Talk:First Battle of Deep Space 9

FA nomination (02 Oct - 08 Oct 2004, Success)
First Battle of Deep Space 9. Self-nomination. --EtaPiscium 08:18, 2 Oct 2004 (CEST)
 * Seconded. --BlueMars 13:50, Oct 2, 2004 (CEST)

Renomination while still an FA (23 June 2005)
First Battle of Deep Space Nine Another well writen good detailed artcile about a relevent topic. Tobyk777 June 23, 2005
 * Forgive me if I'm wrong, but are both of those not already featured articles? -AJHalliwell 19:06, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * They are. Tough Little Ship 19:07, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Renomination while still an FA (25 June 2005)
First Battle of Deep Space Nine: It's interesting, important to Trek and well writen. It's also one of the coolest scenes of DS9 Tobyk777 25 June 2005

Defiant in First Battle of DS9
Anyone know why the Defiant is absent from the First Battle of DS9 (in Way of the Warrior)? -- Jaz talk |undefined 04:33, 15 February 2007 (UTC)


 * According to the First Battle of Deep Space 9 article, the cloaking-device-equipped Defiant had been sent to rendevous with Dukat (who was with the Detapa Council) and so was away from the station when the battle began. --TommyRaiko 12:39, 15 February 2007 (UTC)


 * The battle did not begin until they got back to Deep Space Nine. If you remember from watching, the staff, including Worf and Sisko, were on the Defiant when they went to get the Detapa Council. They returned to a station surrounded by a Klingon fleet. It was then that the battle began. --OuroborosCobra talk 12:57, 15 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Actually, when the Defiant went to rescue the Detapa Council, they were followed back by Klingons and Sisko hailed DS9 and told them that "We've got company." The battle began when the Defiant arrived and docked at DS9 and the Klingons warped in. – Mattmitchell37 16:21, 11 April 2007 (UTC)


 * The Defiant had taken quite a bit of damage as well, losing it's Abalative Armor. – Jono R 13:04, 31 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Considering things, if I was on DS9 and found out that the fleet's most powerful (then) ship was being follwed by a fleet of Klingon ships, I would personally piss my pants. I know that the Federation could possible kick their asses but Klingons are just really, really determined when they put their minds to it.  If the Defiant was lost, I doubt DS9 would have been ours still, even with the new defenses.

--Phaseman22 15:58, April 26, 2010 (UTC)

Content
The article on the Federation-Klingon War (2372-73) says it opened with, not this battle.


 * True. THis was really more the start of the Cold War before the actual war began. --OuroborosCobra talk 02:58, 7 March 2007 (UTC)


 * It's been a while since I've seen Season 4, but did enough stuff happen to justify a Federation-Klingon Cold War article (something similar to the Federation-Dominion Cold War)? The only Klingon episodes I'm aware of are and .  Reignfire 22:37, 8 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I meant "Second Federation-Klingon Cold War". Reignfire 22:39, 8 March 2007 (UTC)


 * There was an uneasy Cease fire created after this battle that was broken in, the war started in force in that episode another cease fire established in  and all hostilities ended in  with the reinstation of the Khitomer Accords. – Jono R 13:18, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Title of article canon?
Is there an episode that actually uses this term? And why would this be given preference as the "first" battle of Deep Space 9 over the initial, nearly-successful attempt of the Cardassians to retake the station in ?  Czech Out  ☎ | ✍  07:44, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, for one, the other incident wasn't significant enough to even warrant an article on MA (although that could be changed). In significance, it was what, three warships against a practically unarmed station? In addition, it lasted all of 10 minutes, with nothing much in the way of lasting ramifications. The same cannot be said of the battle with the Klingons. --OuroborosCobra talk 07:49, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * That still doesn't make this title canon. --Alan 14:06, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

pna-unformatted
Ep references at bottom of page should really be integrated into the article, so as to not keep the reader guessing where the info is coming from. --Alan del Beccio 00:43, 28 January 2008 (UTC)