Talk:Operation -- Annihilate! (episode)

Proposed Move
The name of this episode, per my DVD copy, is "Operation -- Annihilate!" (i.e. with two dashes between the words, and an exclamation mark at the end. I propose changing the name to this, but after jumping the gun on another page, I figured I'd post this proposal here for around a week or so, to see if anyone has anything to say about it.  To clarify: This page would remain as a redirect. -- Balok 02:50, 6 Jan 2005 (CET)

You're right, the correct title would be. I agree with the proposed move. -- Cid Highwind 15:23, 2005 Jan 6 (CET)


 * However, this version would make a useful redirect. -- Captain Mike K. Bartel
 * That was my plan. (Edited above) -- Balok 04:31, 7 Jan 2005 (CET)

Page moved. Feel free to help with correcting all these (1, 2) links. -- Cid Highwind 00:04, 2005 Jan 20 (CET)
 * All done. -- Michael Warren | Talk 00:22, Jan 20, 2005 (CET)

Techically, wouldn't the correct punctuation be an "n dash"? ie. Operation – Annihilate! --Proudhug 22:27, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Engaging Warp Drive in Star System
In reference to the warp drive being engaged inside a star system, this appears to occur more than once in the series. Scotty even mentions 'warping out of orbit' in the briefing room scene in "The Naked Time". There are other examples. OS-Trek 14:29, 1 Nov 2005 (UTC)


 * There is an even better example. In ST IV: The Voyage Home, the Klingon Bird of Prey's warp drives are activated while still inside the Earth's atmosphere. Redwood Elf 02:48, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Brother Nonsense
I find the very long "debate," disguised as a trivia entry, concerning Kirk's brother to be next-to-worthless. Did it really anger Trek fans? Please! I vote to delete the damn thing and the follow-up bit about "Whom Gods Destroy." Sir Rhosis 22:36, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

There is too much trivia, and a lot of it isn't any good. Like the amazon ISBN number. I think that that one, the debate, and several other trivia facts should be deleted. Mr.gn 04:10, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Background Cleanup
I cleaned up the background a bit. I removed some notes in the process. I removed the following note, because I agree with the previous posters that it should not be in the article. We don't log what "some fans" think or thought:
 * The 1989 movie angered some Trek fans when Kirk, toward the end of the film, states: "I lost a brother once. But I was lucky I got him back." This was an obvious nod to Spock, not to Sam, and some fans felt Shatner didn't even remember the storyline of the series (Shatner directed and co-wrote the story for STV). Still, others argued that Kirk was simply referencing the fact that Spock was indeed one of his 'two' brothers, and it was Spock who was 'resurrected.' Nevertheless, some fans believe that it may have been more appropriate if, in the film, he said something to the effect of "I lost both my brothers. But I got one back," and indeed, the comic adaptation of the movie does just that. On the other hand, in {{{e|Whom Gods Destroy}}, Kirk clearly says that he and Mr. Spock are brothers — and Spock agrees with him.

I removed the following because it is incredibly trivial, or is better placed in other articles:
 * This was the last episode of the first season of TOS. It is also the only episode with an exclamation point or dash in the title.
 * It is mentioned that there are 14 science labs aboard Enterprise.

I removed the following for being nitpicks:
 * Light and heat are forms of radiation. There is a little contradiction in saying that radiation did not affect the neural parasites.
 * This episode features the Enterprise not only going to warp 8 while in a star system, but on a course directly for the system's sun. The portion of the scene indicating that the outer hull was at over 1000 degrees was in error, as a ship traveling at warp 8, close enough to have that hull temperature, and heading directly at a star, would have collided with the star in far less time than is shown on screen.  It is doubtful, if the hull temperature had increased any appreciable amount due to the star's radiation, that there would be time to avoid a collision with the star.

I removed the following for being commentary, not background:
 * It is a bit illogical that Kirk gets so angry at McCoy for Spock's blindness. It was Kirk, after all, who was pushing for an immediate test to drive the creature from Spock's body.

I removed the following after a discussion of the blooper reel for this ep, because it is barely related to this episode:
 * In the second season blooper reel, Gene Roddenberry is seen at the top of the stairs used in this episode, while dialogue from "Patterns of Force" recites, "Hail to the Fuhrer."

I removed the following because it's already noted in cast information:
 * William Shatner "played" the body of his dead brother.

– Cleanse 00:57, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Sunburn
Should something be said about the fact that Spock would have probably suffered a severe sunburn and blasting the planet with UV light would have given the population sunburn? - Starfield 04:34, December 17, 2009 (UTC)
 * No, because this wasn't shown to happen. --OuroborosCobra talk 04:39, December 17, 2009 (UTC)
 * That they didn't suffer severe sunburn was shown to happen. - Starfield 16:18, December 17, 2009 (UTC)
 * If we stated everything that didn't happen in an episode, it would quickly overwhelm the episode pages. Unless some comment was made on it, it should not be mentioned.--31dot 16:19, December 17, 2009 (UTC)

move?
shouldn't this be moved to Operation – Annihilate!?--Shisma 21:31, May 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * Why? Are you saying the "(episode)" should be removed?  For a time the episode pages did lack that, but it became necessary to add "(episode)" to them.--31dot 21:38, May 16, 2010 (UTC)

Where was it filmed?
It's obvious that some of the scenes were filmed outside, does anyone know where?


 * See the first note under "Sets, locations and props". –Cleanse ( talk 08:57, May 23, 2011 (UTC)

Spock's World
The novel is mentioned in the Continuity section, but based on the format of other articles, shouldn't it be referenced as Apocrypha? 184.98.116.48 07:07, March 14, 2012 (UTC)


 * Episode articles are different because they are written as a real-world article. The note adds information to something in the section it is in now, and I don't think we need to create a new section just for one note.--31dot 10:44, March 14, 2012 (UTC)