Talk:Gorn


 * Previous discussions related to the Gorn starship can be found at talk:Gorn starship.

TAS reference
The leader of the council in says that they've all been there for centuries. so it's not entirely unknown how long he had been there. --Dalen 17:16, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Skin
There should be some sort of mention of the toughness of Gorn skin. The Gorn in "Arena" was shot with a diamond gun and it didn't appear to even penetrate. --
 * I thought so too, but check out the part in the scene where Kirk refuses to strike the killing blow: they altered the Gorn costume to include embedded diamonds and blood from the wounds. NokiaTouchscreen 22:55, March 10, 2012 (UTC)

Intelligence
"Humans may tend to underestimate Gorn because of an opinion that reptiles are somehow less evolved than mammals. This would be unwise; the Gorn are at least as intelligent as humans. (TOS: Arena)"

I don't think this is very Trek-like. I don't remember that the whole humans in the 23rd or 24th century pretend reptilians lifeforms are inferiors. And saying that Gorn are intelligent is very useful, as they are a space-faring specie. - Philoust123 14:51, 1 February 2006 (UTC)


 * It appears to be adapted from Kirks line: "Weaponless, I face the creature the Metrons called a Gorn. Large, reptilian. Like most humans, I seem to have an instinctive revulsion to reptiles. I must fight to remember that this is an intelligent, highly advanced individual-- the captain of a starship, like myself, undoubtedly a dangerously clever opponent." --Alan del Beccio 15:20, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

The Silvery Nictitating Membranes
I wrote that Gorn have silvery nictitating membranes which they use in high light-levels. someone reverted that. ¿Does anyone have pictures about Slar blinking? Such a screencapture would resolve the question. — — Ŭalabio 04:03, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * The reason that was reverted was because it's speculation; Recently, alot of speculation was removed from the Gorn page. Nothing has indicated they have this, and I do think he blinked in the episode, but I don't remember perfectly. -AJHalliwell 04:15, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * ¿Do you remember whether Slar has standard eyelids or silvery faceted nictitating membranes when he blinks? I believe that I saw silvery faceted nictitating membranes. — — Ŭalabio 04:41, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * It almost doesn't matter now. The Gorn Captain in (Remastered) with the silvery eyes, blinked his eyes a few times in that episode. His eye lids are as green as his thick leathery skin. If memory serves correct, the CGI Gorn Slar in  also had green eye lids. I believe we have two races of Gorn here. --AC84 08:20, 23 October 2006 (PST)
 * I know this is an old discussion, and I'm glad the speculation stays in the background sections, but I think two species is a bit of a stretch to explain the eyes. Why couldn't the silver eyes just be the Gorn version of contact lenses?  The fingers, I grant you, are a bit different, but varying numbers of digits aren't unheard of, and you'll notice that the original Gorn's fingers are fused together, making three distinct digits in a sort of perpetual Vulcan salute. - Wolff359 04:43, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Homeworld?
Removed from article:
 * There Home world Has two Names Gornniska and S'sgarnon.

Sources, if any? -- Cid Highwind 23:05, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

I can provide at least one source. Gornniska was a name I created for the Gorn home planet for some reference material for an online RPG, located at. The name comes from a unique language I created for the Gorn, combining the word "Gorn" with the word for homeworld, "Sassyaiska". I am constantly amazed at how far my little reference guide, now deleted from the internet, reached before its demise. There are bits and pieces of my original work floating around, but the number of people who picked up and expanded upon it constantly amazes me. As for the second name, I have no idea.--The Rev 23:01, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Gorn in Deep Space Nine
Is there any truth to the rumor that the Gorn were to appear in Deep Space Nine? According to the rumor, they were replaced by the Breen as the villains who help the Dominion. -- Tough Little Ship 12:09, 23 October 2006 (UTC)


 * This is the first I have heard of this? What is the source? --Alan del Beccio 04:47, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I've been researching this for a while, but I can find nothing but a sketch of a Gorn starship. I'm not sure if it was for TNG or DS9. Here is a link to a Trekbbs discussion and the sketch itself. -- Tough Little Ship 19:31, 31 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Looks like a Jim Martin sketch to me - his sketches in The Art of Star Trek look similar, but this isn't one that is reprinted in that book. If it is his work, that would rule out TNG. -- Cid Highwind 19:49, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Liquids
AA new note was added regarding liquids:
 * This in combination of the appearance of a Gorn drinking from a glass in TAS indicates that they consume liquids.

Is this note really necessary? Almost every single species encountered in Trek drinks liquids. I can only think of the Changelings as a counter-example. --OuroborosCobra talk 18:24, 2 January 2007 (UTC)


 * a lot of earth reptiles don't drink liquids. or very little. sand critters for example.


 * I make a mean gin and tonic. This in combination of my drinking from a water-bottle a moment ago indicates that I consume liquids. :-P --From Andoria with Love 10:17, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Tense

 * Moved to Memory Alpha talk:Point of view.

Who was the Gorn?
Any idea who actually was inside the "Arena" Gorn costume walking around? Was it the same actor who played the Horta (Janos Prohaska)? -FleetCaptain 09:16, 27 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Answered my own question: Bobby Clark. -FleetCaptain 09:16, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

(PNA) Bite Pattern
Whoever altered my following correction stop it please: "The mirror universe Dr. Phlox once stated their bite pattern compared to that of the extinct Velociraptor (ENT: "In a Mirror, Darkly, Part II"). However, that is clearly an inaccurate statement since velociraptors' jaws were vastly different in size and dimensions to the Gorn in question."

It's right, quit it. Velociraptors aren't what you see in Jurassic Park people. They were small creatures with 8" or under skulls (about the same length as a human skull), and their jaws were long and concave up, not resembling that Gorn whatsoever.

Someone keeps changing it to something like "Their bite size and radius resembles that of the extinct velociraptor." Not only is that not scientifically right, does Phlox even get that specific in that episode? I thought he just said some general remark about their bite resembling a velociraptor's.

I looked at the history section of the article and someone, whose name I won't mention 'cause I don't want to be rude, changed it and his justification for it was he said that "Phlox only used the raptor as a comparison, he didn't say they were similar". What is the difference between using it as a comparison and saying they're similar? It's the exact same thing. But, even if you didn't think it was the same thing, why would you rather revert the wording back to something completely inaccurate rather than rewording what I said?


 * The second sentence of your "correction" should not be part of the main text, as it seems to break the POV we're using. "Nitpick" information like this should be avoided, and if it needs to be included, it should be done as a background comment or in a separate section. I don't know the exact wording that was used, but a bite pattern could surely be compared to another even if the two have different sizes, right? Seeing that this has already been reverted again - I hope we can avoid temporary protection of the page because of an edit war. Please settle this here, everyone. -- Cid Highwind 09:50, 26 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm just trying to help by saying this... but I think the most important thing to keep in mind is that we're coming from an "in universe" perspective with this quote.  Since this is (I'm fairly certain) the first reference to a Velociraptor in the Star Trek canon, this must (from an "in universe" perspective) because the litmus from which all Velociraptor references are judged.  Star Trek is not our universe.  They share many similarities, and many of the same names/faces pre-1970...  but they are different.  Just because something said on screen doesn't jive with what you know about nature/history/paleontology, that doesn't mean its "wrong" from an "in universe" perspective.  Right?  We're not wikipedia, trying to accurately document human life, and the natural Earth.  This is Memory Alpha, where we document Star Trek canon, which in many more egregious places then this, has contradicted "factual" human experience.  Again...  Just trying to help.  Hossrex 10:10, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I understand your POV about how the Star Trek universe may differ from our own and velociraptors there may be different than ours, but what I would say to that is it is misleading to just say on this page that Gorns' bite patterns are similar to a velociraptor's when that is clearly not right. People will get wrong information about a Gorn's physical characteristics. I do not think my second sentence is "nitpicking". I think it is vital information to understanding the physical characteristics of a Gorn. The bite pattern of that Gorn and a velociraptor is like comparing a lion and a chicken's. If you want to remove my second sentence then you should just remove the entire description about the bite pattern because without the second sentence people will not be getting correct info. If you wanna make a separate section for it then go ahead, but I think that's taking it away from the section that it needs to be in to provide the quickest route to the most accurate info possible for someone just glancing at the page. If you folks wanna settle this then stop reverting back my edit and give me legitimate reasons why it should be changed here. Don't just revert it and say nothing 'cause atleast it is right as it stands now. When you revert it back, it isn't providing factual information.


 * Apparently, I wasn't clear enough. If there's an ongoing content dispute, don't change the article back and forth - instead, take your time actually discussing the disputed content. And, yes, this goes for both sides. The article is now protected for one week. Please use this time to find some consensus about the article text. -- Cid Highwind 11:44, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Apparently you don't know what the heck you're doing. My information was atleast supplying correct info. That junk that's on there now is wrong. Why couldn't you lock my info in while we discussed it? That's just super. Nice job. I'm done with this mess. You folks aint gonna change jack regardless of how much we discuss it. If you folks want inaccurate info then go ahead and bathe in your own ignorance and pride. I come on here a trillion times and make ONE edit on this whole freaking site 'cause I was 100% sure what I was supplying was accurate info and all you folks gotta give me a hard time about it like you're all some kinda Star Trek gods or something. Gimme a break. If this is how you treat other folks then it is a wonder how this site has any articles at all 'cause after this I sure as heck don't care about it anymore.


 * Look... There's one article version that might or might not be factually correct. There's another one that might or might not be factually correct, but definitely has some POV problems. A bunch of people have nothing better to do than to revert and re-revert, even after I politely asked to not do that. Since, in the worst case, the "incorrectness" is minor at best, and has been brought up here for discussion, I chose the version without POV problems for protection. I'll also add a "PNA" tag right now, to make more people aware of this.
 * I'm not saying that you are wrong, and the handful of other guys is right, but stomping your feet and dragging out the edit war won't help anyone. Shelling out insults won't give you any cookie points, either. -- Cid Highwind 12:08, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Cookie points? I aint looking for any handouts and you aren't some superior to me to be lording over me like that and even suggesting a thing. You aren't better than me and I aint better than you.

And, my correction did not have POV problems. If you wanna justify an inaccurate piece of information by saying velociraptors in the mirror Trek universe may be different than those in our universe like that other guy then go ahead. I don't agree with that logic one bit.

Your particular argument was you said they can be "compared" without them being the same sizes. What exactly is the comparison of that Gorn and a velociraptor's bite? The jaws are completely different shapes in addition to the different sizes. I said in my original edit the sizes AND dimensions were wrong, yet the reverted wording keeps saying the SIZE/RADIUS between the two are comparable and that's just totally wrong. You can't come here and say one version "may or may not be wrong" after I've said it's wrong several times now. IT - IS - WRONG! Period! The end! I don't know how much more plainly I can put it.

You just seem like a guy to me that loves a power trip and that's all you're concerned about. I personally think you have a major pride problem and you should really work on that. You're suppose to be an administrator and right now you seem to be making poor decisions while being more concerned with your high horse and taking an argumentative position rather than providing accurate information even when it's clearly presented to you. If you can't make a proper decision then I would suggest alerting another administrator and getting them to take a look at it.


 * I don't know if that occured to you, but by adding the "PNA" (="pages needing attention") template to the article, I alerted not only some other admin, but the whole editing community about a possible problem with this article. Feel free to alert whoever you want to alert on top of that. As I said above, I don't really know which version is more factually correct than the other, and even more screaming and shouting and accusing me of being on some kind of power trip won't change that. -- Cid Highwind 13:44, 26 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Just to chime in here and to defend my edit, there is a difference between comparing things and saying they are similar. Comparisons do not necessarily equate similarity. That said, let's try to come up with a better phrasing that can please everyone rather than arguing about it. Here is the exact line from the episode:
 * Mirror Reed: "Perhaps it was a pet owned by one of the original crew?"
 * Mirror Phlox: "Unless one of them owned a velociraptor, I find it extremely unlikely."
 * Phlox was not saying that the bite radius was the same as a velociraptor... he was being sarcastic (or perhaps sardonic), pointing out that the thing is like a frickin' dinosaur and would not likely be anyone's "pet." He was comparing the Gorn to a dinosaur, specifically a raptor, for the benefit of Reed and the others so they would realize how dangerous this creature is. He did not say the Gorn and the raptor were one and the same. Given that the line was not meant to be taken seriously, though, I'm not even sure it's worth including in the article. If we keep it, though, we could rephrase it to say something like "the Gorn's size and bite radius were such that Phlox sarcastically/sardonically compared it to that of a velociraptor's." Or something. I don't know, I have a head cold so it could probably use work, but it's a start. So have at it. --From Andoria with Love 17:44, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
 * PS: And yes, Mr. Anon, your edit did have POV problems. That much is fact based on our policies. --From Andoria with Love 17:46, 26 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the actual dialogue, Shran... Long story short, we'd still end up with some POV problems (in-universe vs. real-world, mirror vs. "main" universe), and all that for something that wasn't meant seriously in the first place. I'd say, let's throw that whole thing out from where it currently resides, and eventually add a background note about this comparison being made as a joke somewhere else - and, do those changes after protection is lifted again. ;) -- Cid Highwind 18:29, 26 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't think it'd be a POV problem to have it as a background note. We have all sorts of goofy things as background notes (J/K!).  I think this should be a "memorable quote" on the episodes page, and a notation on the Gorn page that MirrorPhlox compared The Gorn species to that of MirrorEarth Dinosaurs.  The velociraptor thing was clearly just so the viewer would be able to think "OH!  Its like those guys from Jurassic Park", but we're still not wikipedia.  We're Memory Alpha.  Wikipedia already exists.  If getting things factually correct is more important to someone then getting them canonically correct, they should be given a polite link to wikipedia, and a suggestion that its purpose could possibly be more in line with their sensibilities.  As far as I know, wikipedia also has articles about Star Trek.  Right?  I think the stuff this Anon was saying would be perfect for that wiki.  Hossrex 22:35, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Hossrex, velociraptors were NOT what you see in Jurassic Park. I've already mentioned that. They were small creatures the size of a goose or something if you don't include their tails which were actually longer than their bodies. So, basically what I am hearing is you all would rather say velociraptors were obviously different in the mirror universe than our own 'cause Phlox alluded so, so let's put that down. Has anyone ever thought that Phlox just made a bad joke and got it wrong? These are my two major complaints with you peoples' new plan. Firstly, you cannot add the part in about "size and radius" because that wasn't even mentioned in the dialogue according to Shran, unless it was mentioned prior to those two lines. That itself goes against your own policies, does it not? Secondly, you cannot just flat out say that it compares to a velociraptor's bite pattern 'cause that is wrong. You would have to say it was compared to a mirror universe velociraptors' bite pattern. Furthermore, a note needs to be added that makes it clear the mirror universe velociraptor obviously differs in size to one from our own prehistory. I wouldn't of even brought this up if it was a minor thing. If you folks knew how vastly different the sizes of those bites would be I think you would be onboard with me. I mean, do you guys understand what I'm saying here? This is a gross misrepresentation of a Gorn's physical characteristics. But, since no one gives a crud what my opinion is, I don't even know why I bother. You folks made up your minds days ago that you don't care about what some ANON guy has to say, am I right? You folks just want to do what you can do to increase your egos, even if it means making a ridiculous decision and taking a full week to make it.
 * if Phlox was making a joke, then it is not worth mentioning that he got it wrong, since humor is not meant to state fact. If Phlox wasn't joking, then we have no evidence he was wrong, since canon Velociraptors may be like the Jurrasic Park ones. Either way, it isn't worth mentioning. --OuroborosCobra talk 23:05, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Then don't mention it at all! Take the whole thing out. Either word it so people get an accurate description of a Gorn, or take the whole sentence out. How hard is that to understand? How many times do I have to say it? You guys should just make me an admin 'cause I make better decisions quicker than anyone here, obviously.


 * Just as a technical aside: the "velociraptors" in JP1 were in fact modeled after a then recently discovered species called "Utahraptor", which was larger than Velociraptor and had a blunter, more rounded head. The raptors in JPs 2 and 3 were more closely modeled after Velociraptor proper (smaller, long snouted head, etc).


 * The Gorn head depicted on air would have a bite pattern more similar to Utahraptor, or possibly one of the shorter snouted Tyranosaurids.Capt Christopher Donovan 00:04, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

I appreciate you trying to back me up, but that's not factually correct either. All of the Jurassic Park so called "velociraptors" were too large. Utahraptors were actually considerably larger than the ones shown in JP. I'm telling you guys a velociraptor was a very small creature. Would someone just look it up already on wikipedia or somewhere and see for themselves and fix this stupid thing? I can't believe it's taking this long to fix something that's obviously wrong and I've explained it a dozen times now. Either reword it like I said a few comments ago or take it out altogether.


 * JP1 Velociraptors were modeled on Deinonychus, not Utahraptor. As for why it is taking so long, you aren't reading OUR explanations either. If you had, you wouldn't be treating us as if we were saying a real Velociraptor was that large. Not a single person here has made that claim, and you treating us like we are isn't going to help you accomplish your goal. --OuroborosCobra talk 00:49, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

I have been reading you all's explanations and I've offered a fair compromise. Regardless, I don't have the time to keep coming back here and debating this until the end of the world. You all know my positions on it. Make a decision and do whatever. I've got better things to do than argue over something that shouldn't even have to be debated 'cause it is obvious to begin with. It's a wonder this site has any articles at all with as long as it takes something to be added. Heck, the creator of the site probably saw velociraptors himself he must be so old! Ask him what their jaws looked like. I'm out. Have a nice day.


 * Terrific, now you are making personal attacks. Lovely. I won't fret when you are gone. --OuroborosCobra talk 01:21, 27 November 2007 (UTC)


 * "Then don't mention it at all! Take the whole thing out. Either word it so people get an accurate description of a Gorn, or take the whole sentence out. ... You guys should just make me an admin 'cause I make better decisions quicker than anyone here, obviously.You guys should just make me an admin 'cause I make better decisions quicker than anyone here, obviously."
 * I had already suggested the removal of the line altogether. Are you sure you're actually reading our comments? :P In any case, I do agree with the anon on one point – this has gone on far longer than it should have. As I already said, Phlox's raptor line was not meant to be taken seriously, so there is really no reason to include it, IMO. --From Andoria with Love


 * For the record, I agree the line should be cut, I was just offering clarification vis a vis the JP1 raptors...btw, check these links:


 * 
 * Note the similarities in appearance between Utahraptor and Deinonychus.Capt Christopher Donovan 02:14, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Those images do not convey scale. Utahraptor was big, something like 20 ft long. Deinonychus was the size shown in the movie. --OuroborosCobra talk 02:37, 27 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I think I can live with the change. I would have said "Phlox quipped", instead of "Phlox Joked"...  but its a minute difference, and I think this thread has had far too much bickering.  If theres anything to be gained from this thread...  its that I can understand how trollish I've probably sounded in other discussion pages.  I'm not saying I've ever been this bad, but from now on I'll try to remember how absurdly bad this anon acted, and try to behave better. --Hossrex 05:23, 27 November 2007 (UTC)


 * "I'll try to remember how absurdly bad this anon acted" quoted for truth. I'll just put in my two cents here; in all honesty, it sort of resembles a Komodo Dragon's head, if slightly flattened around the snout. I'll also say that this discussion about a 'mirror verse' idea of V.Raptors would be canonly wrong, as the Star Trek verse only deviates from our history around the late 1980's, when the genetics wars begin. --- ANON

Removed background comment

 * It has been suggested that this is simply because there is no significant difference in appearance between the genders. More likely is the fact that no identified female Gorn has appeared in any Star Trek medis thus far, and Cryptic Studios is either unable to design a female Gorn due to intellectual property issues, or unwilling to design the female of the species from the ground up.

Speculation unless it can be cited with comments from people who have worked on the game.--31dot 12:49, January 25, 2010 (UTC)

War with Klingons?
If I remember correctly, this is material from STO only. 'ally with klingons' is irrelevant, because as far as the canonical storyline is concerned, the Klingons and Federation could still be allied in the time that STO claims it exists. When you say they went to war, you're entering STO canon, not general Star Trek canon. This information belongs in memory-beta and under the apocrypha. If anything, the main canon (ST:Voyager - End Game) suggests that Klingons and Federation are still peaceful around the time of STO, given how long humans live in the Star Trek Universe and Janeway's appearance. Of course, that is all speculation, but not without any sound articulation.

With all this in mind, the Gorn have been allies of the federation and thus by default at least neutral and never in a position from the Klingons to be forced into an 'alliance'. I am well aware this input into the Gorn page is from information regarding Federation versus Klingon with regards to STO. --Tricit 05:50, May 27, 2010 (CST)

Compound eyewear
You say on the page that some gorn have the silvery compound eyes, but in Star Trek Online the character customization allows you to add them as 'Recon Goggles.' Is this a mistake? or is Star Trek Online not a trusted source of information?


 * STO is not canon. Whatever they decide to do is their own ideas.  You could mention such information in the Apocrypha section in the article(under video games) but it could not be in the in-universe portion of the article here.  It could be on Memory Beta, which has the broader scope of all licensed products.--31dot 02:39, February 9, 2012 (UTC)
 * I suspect that STO did that to reconcile the Gorn seen in with Slar seen in Enterprise(which didn't have the compound eyes)--31dot 02:41, February 9, 2012 (UTC)