Ad blocker interference detected!
Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers
Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.
Is anyone bugged that you can take Stewart's career from IMDB and just recite it again here to beef up your article?
- Yeah, I'm not too happy about just placing film and TV appearances in a list. If nobody else beats me to it, I plan on writing his film career into the article's body in the near future, although it will only include roles he has gotten wide attention for (i.e. the X-Men films) and those that feature other Star Trek actors. (I think what's been done at Rene Auberjonois and Robert Picardo are good examples. ;)) As for beefing up an article, there certainly isn't anything wrong with expanding the article with career info, especially for an actor who had been a part of the Trek franchise for 15 years and whose other works deserve to be noted. --From Andoria with Love 04:43, 16 Nov 2005 (UTC)
I got rid of the word "method" in the description of Stewart as a "method actor". He's not. He's a classical actor. The "method" is a very specific school of acting popularised in the US by Lee Strasberg. Patrick Stewart's Old Vic acting heritage inherits more from Laurence Olivier, who was utterly contemptuous of the "method". As a general rule, Stewart's acting emphasises technique whereas "method" tends to psychologise and deliberate over notions like "character" and "emotion". It does little justice to Stewart to tag him as a method actor. FionnMatthew 03:22, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
I just added a minor comment and a link under "Star Trek". Feel free to remove it if there is anything wrong with it, although I find the information given in it quite interesting. – Ambassador 00:01, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
Monty Python note Edit
I removed the following info. While interesting (I'm a huge Python fan, myself), it's uncited and also doesn't really fit into the article at present,though I'm sure we can find a place... maybe add a trivia section or something. Assuming it gets cited, of course. --From Andoria with Love 21:11, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- According to several documentaries about Monty Python and several interviews with the Pythons, Stewart is a huge and very much devoted fan of them. He is also very good friends with them all and was a close personal friend of Graham Chapman. He is such a fan and friend of them that the Pythons have announced that if there ever was a reunion tour Stewart would take Chapman's place, Cleese believes it is what Chapman would have wanted.
- Ok, I found wbm that explains he is a huge fan and that Python was a major part of his family's life. However, I haven't found anything other than a biographical bit at IMDb (which obviously doesn't count) stating that he would be a replacement for Chapman. --From Andoria with Love 21:17, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- I'll go look for a citation, but the reason I put it under stage work is that if the Pythons did do a reunion tour with Stewart as Chapman's replacement it would be stage work.
- Acknowledged. And good point. :) --From Andoria with Love 08:37, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Okay, I haven't been paying attention for a long while, but I do remember that back-in-the-days, that Stewart was a major cat lover, I remember a note in the newspaper about him and a charity for cats or something. Why wasn't there even one note about that in the personal life section? What about Bella? (and did Bella go back to live with Stewart after the divorce? I read that his beloved cat has to go live with his assistant because it was jealous of his new wife). - T'Sura 220.127.116.11 03:52, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
- It might not be in the article due to how trivial it is to his personal life/biography. I hear Scott Bakula likes squirrels. Maybe we should add that to his article. :D --From Andoria with Love 04:42, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Really, does Scott Bakula have a pet squirrel? Donated to a squirrel charity? Bella, Stewart's cat, was found on the set of TNG, which is why I think it's relevant. Also, in numerous Stewart biographies, particularly the TNG era ones, his love for cats, and Bella, was mentioned.
Heck, the article as a whole looks thin. What about his interview for his part in Jeffrey, in which Stewart's troubled childhood was brought up, and that was why he was drawn to characters like Picard. In /that/ interview, Stewart also mentions that he sees Picard as a 'frightened child', a perspective I haven't considered before, when I was busy being disappointed by all the ways that Picard isn't Kirk. Should interview bit be in personal life, or career? - T'Sura 18.104.22.168 03:37, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
- I added information that was readily available when I went looking for it; the article is by no way "complete." Feel free to add whatever information you like. Just try to make relate in some way to Trek, if you can. :) --From Andoria with Love 03:41, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
- Patrick adopted Bella in 1994 and his assistant took her when he moved back to England, she died of a brain tumor around 2009. The group was Precious Paws. CORRECTION: I adopted Bella to Patrick in 1994, Bella was not found on the set at Paramount. Bella was found in a car port the week of the 94 earthquake, and her owners could not be found. Patrick had mentioned to me he wanted a cat, and I called him and told him I had just the cat for him, so Bella was brought over to his office to meet him and she stayed. He called a mobile vet to come to his office to examine and vaccinate Bella and the rest is history. I took care of the cats on the Paramount lot for seven years and found a litter of kittens on the Deep Space Nine set. But Bella was a cat I adopted to Patrick. www.preciouspaws.org Scott Bakula has also autographed pictures and t shirts for Precious Paws to auction off to raise money as well as Patrick. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 22.214.171.124 (talk).
Uncited "interview" content Edit
Hi, I've removed the second sentence of
- Stewart also lent his voice in an episode of The Simpsons, playing a character named Number One. He once said in an interview that this comes in second place to things he is most proud of (first place going to his appearance in Extras).
The interview had been cited from his IMDB page, citation was replaced with incite tag a year ago. TribbleFurSuit 02:22, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
- I would actually like to read that interview. But, yeah, IMDb alone is not a valid source. Good job removing the note. --From Andoria with Love 04:34, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Uncited info Edit
I have removed the following uncited note.
- Stewart once stated in an interview that with every role he plays he starts out trying to convince the director that he should play with his typical Yorkshire accent. In fact there was a test screening at the very beginning of Next Generation in which Stewart played Picard with a French accent.
If another source for this information can be provided, the quote should be re-added. --From Andoria with Love 10:14, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
Doctor Who role Edit
I removed the following:
- It has been confirmed that a major role in Doctor Who is waiting for specifically Patrick Stewart, as they'll wait for him to use this character when his scheduele clears him enough time to film the episode the character will appear in. Him playing this character will mark the first time an actor who has played a major character in Star Trek, play a major character in Doctor Who (and one of the few times an actor who has played a major character in one science fiction franchise will play a major character in another).
Stories originating from gossip magazines and supermarket tabloids such as The Sun, Daily Mail, Daily Mirror, The National Enquirer, and Star are not valid sources here at Memory Alpha. Thus far, these are the only sources that have reported the Patrick Stewart/Doctor Who story. When a reliable news source such as Variety, Hollywood Reporter, The Associated Press, or The New York Times reports it (as fact and not simply citing the tabloids), then it can be added to this article. Until then, it is only tabloid rumor. --From Andoria with Love 19:10, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Per handling of other actors I've removed Locutus from the Additional appearances section. It's not a new character or a recreation of an existing character it's just Picard as a drone. In the end it's still Picard. — Morder (talk) 20:12, October 23, 2009 (UTC)
- Totally didn't see this before I left the comment on your talk page, but as I said there, Riker wasn't Riker when he was hosting the trill from "The Host", even though it was his body. This is almost the same, as in Picard wasn't in control of his actions as Locutus. I'm not sure what other actors have been handled differently in similar cases. - Archduk3:talk 20:27, October 23, 2009 (UTC)
Actually, if you followed all removals before this one you'd know that we only remove when they play a completely different character apart from their standard one (holograms of their standard characters are still new characters). Even if the character's memory is erased or what not they're still the same person. Similar as how we don't have a separate entry for Seven of Nine as a borg drone. There may be actors that still have additional appearances that need to be removed but the issue still stands at only new characters not changed characters. — Morder (talk) 20:37, October 23, 2009 (UTC)
- Picard was considered dead after he was assimilated, and Locutus has a separate article, for good reasons. We do still have separate entries for some, mainly in the Voyager cast. When was it decided to remove the other ones? I definitely want to read that discussion, as Seven is the exception rather that the rule IMO. - Archduk3:talk 21:21, October 23, 2009 (UTC)
- I have to admit I'm on the fence on that one, but the deciding factor to me would be Kurn wanted to be Rodek. Picard didn't want to be Locutus, a different personality was forced one him, which makes the difference. An outside force was controlling the body, as opposed to a person just acting without their memory. - Archduk3:talk 01:24, October 24, 2009 (UTC)
Depends on your point of view. You could say that Kurn had no real choice in becoming Rodek else he would die, thus it was also forced upon him. The actor didn't play a new character in either case, they played an altered one, whereas other examples they played a completely different character. Looking at it that way it's harder to debate the finer points (such as memory loss or forced change) and makes the lists consistent otherwise what's to say that we don't put kirk as Kirok just because he lost his memory. Similar situations in all but the end result is Rodek is not a new character, Locutus is not a new character and Kirk as Kirok is not a new character. They're all the same with some memory loss :) (though picard didn't lose his memory just had his control taken away) — Morder (talk) 01:32, October 24, 2009 (UTC)
And before you say it - I would remove Sargon, Janice and the other one from Kirk's listing as well since they follow the same pattern - but I'll wait until this discussion is over. If you really feel that the policy is wrong we should discuss it in the forums. — Morder (talk) 01:35, October 24, 2009 (UTC)
- To the forums then! :) I just feel there is a big difference between a knock on the head or a memory wipe and something else controlling the character. Also, Kurn actually would have preferred death, he was honor bound to accept the memory wipe, but wasn't forced. - Archduk3:talk 02:20, October 24, 2009 (UTC)
Bp pointed out this list as a source stating that Stewart is still an OBE. However, that list shows the title he was holding at the time he was announced for knighthood. If you'll notice, no one on that list has the title of "KBE;" that's because if no one on that list had the title yet. That's why they were being knighted. If they already had that title, they would not be on the list... because they were already knighted. :) Now that Stewart has been knighted, he officially holds the title of KBE. --From Andoria with Love 20:15, December 31, 2009 (UTC)
- Oh really. --bp 20:20, December 31, 2009 (UTC)
Actually, people on Wikipedia are saying that Knight Bachelor does not replace OBE... even though KBE, I think, stands for Knight Bachelor of the British Empire, yes? --From Andoria with Love 20:30, December 31, 2009 (UTC)
- Nevermind, it stands for Knight Commander of the British Empire (k = Knight, B.E. = British Empire). I got confused. I think he's still an OBE, after all. --From Andoria with Love 20:31, December 31, 2009 (UTC)
- To quote Wikipedia--If one is appointed to a higher class within the order, one must return one's existing insignia in exchange for the more senior one, and cease using the junior post-nominal letters. Some people, however, have been appointed to both divisions, such as Dame Kelly Holmes, who has been appointed an MBE in the military division and a DBE in the civil division, and is therefore known as "Dame Kelly Holmes, DBE, MBE (Mil.)". Based on this, he would only be both a KBE and an OBE if he was appointed from two seperate divisions. I think it's safe to say this isn't the case and he is now a KBE and no longer an OBE as KBE is the more sernior rank. The ranking from lowest to highest is MBE (Member), OBE (Officer), CBE (Commander), KBE (Knight Commander), GBE (Knight Grand Cross). --Bapaveza 22:25, December 31, 2009 (UTC)
- I've got a better idea. How about we stop taking this Original Research approach, depending on one of us being an expert in the knighthood and title system, and instead find a reliable resource printed after the knighthood ceremony that gives his title and rank? --OuroborosCobra talk 22:35, December 31, 2009 (UTC)
- I'd remind everyone that looking at Wikipedia, ATM, for his title or what his title will be may not be accurate. If he is due to be knighted on New Years 2010, then it hasn't happened yet, and his old title still applies. Even in the UK, it is still 2009. --OuroborosCobra talk 22:45, December 31, 2009 (UTC)
Even after he is knighted, he still won't hold the title of KBE. A KBE is the insignia given to a Knight Commander of the British Empire (KBE). It has been confirmed that Stewart is becoming a Knight Bachelor, which is a different class than Knight Commander. Currently, Stewart is OBE. Once he becomes a Knight Bachelor, he will be Sir Patrick Stewart, OBE. If he were to be knighted as a Knight Commander, only then would he become Sir Patrick Stewart, KBE. There are many sources explaining this, you just need to look (those in the reference/external links sections of the Wikipedia articles are tremendous help). To quote this page from the Honour System's official site: "The appointment of Knight Bachelor (to men only) originates from the medieval period and recipients are called 'Sir' but have no post nominal letters." --From Andoria with Love
- It still strikes me as original research. Great, we found a document that talks about the knighthood system, and we're interpreting/researching it to how it applies to Stewart. Why don't we just get some article that talks about Stewart specifically, and his title? You know, the same standard we'd apply to any other article on this website? --OuroborosCobra talk 07:45, January 1, 2010 (UTC)
Cobra, original research means to produce new knowledge rather than presenting existing knowledge in a sourced form. This has nothing to do with original research; I think maybe you mean some other term. Anyway, my purpose here is to provide sourced information for what Stewart's title is, which I did above. Based on what the organization handing out the honours says (as provided in the link source above), Stewart is now Sir Patrick Stewart, OBE. And it doesn't get more official than the officials. :) --From Andoria with Love 10:16, January 1, 2010 (UTC)
- You are presenting new knowledge rather then presenting existing knowledge in a sourced form. You are presenting the new knowledge of "Patrick Stewart's title is OBE," which is not in your source, which doesn't mention Patrick Stewart. That's called original research. If this were an article just on the kighthood system, that would represent a valid and final source, but this isn't. You aren't making a claim about the system at large, you are saying "this is Patrick Stewart's title, based on my own research of the system." Not based on a source actually saying "this is Patrick Stewart's title." I can't imagine that there isn't a source out there. --OuroborosCobra talk 10:42, January 2, 2010 (UTC)
Fortunately, we also have this. :) If the officials say that a knight bachelor becomes sir without a new nominal letters, then facts and common sense dictate that Patrick Stewart is now Sir Patrick Stewart, OBE. After all, 2 + 2 without a source specifying it still equals 4. However, we do have sources like this, which states him to be "Sir" and an OBE. You'll be hard-pressed to find a valid, non-encyclopedic source which states his full name and title ("Sir Patrick Stewart, OBE"), which is why we don't need such a source. Also, I still don't believe this constitutes original research, but then again that concept has been known to be interpreted in different ways. --From Andoria with Love 23:22, January 2, 2010 (UTC)
- Apparently it isn't hard, you found a source, the BBC article. Was that so hard? --OuroborosCobra talk 00:04, January 3, 2010 (UTC)
Not at all, it was provided by Wikipedia. :) I was just a little confused as to how "direct" (for lack of a better term) you wanted the reference to be. If that makes sense. If it doesn't, I can try better explaining on IRC sometime, I think we're clogging up this talk page a bit too much. ;) --From Andoria with Love 04:07, January 3, 2010 (UTC)
Lonely Among Us Edit
In "Lonely Among Us", Picard found himself under the thrall of the Beta Renner cloud. Under this influence, the ship was in jeopardy. There are none to be found on Memory Alpha, but there should be in Stewart's image gallery, a photo of Picard under the cloud's control.--Jared Paul Baratta 03:30, February 20, 2011 (UTC)
Full Name? Edit
Was looking at his Wikipedia page's talk section. Someone there claims that "Hewes" is not part of his name, and claims they got this info from Stewart himself. It's not otherwise cited so I don't want to change based just on that. But does anyone have a reliable source of his full name? Todd0419 (talk) 12:40, January 10, 2013 (UTC)
- I went and looked at the Honours List when Sir Patrick was awarded his knighthood, as I figured that was about as reliable a source as you could get. It can be found at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/31_12_09_queenslist.pdf - note that people are listed by their full name, including middle names. Sir Patrick is simply "Patrick Stewart, OBE". I think that justifies removing it from the lead. If the reason behind "Hewes" is true (as given on the Wikipedia talk page), and can be cited, it can be added back into the article. -- Michael Warren | Talk 15:57, January 10, 2013 (UTC)
Additional characters Edit
I was wondering. Actually, Locutus of Borg IS Jean-Luc Picard just known under a different name. I think Locutus should not be listed under the additional characters section because it is Picard. Tom (talk) 18:13, March 29, 2013 (UTC)