FA status Edit

FA nomination (June 2004, Success)Edit

Self-nomination. I just finished rewriting the article, and IMO it's a good summary of one of Trek's most personal villains. -- Dan Carlson 20:12, 27 Jun 2004 (CEST)

  • Seconded. Are you the only one writing Featured Article here? :P Ottens 21:54, 27 Jun 2004 (CEST)
  • Seconded, although we should reimplement the sidebar with quickinfo. --BlueMars 00:33, Jun 28, 2004 (CEST)
  • Seconded. I agree with BlueMars. -- Redge 11:22, 28 Jun 2004 (CEST)
    • As I already explained to BlueMars, I removed the sidebar because it was IMO superfluous. All of the information was provided in the first sentence (or at most the first paragraph) of the article. It just wasn't necessary in my eyes. -- Dan Carlson 16:31, 28 Jun 2004 (CEST)

Featured? Edit

Why is this a featured article? I'm not saying it's bad, but it lacks the structure and information prevalent in other featured articles, and doesn't seem to be on the same level as others. - Hayter 16:21, 2 Dec 2005 (UTC)

If you do not feel it should be a featured article, feel free to nominated it at Featured article removal candidates. --From Andoria with Love 00:51, 3 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Ah, thanks for that. - Hayter 13:18, 3 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Was it's status even legitimate? I don't even see where it was added in the page history, and for that matter, I see no votes for it, archived here nor in the nomination archive. --Alan del Beccio 14:17, 3 Dec 2005 (UTC)
If that's the case, then it's been incorrectly designated a featured article since July 26, 2004. There was never a time when it was labeled as a featured article candidate, it just suddenly became a featured article. Apparently the user who labeled it as featured (Redge) liked the article and designated it as featured without nominating it. --From Andoria with Love 05:02, 4 Dec 2005 (UTC)

FA removal (03 Dec - 18 Dec 2006, Success) Edit

Put simply, I don't feel this is good enough to be a featured article. It lacks the clear sectioning used in other featured articles (see William T. Riker), and there is a mix of canon and apocryphal (sic?) data in contrast to the MA practice of including non-canon data at the bottom of a page. Clearly a page on a one movie villain who was only briefly expanded upon cannot be as in depth or elongated as the provided example above, but even featured pages about subjects such as the Cardassian Rebellion - an event which only lasted a few episodes and was never really covered directly (Kira & Damar's shown actions being largely tunnelled), we get a much more convincing layout than what's shown here. And if you think that a subject such as Shinzon simply cannot be detailed as much as this because there is simply less data, it seems clear that the article cannot be considered to be on the same level of quality. - Hayter 13:40, 3 Dec 2005 (UTC)

I agree with you, Hayter, it looks like this one slipped through the net when it was put up for featured status. It needs a total overhaul, and probably a peer review before it gets re-assessed for FA status. Zsingaya Talk 14:21, 3 Dec 2005 (UTC)
I support its removal as a featured article. This page has been incorrectly labeled as such since July 26th, 2004, and it was apparently never nominated. And it certainly could use some work before becoming a featured article. --From Andoria with Love 05:05, 4 Dec 2005 (UTC)
Support removal, definetly. --Starchild 05:44, 4 Dec 2005 (UTC)
Support; if for no other reason then because it wasn't voted on prior to featuring it. (I haven't seen the movie so can't judge its accuracy and such.) Sloan 05:53, 4 Dec 2005 (UTC)
Support FA removal. Seems not to have been discussed before, and was edited considerably after. -- Cid Highwind 12:31, 4 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Shinzon is NOT Chinese Edit

And even if it were, it has absolutely NO relation to what "Moon Warrior" would mean in Chinese, the closest approximation being "月士", yueshi. Who claimed that it was derived from Chinese, and what was the source?

Although I cannot answer your questions, I found this on Wikipedia: ""Shinzon" is a variant, non-standard romanization of the word xinzang (心臟), meaning "heart" in Mandarin Chinese." - Enzo Aquarius 23:58, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
I think it really is Mandarin. But they may say it is Reman or Romulan.--Windu223 20:00, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
The note still lacks a source, and has thus been removed. Here it is for the record:
  • The name "Shinzon," and the other Reman and Romulan names in this film are based on ancient Chinese names, in homage to Gene Roddenberry's ideas that the Romulans were representative of 1960s communist China. The name "Shinzon" is an allusion to the Chinese words "Shen" meaning "Warrior" and "Zhan" meaning "Moon"; therefore Shinzon means "Warrior of the Moon."
Cleanse ( talk | contribs ) 03:49, September 4, 2010 (UTC)
The Klingons were supposed to the Roddenberry's representation of Communist China... --OuroborosCobra talk 03:57, September 4, 2010 (UTC)

Assasination of Senate Edit

Was it ever confermed that shinzon assasinated the romulan senate with Thaleron? it could be an intirely different type of radiation, with the same time of emitter that was on the Scemitar

It wasn't stated in dialogue, but the two weapons and the energy emitted were of the same design and function; the weapon opened the same way, the radiation glowed the same color, etc. This is to let the viewer know that the weapon being deployed at the end of the film was the same as the one deployed at the beginning of the film, and that it is, indeed, not a good thing for the Enterprise crew to come into contact with. --From Andoria with Love 04:43, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Shinzon's Age Edit

In the Background section of the article it states that Shinzon was probably created no earlier than 2364. But this seems unlikely since Nemesis took place in 2379 and Shinzon would have only been about 15. And he would have been 11 by the end of the Dominion War (which he also fought in and gained rank during; I doubt the Romulans would have promoted an 11 year old human). He must have been created earlier than 2364. And it couldn't be that his Temporal DNA was making him seem older because that didn't become active until near the end of Nemesis when he started dying. Any thoughts/ideas?

I would feel uncomfortable with both putting a date to his "creation", and implying that his "temporal DNA" (~groan~) couldn't have had a hand in premature aging since his inception. In the end, it was a bad movie... so we have to simply focus on what MA does best. Canon information. If there was no reference to when he could have been created, that notation *must* be removed. – Hossrex 01:02, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Shinzon was created in 2348 after a Romulan agent named Manathas, present at the wedding of Starfleet officers Beverly Howard and Jack Crusher, managed to acquire genetic material from Picard and three other Starfleet captains.-- 22:44, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
That's got to be non-canon. --OuroborosCobra talk 22:47, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Rise to Power Edit

How much of this section is actually canon? I haven't seen "Nemesis" in a while, but I don't remember any mention of Shinzon fighting in the Dominion war. Is this actually from the film, or from a book? DaveS86 15:25, March 27, 2011 (UTC)

Data talked about Shinzon's War record, obtained from Starfleet Intelligence. The one part I don't recall right now is the mention of him being "a great tactician".--31dot 15:27, March 27, 2011 (UTC)
I just watched "Nemesis" over again, it's all in there. It's talked about in Data's briefing, and in the meeting of the Romulan Senate.DaveS86 12:38, April 1, 2011 (UTC)

Shinzon, RemanEdit

Shinzon considers himself Reman even though he is genetically Human; therefore, he belongs in both categories. Dkendr (talk) 20:42, October 30, 2012 (UTC)

The species categories are not for what people "consider themselves", they are for what they are. 31dot (talk) 00:29, October 31, 2012 (UTC)

Family relationships Edit

since Captain Picard had a brother and nephew is it save to say that they were shinzon's brother and nephew toCaptain Stephen Avril (talk) 20:05, January 26, 2014 (UTC)

I think there's more to family relationships than just genetics. In any useful sense of the word, Shinzon never was "an uncle" to René Picard for example, so it wouldn't make much sense to list this as such. The fact that Shinzon is a clone and thus shares a genetic makeup with Jean-Luc Picard (and, in extension, his family) is pretty much spelled out and anyone interested could just visit the Picard article for more information. -- Cid Highwind (talk) 08:51, January 27, 2014 (UTC)