Jump to content

Talk:Balance of Terror

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by HistoryBuff14 (talk | contribs) at 15:03, 5 April 2016 (replyR). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Untitled

Wasn't "balance of terror" a phrase used to describe the nuclear standoff of the Cold War/the policy adopted by the US and USSR in maintaing huge nuclear arsenals to ensure no one had the upper hand (thereby ensuring peace)? If I am right (and I may well be wrong), should we disambiguate, or place a note at the top directing someone to Balance of terror (policy). Or should we wait until I or someone else writes such an article? Any thoughts? Jwrosenzweig 21:35, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)

That would be balance of terror (which there is one link to). I odn't think disambiguating by case is so bad here. Morwen 21:37, Dec 17, 2003 (UTC)
So, if I search "balance of terror" on Google, could I end up at this site first? And end up deciding to go elsewhere? How could we steer someone who accidentally ended up at the wrong article? Jwrosenzweig 21:40, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Well, if you do search today; you get star trek as hit 2, 4, 5. :) Maybe a small disambig note at the top of this page. Morwen 21:44, Dec 17, 2003 (UTC)
I think the more common term for the RW state of affairs would have been mutually assured destruction. - knoodelhed 21:46, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)
I think I'm well read on this topic and I've never heard the phrase "balance of terror". Can we source the use of this phrase, please? We don't want to be the ones to create new phrases here. Thanks. Rossami 22:45, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)
http://www.rand.org/publications/classics/wohlstetter/P1472/P1472.html, #1 hit on google. Morwen 22:46, Dec 17, 2003 (UTC)

I don't know how to edit the sidebar; The Romulan Commander doesn't "antagonize" over Captain Kirk's tactical ability, he agonizes. Can somebody correct this? Thanks. Clarityfiend 03:06, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Remastered version

Just want to document a bit more some edits I just made to the bullet point about this being the first episode of the remastered Trek. It was the first (in most markets) to air, but do we have any source that it was the first actually to be remastered, as the sentence implied before my edit? Also, it stated that it was airing in HDTV, but from what I've been reading, the episodes were produced in HD but are currently being broadcast in SD. [1] -- Hawaiian717 06:55, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rand

Should mention maybe that in original running order this was the last ep in which Yeoman Rand appeared.Captain Pedant (talk) 21:41, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Trivia? Alastairward (talk) 21:49, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hard to tell; the article for the previous episode ("The Conscience of the King")indicates that her walk-on there was her final filmed scene, so her appearance here has to do with filming vs. broadcast order. It's a bit odd to watch the previous episode, read the article on it (with the aforementioned blurb), and then watch the next one and go, "why's Rand there?" MSJapan (talk) 04:33, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Episode brings to mind a WW II movie. Title?

This episode strongly reminds me of a WWII movie at sea in which an American destroyer captain plays a cat and mouse game with a German captain of a U-boat. Just as with this episode, both commanders engender a mutual respect for the other. Does anyone recall the title of this movie? Also, did the Star Trek writer ever acknowledge being influenced by it? Thanks.HistoryBuff14 (talk) 00:18, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@HistoryBuff14: That would be The Enemy Below from 1957. ScrpIronIV 21:35, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much!!HistoryBuff14 (talk) 15:03, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]