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.
- MA files from this episode (23) • MA remastered files from this episode (13)
- Template:Titles/The Defector yields The Defector (TNG 3x10)
For general discussion on this episode, visit the TNG forum at The Trek BBS.
Tomalek was always a good Nemesis, shame the actor isn't around anymore, would have been a good tie in for the movie of the same name--184.108.40.206 01:01, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
- Not to sound heartless or disrespectful, but talk pages isn't really the place for this sort of comment. They are for discussing the content and quality of the article, not for personal commentaries and opinions. --From Andoria with Love 04:51, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
I think it is inaccurate to say this is the first episode of the 1990's, as the 90's did not start until 1991 because there was no year 0. Should that be removed? 31dot 01:59, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
- I don't think you'll find much support for suggesting 1990 was the last year of the 80's.Caducus 15:25, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
- Despite it being true. After all, 2000 is the last year of the 20th century. :)
- Having said that, I'm not even sure if it's something worth stating in any article though. -- Sulfur 15:37, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
- I wouldn't agree that it's true - the 90's is a grouping of years from '90 to '99. It isn't affected by the existence or not of year 0, it's simply a grouping of ten years. Otherwise calling it the 90's makes no sense. Besides which I won't subscribe to either interpretation of when the centuries end without some proof - you can argue for either position. Caducus 15:48, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
- We're not talking about the 200th decade here. The 1990's is an entirely different concept so the year zero is irrelevant.
- It seems rather unlikely that the Enterprise replicators would be unable to reproduce an approximation of Romulan ale, since the beverage was available even in James T. Kirk's time, unless a deliberate decision had been made not to program the replicators to do so because Romulan ale was still illegal within Federation space, or because of Kirk's directive not to serve Romulan ale at official functions (Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country).
Removed the above nitpick. – Morder 07:32, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
- * There is an error in the opening scene, Worf is somehow able to track the Romulan ship even after it is cloaked.
- Maybe at this time Federation sensor technology was improving faster than Romulan cloaking technology.– Cleanse ( talk | contribs ) 00:21, January 6, 2010 (UTC)
Play of the same name? Edit
There's a quote from Michael Piller in Captains' Logs: The Unauthorized Complete Trek Voyages where he discusses Patrick Stewart choosing Henry V for the teaser. He states that "Actually there was a Shakespearean play called 'The Defector,' but it was too unknown for our purposes." (p. 190)
I was going to add this, but I actually can't find any play called "The Defector", Shakespearean or otherwise. Anyone know what Piller was referring to?– Cleanse 01:13, December 8, 2009 (UTC)
- The only Shakespearean thing I can find is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troilus_and_Cressida - where Cressida is a defector but not anything with the same name....— Morder (talk) 01:21, December 8, 2009 (UTC)
I removed the following note, as it has lacked citation for awhile. While it is well-known that "The Child" and "Devil's Due" were rewrites of Phase II episodes, I can't find any citation that "The Defector" was, rather than just a similar story.
- Like "The Child" and "Devil's Due", this episode was also a re-write of an episode from the failed Star Trek: Phase II series. In that version (Kitumba), the defector was to be a Klingon.