If the captain is referred to as a "he" then I suggest that:
- A: the article shouldn't refer to Demora Sulu as a possible candidate, and certainly not give equal weight to the possibility that she is the captain as it does to the possibility that it is Hikaru Sulu. Regardless of what the expanded universe says, in canon the possibility that Chakotay should refer to her as a "he" is very remote.
- and B: With Demora out of the equation, little doubt remains that this was a deliberate reference to Hikaru Sulu, and thus the article should probably be merged into the Sulu article.
Right now the article is severely warped towards the possibility that Demora is the captain here, for the sole purpose of accommodating something that is non-canon and thus should not be acknowledged by MA. (not to mention that I can only guess the explanation would have to be highly contrived and considered a retcon) -- Capricorn 15:16, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
- You're right, it is most likely a reference to Hikaru Sulu and that was likely the Sulu the writers meant. We should have a source stating that fact, though, before a merge can take place. --From Andoria with Love 16:20, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
- The solution is not to proceed with a merge, the solution is to clean up the note about Demora. --TribbleFurSuit 16:40, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
- Well, I take it back: there's no reason that apocryphal info should be removed from what's clearly a Background note. --TribbleFurSuit 16:42, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm not saying there shouldn't be a background note, just that it should be rewritten. The way it is now it extensively argues that the captain might be either hikaru (male) or Demora (female), before suddenly stating that "oh, and by the way the captain was refered to as a he". I'm going to go forward with rewriting the note to better reflect this, which is the very least that should be done imo. As for merging the article into Sulu, I still think it should be done, it's clear they did not randomly pull a name out of a hat and by pure chance it was the same as a TOS character. But I'm open to counterarguments. @ Shran: Exactly what do you mean, what kind of source do you feel would be required in your opinion? - Capricorn 09:45, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
- No problem with a merge, but I know some non-canon novels have speculated(Jeri Taylor's I think, but not certain) that it was Hikaru's grandson that sponsored Chakotay.--31dot 12:51, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
- Which just goes to show that it's far from clear in canon who Chakotay's sponsor was. In such a state, a merge seems unjustified. I support the re-write that Cap did.
- Cap, the kind of source that Shran means is something along the lines of a screenwriter having said somewhere who "Captain Sulu" was intended to have been. Unfortunately, the credited screenwriter is no longer with us, so unless he already left a record, or another screenwriter was involved but not credited, it doesn't seem like we'll ever be able to ask anyone. --TribbleFurSuit 17:47, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
- RE: Capricorn -- what TribbleFurSuit said. :) Basically, an interview with someone who worked on the show or a mention in a reference book like the Star Trek: Voyager Companion are good sources. As TFS said, though, Michael Piller is no longer alive and he may have been the only one who knew for sure that the reference was supposed to mean Hikaru Sulu and not a great-grandchild or something. If there's an interview out there somewhere where he states his intentions, that would be great. If not, then we may never know unless he told one or more of the producers or a fellow writer or Robert Beltran. --From Andoria with Love 18:59, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
- That seems reasonable. unfortunately I don't have any Voyager reference material at all, but until the time such a quote might surface I now agree the article should stay here. I never even thought of the possibility of a grandson, but it sure is conceivable that Piller did. - Capricorn 12:15, 4 December 2008 (UTC)