Talk:Beverly Crusher

Names of parents

I'm curious as to where the names of her parents come from. -Branddobbe 22:18, Feb 19, 2004 (UTC)

I found them in the Star Trek Chronology. It says in there that they were shown on a computer screen for a moment in the TNG episode "Conundrum". -- Djinn112 22:56, Feb 19, 2004 (UTC)

Huh. OK. -Branddobbe 00:02, Feb 20, 2004 (UTC)

renamed

Can't this page be renamed in Beverly Crusher (Star Trek) ? is there an articles naming policy

I don't see why it should be. Is there someone else named Beverly Crusher that is more notable? -- Plutor 17:56, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Quotes

I removed this section. "Quotes" is a bit vague -- certainly this isn't an exhaustive list of all her quotes. What're the criteria for inclusion? It looks like this might more aptly be called "Memorable" quotes or "WP:ILIKEIT quotes" -- but that's subjective/non-NPOV. "Notable" quotes would be more significant, but lacking a citation about what makes them memorable, that doesn't work either. Lastly, straight-up quotes should be over in Wikiquote. If someone wants to move them over there, by all means... --EEMeltonIV 11:43, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Shortened

Last time I read this artical, it was signifigantly longer than this. Who got rid of half the stuff? Alot of it was about her bio and relationships. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TwistedRed (talk • contribs) 02:11, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Slash

"In het slash fanfics, fans often pair Beverly Crusher with Jean-Luc Picard."

Um. Who ever wrote this doesb't know much about fan fiction terms. Slash means same-sex pairings. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.132.112.167 (talk) 03:49, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

>>Originally in the Trek fandom, "slash" denoted any romantic/sexual pairing. However, since at this stage "slash" is firmly considered to apply to same sex pairings, and since the "slash" page on wiki reflects this, I've changed the appropriate section of the entry. 89.125.85.190 02:45, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Assessment

I have added a quality assessment rating and importance rating to this article. Feel free to change them as the article improves! Also, feel free to add more issues to the list below, and strike them out (strike) when they're completed. — OranL (talk) 20:28, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Notable issues

• Article's lead needs to be a summary of the article. The current lead includes trivia-type information that needs to be incorporated into the main article and then summarized in the lead.
• Some good, real-world information is included, but it is unreferenced. There are some {{fact}} tags pointing to statements that need verifiable sources.
• Current references need cleanup. Here's a guide: Wikipedia: Citing sources

Conflict of interest?

I looked through the edit history and don't see any usernames that are suspicious. What's the conflict of interest? -Mike Payne (T • C) 05:35, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

I am removing this COI tag. When editors add tags, they are supposed to explain on the talk page why. travb (talk) 04:18, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Can someone please re-write the 6th paragraph of the "Character Information" section

Come on, just read this...

"Beverly and the Enterprise captain, Jean-Luc Picard, used to know each other when Jack was alive, but after Jack's death, they fell out of touch, so it is the first time they see each other when the series starts, as Picard was good friends with Jack Crusher. Picard has been in love with her for some time, but he shielded his feelings very well from perceptive Beverly, so she had little idea of his infatuation with her. It is evident she returns his feelings for the first time during the show's run. As the series progresses, the two become closer, starting with the first season episode "The Naked Now". Their relationship is further developed in "Attached", when the two are linked telepathically. This leads them to discover that they do have feelings for each other. They decide somewhat hesitantly not to pursue these feelings, to save potentially harming their close friendship, and sensitive Beverly is fearful of rushing into another relationship. However, now that they have both acknowledged them, it seems likely that the issue will be addressed at some point in the characters' futures."

It's not written at all in a style befitting an encyclopedia (both in content and grammar). Too many run-on-sentences and fan bias descriptions.

Edited. I agree, that was way too in universe and non-encyclopaedic. Hope it reads better now. Josh 01:47, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

List of Episodes

There should be a list of episodes the character appears in STNG. Does she have a role in every one? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.203.109.88 (talk) 10:47, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

In-universe style

Someone reverted a recent change to tag the article as in-universe style, which it very much is. Please do not remove the tag without correcting the issue. Please see the manual of style about covering fiction for how to resolve the issue, and what's considered encyclopedic. The tag should not be removed until there is consensus in the talk page that the issue has been fixed.

In particular, the article is mostly an egregious example of fictography, which explicitly called out as prohibited in the style guide. The guide describes fictography:

A character description that is written like a biography, placing undue emphasis on fictional traits (titles, birthdates, etc.) that are unimportant to the plot or interpretation thereof. For example, instead of introducing the character as: "Gandalf was a powerful wizard", write: "Gandalf is characterised as a powerful wizard", or: "Gandalf is a wizard who appears within the works of J. R. R. Tolkien".

The problem quite pervasive in the article, so this will likely not be a quick fix. If there are other articles that are similar, that does not justify the problem here— those articles likely need in-universe tags as well.

Timrb (talk) 22:07, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Again, this article mirrors other entries of fictional characters in works of fiction. Placing a tag on an article and warning people not to remove it without consensus does not make your case any more "right." I'm very glad you provided the quote from Wikipedia about JRR Tolkein. A quick glance at Frodo Baggins shows almost an identical use of style. If you are going to describe the life of a fictional character, it is going to, at most times, resemble the biography of a real person. To begin each sentence with "BTW, this person is fictitious" is both monotonous and redundant. A good lead should indicate that a character is from a fictional universe, which this article, all Star Trek character articles, and Mr Baggins himself all do. I am reverting this tag. If you truly want a consensus on this, I encourage you to create a new section at talk:WikiProject_Star_Trek. You may also wish to create a sandbox of the Beverly Crusher article and edit it to show examples of how you think these articles should/could be better written. StarHOG (Talk) 12:59, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Please read the style guide on in-universe style. The recommended remedy is not to preface every sentence, and that is not what I suggested and not what the style guide suggests. The Bilbo Baggins article obeys many more principles outlined in the guide (historical present tense; organizing by the creative work in which the events appear, and not in-universe chronology; and many others) which this article does not. The problem has not been corrected, so the tag cannot yet be removed, but you are welcome to take stab at making the corrections. Timrb (talk) 18:27, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

The Next Generation absences

The Child Where Silence Has Lease Elementary, Dear Data The Outrageous Okona Loud As A Whisper The Schizoid Man Unnatural Selection A Matter Of Honor The Measure Of A Man The Dauphin Contagion The Royale Time Squared The Icarus Factor Pen Pals Q Who Samaritan Snare Up The Long Ladder Manhunt The Emissary Peak Performance The Wounded Goojrr (talk) 06:30, 4 January 2024 (UTC)