Talk:Star Trek: Discovery

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Star Trek: Discovery article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2: 2 months

view · edit

Frequently asked questions

Q1: Why isn't there any negative criticism or mention of the fan backlash?

A1: Wikipedia policy requires that all material be verifiable to reliable, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. Additionally, sources must be reliable for the topic at hand and their viewpoints must be given appropriate weight in proportion to their prominence among all others. The article reflects the viewpoints represented in reliable sources.

Q2: Why aren't user reviews or audience ratings used?

A2: Content from websites whose content is largely user-generated is generally unacceptable. User reviews are user-generated content. And although review aggregators (such as Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic) may be reliable when summarizing experts, the ratings and opinions of their users are not.

Star Trek Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Star Trek, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to all Star Trek-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Star TrekWikipedia:WikiProject Star TrekTemplate:WikiProject Star TrekStar Trek
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Television Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Science Fiction Mid‑importance

	Speculative fiction portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Television Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Television portal This article is supported by American television task force.

Canada: Ontario / Toronto / Television Low‑importance

Canada
portal

WikiProject
Canada

Canada
notice board

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by WikiProject Ontario.

This article is supported by WikiProject Toronto.

This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian television.

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened:

September 24 to 30, 2017 (3rd)

Spore drive on peer review

Hi,

If anyone has the time or interest, I would love to take Spore drive that I created to GA and then FA status. I was expecting when I began to have enough material for a small article, and was blown away but the scope of what I found (and I still have an entire book of academic essays on DISCO to get through).

If interested:

Wikipedia:Peer review/Spore drive/archive1

Thanks! -- Very Polite Person (talk) 23:20, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Talk:List of Star Trek: Discovery episodes#Merge or keep?

I have started a discussion at Talk:List of Star Trek: Discovery episodes#Merge or keep? about how to handle that list. Any thoughts on this would be appreciated. Thanks, adamstom97 (talk) 18:47, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

criticism

where is the critical reception by the fans? DIS was torn apart by fans of classic trek die to its weak writing and acting, also because of its controversial retconning of e.g. the klingons and unfitting technological issues compared to TOS. Where did that Go? i remember thus article to mention that. Now it feels like advertisement. KhlavKhalash (talk) 14:38, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

By SOME fans.. not by all..or even most.. and this is an encyclopedia article about the history of the show not a blog for people to complain about it. Spanneraol (talk) 14:52, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the FAQs at the top of the page. - adamstom97 (talk) 16:04, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Quote box

@Joeyconnick: the quote box template is clearly used much more widely than the documentation (which was written many years ago) suggests. Looking through the history it appears that the main concerns with it are related to pull quotes, which is not how it is being used here. It's use here aligns with the usage described in the documentation: For actual quotes, and poems, this template (a variant of {{Quote frame}}) can be used to present a title, quote, author, and source in a box... This is useful in articles that are short on images and need some graphic-like element, or where an important or interesting quote wants to be presented in a way that sets it off from the surrounding text. The quote does not need to be integrated with the text as you did in your edit, it is intended to be in addition to the text and an illustrative element of the article like an image, chart, or framed external link. Again, the template documentation may discourage use in articles but it doesn't actually say not to do it and it is a widely accepted practice. I'm not saying we should do it because other articles do it, but I am saying that the larger number of articles using this template show that there is a big gap between the documentation wording and the reality of how this template gets used. - adamstom97 (talk) 22:56, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]