorrect here.
- POV -- the point of view of the encyclopedia. It is written from the POV of someone who exists in that universe. Ergo, your prior notes that were removed (and put onto this page above) were in the wrong POV. They would be like someone writing an article about your life and talking about "episodes", "series", "actors", etc. Wrong context. That's why this kind of information is background information at best.
- Source -- A source is the base information. In this case, the episodes. You appear to be using the word "source" as to mean your thesis (ie, the point you are arguing).
- Regardless, the information you have presented here does not belong in the main body of the article. It belongs (at best) in the background section. That's the reason that the MA:POV policy was presented to you in the first place. This is not Wikipedia, and Memory Alpha does not treat Star Trek as if it were a "fictional" show. MA treats it as if it were actual history. -- sulfur 13:11, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
- A couple of notes. There is no assumption that Connors is Leslie. None. Also... you are getting your terms and language a bit incorrect here.
- Leslie being called by name after his death would seem to be evidence that he died and came back to life, absent information he was another character.--31dot 13:15, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
@Sulfur --- Source = WATCH THE FRIGGIN EPISODE. I even provided the exact moments in to watch. Watch the episode.
@31dot @ Leslie being called by name after his death would seem to be evidence that he died and came back to life, absent information he was another character. That's not speculation? Source me his resurrection and I'll concede. I sourced information which proved he was 3 characters in one episode ALONE. Lots of people have the same last name. Not very many people are resurrected. -- 18.104.22.168 13:19, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
@both of you: Are you arguing just to argue or do you have any source which backs up your opinion or discredits the source I have provided? -- 22.214.171.124 13:21, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
- Just because we didn't see it doesn't mean it didn't happen, and in Star Trek people are "resurrected"(Spock, Scotty, Neelix) so I'm not sure why it's so hard to believe other people could have been. And stop telling people I "haven't watched the episode"- I certainly have, just not recently enough to time a minor character down to the minute.--31dot 13:24, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
I didn't say it didn't happen. I said it wasn't sourced. Therefore it is speculation. What makes your speculation more valid than my speculation? -- 126.96.36.199 13:25, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
- Well, I don't know what you've been watching, but he appeared after his "death". Since there is no evidence he had a brother, or clone, or was from another universe, or any other unsourced speculation you come up with, that's what we go with. I would suggest you reread what Sulfur wrote.--31dot 13:27, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
In other words, your speculation is more valid than my speculation. As I understand you, you don't have to source your theory. And the evidence which proves that Paskey played three characters in one episode doesn't matter because you don't remember a minor character from the episode. I have the episode in remastered HD and watched it the night I made the corrections ... but we'll stick with your theory because you don't have to source your speculation.
As for Sulfur, he did not edit my text to fit with the POV of the encyclopedia. Rather he deleted it. I have no problems with edits which correct style or POV. I have a problem with someone telling me that their speculation is more valid than my speculation and that my sourced material is immaterial. -- 188.8.131.52 13:33, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
- The article currently reads "However, by stardate 3620.7, he recovered and began walking the corridors of the Enterprise. By stardate 3715.3, he returned to active duty.". I suggest changing this to "by stardate 3620.7, he was walking the corridors of the Enterprise. By stardate 3715.3, he was on active duty." or similar. This removes the only hints of explanation for his return from the in-universe part of the article.
- Saying that Paskey played a character called Connors and a character called Leslie (at least) creates a problem - how do you decide which appearances are Connors and which are Leslie? The only correct way of doing so is by sourcing the episodes for names. There are many many episodes where Eddie Paskey's character isn't named, so is it Connors or Leslie? If we are to accept that there is a twin brother called Leslie we suddenly have to pick which times he's playing which twin. You can invent various ways to do so, by rank, uniform, role, etc. but it will always be speculation. MA seems to use the assumption that it's always Leslie unless another name is used. (Except for Ryan for some reason.) I don't agree with this 100% myself, but I can't offer any less speculative way of doing it. I think we would all like to hear if you do. --Myko 13:40, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
- It's not "my theory", it's what was observed and is consistent with other characters who were seen after they died. Tell me where Leslie or another character said he had a brother or clone. What Myko said is correct- we assume it is the same person unless told otherwise. Is it perfect? No, but it's the best we can do.--31dot 13:47, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
Despite 31dot's ridiculous assertion that his speculation is more valid than my speculation, we at last a voice of reason. I would suggest: "However, by stardate 3620.7, another officer, later referred to as Leslie was seen walking the corridors of the Enterprise." If you try to stick with the recovery/regeneration theory, then you have to explain away why you won't allow other speculation. Maybe that was Leslie's forlorn ghost was seen walking the halls of the 'Enterprise'?
The fact is this Paskey was an uncredited extra who played multiple roles. That is a fact. I think the article needs a line or two which says something like, "There were a number of officers aboard the Enterprise who bore a striking resemblance to Leslie (see Conner/Ryan below) and at least one of his look-a-likes shared his last name. Because of the resemblance of the Leslies to Conner and Ryan it is difficult at times to ascertain who participated in which missions." As for speculation, including resurrection speculation, there is a precedent for such handling speculation: insert a box with the "one Leslie theory" analogous to the speculation box found on Hadley's page. -- 184.108.40.206 13:53, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
For 31dot: http://www.startrek.com/watch_episode/YQykzlh2T6H2D9hsggf36_R0e_KXst_w Jump to the moment I sourced. -- 220.127.116.11 13:54, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
- Show me a call sheet, episode credit list, or staff statement where it was said Paskey played multiple roles. That's the only way any claim of him playing multiple roles can be in the article. I have not said you are being ridiculous, I would appreciate the same courtesy.--31dot 14:01, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
- The cast lists on MA for Mudd's Women and The Conscience of the King suggests he played both Connors and Leslie: multiple roles. I specifically picked episodes where the character names were used, but I can't offer any production material. --Myko 14:08, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
- Connors is a separate page; perhaps Ryan should be, I don't know(though some information regarding that was removed from this page and posted in a section above), but that's not the issue here- the anon user is arguing that he played multiple roles in the same episode.--31dot 14:12, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
I'm not arguing. I'm begging you to watch the episode. Then argue with the source and stop begging me to repeat myself. But if you're too stubborn to actually watch the episode, it doesn't matter. If you already admit that Paskey played more than one officer you're halfway there. Now you just need to admit that you don't know why another officer who looked like Leslie and who was named Leslie was back on board after McCoy declared him dead. You think you know why. I think I know why too. But there is no source which will confirm your theory. -- 18.104.22.168 14:18, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
- Assignment: Earth does suggest that there are three characters played by Eddie Paskey in three separate locations on the ship at the same time. I agree with the anon user on this. There is no way to incorporate this into MA however, except as a background note. --Myko 14:25, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
The way to incorporate is to stick to the "facts" by stating: "There were a number of officers aboard the Enterprise who bore a striking resemblance to Leslie (see Conner/Ryan below) and at least one of his look-a-likes shared his last name. Because of the resemblance of the Leslies to Conner and Ryan it is difficult at times to ascertain who participated in which missions."
- Myko- Such a note, though, would need to be carefully worded, and certainly should not include speculation about twin brothers or whatever without evidence. If one reviews the article, though, there is evidence which the anon either ignores or dismisses to support the idea that he was alive after being declared dead, including production information and the fact that his name was used.--31dot 14:33, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
- Please note... "Ryan" comes from a transcript. Not a script. It comes from someone's interpretation of a line said on-screen. To me, it doesn't even sound like "Ryan" in that scene. So... let's leave this "Ryan" out of the conversation please? If you want to discuss the "Ryan" issue, take it up in the section above. -- sulfur 14:35, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
- 31dot- completely agree with you on contents of said note. The note would simply state that Eddie played three characters at the same time. (One of which was via stock footage.) --Myko 14:42, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
I can't wrap my head around the idea that an undocumented, never shown, never mentioned full-blown resurrection is acceptable speculation but the perfectly reasonable and ordinary idea of twin brothers is wild-eyed crazy speculation. I'm willing to concede that the twin brother theory is just a theory, but I'm outraged that someone can actually write that an unsourced return from death is perfectly reasonable. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 22.214.171.124 (talk).
- And I can't wrap my head around the idea of ignoring what was seen on screen and ignoring production information in this very article. So there you go.--31dot 14:46, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
Thank you again @ Myoko. I'm not ignoring production information. I'm not ignoring what was onscreen. I just don't see any production information or on-screen action that says anything about a resurrection. The question is, if we know that Paskey played more than one crewmember, how do we know which one is is which episode. Answer: we don't. Thus this entire article is speculative creating one character from many very minor characters. -- 126.96.36.199 14:51, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
- So if Captain Picard's name wasn't used in an episode, we should have a separate article about that "character"? Because you seem to be saying we need ten different articles here. It is preferable to have all the appearances under one page than to have ten "Unnamed character" articles.--31dot 14:55, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
- I figure I should note MA is inconsistant here. For example, the "Unnamed 23rd century USS Enterprise personell" page lists Frank da Vinci as playing "Command division wedding attendee", when that appearance could have been placed under either Brent or Vinci. If we follow that example, the yellow shirted Paskey appearances should be moved to "Unnamed 23rd...". --Myko 15:10, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
@31 dot: Your Captain Picard analogy doesn't work. It doesn't work because Patrick Stewart only played one character in Star Trek, and in all instances his uniform, station, duties and insignia indicated that he was the same person. Paskey was a stand-in, an extra and a stuntman. The very nature of that job means that he played many different characters. You must compare Paskey to William Blackburn. I will note (again) that the Hadley entry has a box of speculative (labeled as such) at the outset.
Because we know that Paskey played several characters cannot assume that every appearance of Paskey is Leslie. You cannot assume that just because Eddie Paskey's website said that Leslie returned from the dead that Leslie actually returned from death. We cannot even assume that yellow shirt Paskey is someone other than red shirt Paskey. Maybe he did rise from the dead. But we don't know what wasn't said. -- 188.8.131.52 15:19, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
- The fact that he was a stand-in or extra is irrelevant to the canon portion of the article. Sulfur already explained that to you.--31dot 15:23, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
I tried to make you smarter ... but I give up. -- 184.108.40.206 16:25, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
The article as written is highly speculative.
1. The article speculates about Leslie's "affable" nature and his relationships with shipmates.
2. The article assumes that every unnamed appearance of Paskey is Leslie, when we already know of at least 2 officers who looked like Leslie on the Enterprise.
3. The article speculates that Leslie returned from death. There is no source that shows that Security Guard Leslie returned from death. It possible that Leslie returned from death and was a superhuman. But that is pure speculation. -- 220.127.116.11 14:29, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
- I'm not sure why you are posting this again, as this is all listed above. At least one of the "other officers" already has his own page because a different name was used.--31dot 14:34, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
Quite simply because you stand by your assertion that your speculation is more valid than my speculation. I don't mind speculation . . . labeled as such. If you're going to allow your speculation, then you should allow my speculation as well. -- 18.104.22.168 14:46, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
- I have not done so, I've simply stated what was seen and I'm certainly not going to argue about it with you in two different sections on the same page.--31dot 14:49, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
Okay. Please source the resurrection/regeneration scene so I can watch it. -- 22.214.171.124 14:53, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
- What's up with these totally arbitrary section breaks? Stop adding those and stop repeating yourself, it only serves to annoy people trying to read all of this, but won't really help getting your point across.
- So, part of this whole shebang seems to be about the potentially double Leslie. Let's think about this for a while: you say that calling both of them "one person" would be speculation, while others say that considering the single Leslie to be two persons would be speculation - and actually, all of you might be correct. What's the way out? Surely not the suggestion where we have a lengthy note stating in a definite way that there were a good dozen Leslie-lookalikes on the Enterprise. Instead, it would be a small change to this existing article, where we remove whatever hint at resurrection there may be (as has been stated already, it's not really that prominent after all), and just state that some Leslie worked on the Enterprise, then died, and then some Leslie worked on the Enterprise. No speculation about him being revived, and no speculation about him being two different persons. Let the reader beware, problem solved.
- Regarding the rest, if there are other occurrences which could be Leslie, or could not be Leslie, it would again be speculation to state either one as a definite fact. So, what's the least speculative way out here? Considering that we already have an article about the character named Leslie, it seems to be less speculative to have a note here, stating that not all occurrences of this face need to be Leslie, than it would be to add several more unnamed character articles, each of which would need to state that the character might actually be the same as Leslie, or one of the other guys.
- So, all in all, this is pretty much noise about something that should have been a small clarification to the existing article. -- Cid Highwind 16:35, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
I agree with Cid Highwind's resolution regarding the miraculous resurrection of Lt. Leslie. Maybe Leslie was restored/regenerated. Maybe the Leslie boys were twins. Either way, or a host of other possibilities, are ripe for speculation, but I know for a fact that Leslie's resurrection isn't canon. I'm glad to see that now two of the Great Powers of the Galaxy at least understand what 31dot has difficulty comprehending. The resurrection claim (taken whole cloth from Paskey's website) is the single most egregious mistake in the article.
That leaves problems two and three.
Problem 2: Leslie the multi-disciplined officer. I have sourced to the minute in Assignment: Earth the point where 3 unnamed characters played by Paskey appear in 3 different places at the same but in different uniforms. This sequence proves that not every occurrence of Paskey in a Starfleet uniform is Leslie. In other words, the multi-uniformed sequence in Assignment: Earth shows the viewer that Lt. Leslie is not a transporter chief/helmsman/engineer/security guard and medical assistant all rolled into one. This sequence establishes beyond doubt that Paskey is playing several different crewmen.
I'm not advocating for new articles for/about those multitudinous appearances. And I'll let the editor decide if those appearance belong here on Paskey's page or on a general page about unnamed crewmen. My thrust is this: one cannot conclude that just because Paskey played a host of roles that the Leslie character was a well-loved multi-disciplined superman. The creation of the Leslie character as described here is a creation of the authors of that article.
Problem 3: How do we know that Leslie was affable? How do we know that he had "good working relationships" with a host of minor characters? This is so much fanciful speculation well-suited for the Paskey fanzine but not suitable for a canon encyclopedia. -- 126.96.36.199 18:33, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
BTW, the 'arbitrary section breaks' were inserted because the discussion was getting so lengthy I thought it was unmanageable for editing. I stand corrected. Not that my feelings are important here, but I will share that I don't much like the fact that I have to work this hard just to point out flaws in the article that seems plainly obvious to me. When I was deleted rather than edited I took offense. I tried commenting in the talk section of this article months and months ago and was ignored. So I assumed no one cared and took the time to edit. Rather than correcting my edits or improving my work Sulfur dismissed me and my work. 31 dot didn't even look at the source but found time to tell me that I didn't know what I was talking about. I found this highly offensive and counter-productive. /End rant. -- 188.8.131.52 18:40, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
- Perhaps, after all this discussion, you now understand that it wasn't simply "pointing out/correcting a flaw" that got reverted, but an edit that actually made the article worse - because you were using wrong POV etc. (see above, has been mentioned several times now). The fact that your tone is somewhat condescending doesn't make it easier for everyone to actually stick to this discussion, either. -- Cid Highwind 19:48, June 14, 2011 (UTC)
- I'm not going to address the anon user's false comments about me, but I will say that I agree with Cid's last paragraph (in his first post) as I had said as much somewhere up above. I really don't think it's speculative at all to state that he was dead and then seen alive, but I can also live with what Cid said in the first paragraph. The actual wording of the article(affable, etc) being questioned can be addressed in a new section on this page.--31dot 01:07, June 15, 2011 (UTC)
It is not speculative to report what is seen on the show. A Leslie was killed and died. Lt. Leslie was later seen on the ship. But what 31dot said repeatedly is that Lt. Leslie was restored or regenerated. This is not canon. The resurrection of Leslie is 100% pure speculation.
The article has 3 gaping flaws of speculation. I've pointed these out repeatedly and ad nauseum. No one seems to be interested in fixing the flaws. Rather, this discussion seems be more about protecting turf. It seems that Cid would prefer to have wrong information in the wiki, rather than risk the chance that correct information is added which does not conform to the POV standards of the wiki. Myself and others pointed out the problems with this article on the talk page, but no one responded. When I took it upon myself to begin the editing process my edits were deleted.
If you prefer to stick with wrong information in MA, so be it. But it is wrong. I referenced the show to the minute which proves the error and I was told I need original scripts and production notes. If that's the standard you'll need, I'll never be qualified to edit this wiki in any form. If you are more concerned with correcting my tone than hearing my facts then we are at an impasse. I am not sheepish when the facts are on my side.
However, I apologize if you find my tone condescending. I find it offensive that I have to work this hard to help edit one page of a very minor character in the Star Trek universe. I think you should incorporate a note of warning just above the "SAVE" button that says, "Admins and editors here are very defensive of turf. Should you the reader consider submitting corrections to this wiki, you must reference the source or your contributions will be summarily deleted. The episode and minute within the episode are not considered properly sourced. You must also reference lines from the original script and casting production notes. (Transcripts are not acceptable.) If you cannot provide a highlighted copy of the original script in PDF form, then any speculation that the editors have inserted in this wiki must stand unchallenged."
If I had known that this was the policy of the wiki I would not have started the discussion in the first place. And don't tell me this isn't the policy of MA unless you've read the discussion on this page. -- 184.108.40.206 11:40, June 15, 2011 (UTC)
Postscript: The reason I kept repeating myself is because no one ever addresses the points I make about the show. Cid and 31dot both take time to talk about me and my comments, but they don't take time to address points 1, 2 and 3. I'm not sure why that part of the page is invisible, but I suppose it's more fun to identify outgroups and pose as authority figures than it is to actually correct the article. -- 220.127.116.11 11:49, June 15, 2011 (UTC)
- It's clear you are reading what you choose to read, since Cid actually agrees with a good chunk of what you've been saying but you focus on what you don't like about it. It's also clear that we are "protecting turf" in your eyes because you don't like our answers. We can't change the polices, scope, and purpose of this wiki on one anon user's say-so. Otherwise, we'd have to do that for everyone. If you would actually take the time to read them, you might see that there are reasons things are the way they are; it is not because we feel like it or we are tyrants. People have addressed your points, you just don't like the answer.
- I've said several times that the wording that you disagree with can be discussed in a separate section on this page if you wish- you might be right about some of it. Since that is a different subject, it shouldn't be mixed with this one.
- As an encyclopedia, if you are going to claim that someone played different roles, you need evidence. Otherwise it is just speculation. I'm sorry you don't like that. Other people manage to do it- it may be harder with TOS but it is done quite frequently for the more modern series.
- I will probably not have much more to say on this subject, as you're just going around in circles. --31dot 21:11, June 15, 2011 (UTC)
Who said anything about changing policies? I'm now fully convinced that 31dot has no interest in correcting wrong information in the article. Yet again he's launched into a tangential ad hominem attack on me but yet to address any of the flaws in the article. No one has addressed these flaws with the article:
1. Speculation: Leslie is "affable." Going to the crew lounge does not make you affable. Shy people, jerks and many other types of people go to the crew lounge. We know nothing of Leslie's working relationship with other members of the crew.
2. Speculation: The many characters played by Paskey are one character whose name might be Ryan/Conners/Leslie.
3. Speculation: Leslie rose from the dead. No where is this referenced on screen in any episode ever.
The article asserts that Paskey plays one character who works in helm, engineering, navigation, security AND medical. If this is true then please explain how in Assignment: Earth Paskey appears in 3 different places in 3 different uniforms at the same time.
If Cid or anyone else has agreed with me, no one has taken time to change the article and when I tried editing the article I was deleted. Can someone who will not be deleted please make these corrections? -- 18.104.22.168 20:32, June 21, 2011 (UTC)
- Your points have been addressed, but I'll state them again. #2 and #3 were addressed by Cid above who stated the following:
- "Regarding the rest, if there are other occurrences which could be Leslie, or could not be Leslie, it would again be speculation to state either one as a definite fact. So, what's the least speculative way out here? Considering that we already have an article about the character named Leslie, it seems to be less speculative to have a note here, stating that not all occurrences of this face need to be Leslie, than it would be to add several more unnamed character articles, each of which would need to state that the character might actually be the same as Leslie, or one of the other guys."
- #3 was also addressed by Cid who stated:
- "Instead, it would be a small change to this existing article, where we remove whatever hint at resurrection there may be (as has been stated already, it's not really that prominent after all), and just state that some Leslie worked on the Enterprise, then died, and then some Leslie worked on the Enterprise. No speculation about him being revived, and no speculation about him being two different persons."
- As for #1, no one has dismissed any arguments about it- and if you have an alternate wording to propose, I and others would be happy to see it.--31dot 00:19, June 22, 2011 (UTC)
The simple truth is, Paskey was hired to be Shatner's stand in and stunt double. GR didn't want to waste money and put Paskey wherever he was needed. Paskey played so many parts, and STTOS was so new at the time that Paskey entertained the idea that "Mr. Leslie" was either a robot with many duplicates ( ala "I, Mudd" )or an endless set of clones. Go here: http://www.eddiepaskey.com/ – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 22.214.171.124 (talk).
This article is founded on the highly dubious opinion that every appearance of Paskey should be aggregated into a single character. 126.96.36.199 10:07, August 12, 2012 (UTC)
- This has been brought up before, if you'll review the above discussions, especially the post immediately above here. 31dot (talk) 10:13, August 12, 2012 (UTC)
- I agree. This article is in need of a serious edit. Paskey was a stunt man and extra who played many parts. This article conflates his many appearances into a single character. The trouble is the foundational assumption that Paskey played only one character is so intertwined into the article that it's difficult to separate assumption and wishful thinking from canon. IMHO, Paskey should be considered a random crewman except in those instances where he is referred to by the name Leslie. At best, you could expand his appearances with the same color shirt into the Leslie character, but it's preposterous to assume that he was good at engineering, helm, transporter AND medical?! 188.8.131.52 18:24, August 24, 2012 (UTC)
- As I said, this has been brought up and discussed to death before, and it is preferable to have one article than ten different "Unnamed character" articles, as Cid describes above, since we don't usually know where Leslie stops and where he starts, or even if there was intent to have each of his appearances be separate characters. Let's leave the dead horse alone. 31dot (talk) 23:46, August 24, 2012 (UTC)
- I suggest you review the above discussions to see why it is the way it is, especially the comments immediately above this section. 31dot (talk) 22:37, September 8, 2012 (UTC)
- It looks like there was much discussion but the article still wasn't corrected. According to this article Leslie was a super-human character with multiple vocations, multiple positions and multiple nearly simultaneous appearances. Most of all Leslie did not come back from the dead. Well maybe he did, but only if . . . [| this Zeon rebel] is ALSO Leslie. This article will remain a joke until the puffery in this article is cleaned up. 184.108.40.206 17:53, September 13, 2012 (UTC)
- BTW, I got a chuckle when I read: Before stardate 2126.1, his uniform showed no rank insignia until he was promoted to the rank of lieutenant. With rare exceptions after this point, his uniform showed a full lieutenant stripe. Let me get this straight Leslie was a master of multiple disciplines, was so dedicated and tough that he rose from the dead, BUT he was bust down in rank? Funny. 220.127.116.11 17:57, September 13, 2012 (UTC)
Why is it that Commodore Weslie is standing beside Leslie in the Horta picture? 18.104.22.168 00:38, November 16, 2012 (UTC)