Talk:William Riker

What significance does "(231-427)" have in the infobox? I can't for the life of me figure out what this has to do with Riker. -Etoile 03:10, 27 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

That is his starfleet serial number (given in Gambit, part 1). Cburnett 19:27, 23 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

Is his name not William Troi following Nemesis? Matthew Platts 21:32, 27 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

That depends, if Will decided to honour the Betazed tradition or not. My guess (correct me if I'm wrong, anyone), is on Betazed he's name is William T.Troi, everywhere else he's William T.Riker (after all, Deanna is half-human). Great question by the way Mightberight/wrong 22:26, 30 October 2005 (UTC).

I'd always assumed that with as matrilineial a society as the Betazed's seem to be that they would of course hand the surname down through the maternal line, and that men would have to take their wive's names. Terrilyn 23:02, 6 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Terrilyn (talk • contribs)

Captain Picard calling him "Mr. Troi" was a joke intended to make fun of Riker. Sort of a "who wears the pants" joke. I'm not sure if it is a Betazoid tradition to change the man's name. Mainphramephreak 13:54, 22 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

Agreed ("duh," even). Hence Riker's bemused expression and the wry smiles on the folks standing in the background. --EEMeltonIV 16:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

2 are seen in the Star Trek TNG episode parallels. 1 on a ship where this universe Worf gets transported to, and another is seen briefly from another universe where the Borg is dominant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.99.210.174 (talk) 21:21, 20 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Now that William T.Riker is a Captain, and in command of the USS Titan. I wonder who his First Officer will be, would he consider Lt.Cmdr Shelby. Mightberight/wrong 22:28, 30 October 2005 (UTC).

According to Star Trek: Titan: Taking Wing, his XO is Christine Vale. Shelby, at this time, is probably already the Admiral of Sector 221-G. PantherFoxie 00:18, 12 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

I deleted "(Starfleet has a bizarre habit of indulging officers who wish to stay with ships named Enterprise, even when it would be better for their careers to move on to new ships and postings.)" It isn't clear to me this is Starfleet's "bizarre habit" or limited to Enterprise. My impression is, XOs generally have the option to refuse command; I would guess there is RN influence at play here, since I'm unaware of USN officers being able to refuse promotion, but Brits seem able to. --trekphiler, 16/11/05

Riker was always the one to refuse the two other commands. Admiral Hanson (Best of Both Worlds, Part I) even went so far as to talk to Captain Picard about Riker being offered the Melborne. The admiral wanted Picard to basically kick Riker in the butt to get him off the Enterprise and into a command of his own. Good thing Riker didn't take it, too. Mainphramephreak 13:43, 22 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

Captain William T.Riker of the USS Titan, isn't the original William T.Riker. He & Tom are both transporter clones of the original Will Riker, does anyone agree? GoodDay 16:15, 21 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

There is no 'Original Will Riker'. Both William and Thomas Riker are both the exact same person up to the point of the transporter incident. They both have the same history before that point. IE: Thomas Riker's bio would read identical to William's until the accident. I don't think that makes either of them a 'different' person from the original. The original didn't die and was replaced with clones. The original was just copied (the only technicality is that neither one is the original nor a 'copy'. They are just two versions of the original. It's as if I write out two copies of chapter one of a novel identically. Then, at that point, I write chapter two for one copy. Then I write a different chapter two for the second copy. Both copies of the story have the same first chapter, but neither is 'the original' or 'a copy' of the other. It's just two stories like Tom and Will are two people who originated from one person.

Another way to look at it is that a transporter reads a person's molecules, turns it into energy and then turns it back into molecules. So if you want to look at it another way, every time you transport, you're merely destroying a person and creating a copy. In this case, two copies were made instead of one. However, if you want to get absolutely technical, Geordi does mention that the original transporter chief created a second beam, and that was the one that bounced back. So in the most technical sense, perhaps Thomas comes from a 'secondary' transporter signal of Riker while Will was the primary transporter pattern. But ultimately they are both identical patterns. TheHYPO 22:34, 28 March 2006 (UTC)Reply

Besides all that, Gene Roddenberry himself had stated many times that whenever a duplicate of someone is made, or a time travel paradox happens (ETC ETC ETC) that we should accept that the status quo was achieved by the end of the episode unless specified. Dphilp75 (talk) 23:15, 23 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Any chance that there's a character name inspiration from William H. Riker? Cburnett 19:27, 23 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

Forgive me if you guys have a different reason for having this picture, but isn't the pic of riker a little unflattering? Isn't that from nemesis, where he's REALLY old? Surely there's a better picture of him with the tng uniform and alot younger. He's certainly better known in that context. I would upload a picture, but I am afraid of violating one of wikipedia's rules or something. They're very complicated, and I'm not sure that I wouldn't be like banned immediately for vandalizing someone's hard work or something.

But that pic of riker has gotta go. He's fat, old, and in that hideous new uniform.

I don't mind the picture, but I agree that we should probably include one from when he was most memorable: TNG. I'll find something. And as long as source information accompanies a picture, you should be able to upload one (anew or as a replacement) without difficulty. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 23:54, 4 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

Is it just me or does Riker become captain of the enterprise D at another time other than when Picard was assimilated? Where we see an old and greying riker, with an upgraded enterprise D ?

I think the picture is fine and flattering, but we need a picture of him later in the movie with Captains pips. Nicht Nein! 17:04, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Agree - I think the images from TNG are classic and work best, but I also agree it would be a good idea to have a later image from say, Nemesis, later in the article where Nemesis and the other TNG movies are mentioned, if no objections I will change this. Ejfetters 06:43, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Marina Sirtis played Troi on three different series, too. TNG (entire run), ENT (TATV), and VOY (couple episodes including "Pathfinder"

In the time it took you to post that, you could have fixed it ;-) --EEMeltonIV 19:48, 11 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

Why did Riker grow a beard and mustache just before Season 2?--70.58.240.56 18:09, 22 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

I think IMDb(?)'s ever-reliable trivia section says he grew it for a Civil War-era film and kept it for the second season of TNG. --EEMeltonIV 18:10, 22 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

On the History Channel, Frakes said that he (and the producers) decided to make the character appear more "commanding" and "wise", that Frake's face sans beard looked too boyish and lacked a sense of authority, diminishing the character. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.196.114.55 (talk) 07:46, 3 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

During a convention appearance, Frakes said he was tired of constantly shaving to keep Riker clean-cut, so he simply let his beard grow out during the extended hiatus between seasons due to the 1988 WGA Strike. As a result, when he returned to work he hadn't shaved yet, and the producers liked the way it looked and asked him to keep it.--Michael24 9:51PM, January 5, 2010 —Preceding undated comment added 05:53, 6 January 2010 (UTC).Reply

Am I the only one who noticed that Riker was on a sort of Galactic Conequest, mainly to conqure all alien women he met? He seemed to be giving Kirk a run for his money...

Seriously. Before he got the beard, he seemed a little young and just sort of bathed in the attention he got from women. But you can pinpoint the exact moment his conquest began - it was in Up The Long Ladder. He gave that Irish woman his patented "Riker" stare, the one where he opens his eyes wide and smiles a bit. After that, no woman can resist him. It only seems to work from season 2 onwards though.

Just watch him after that. Every attractive woman he meets, he gives the look. After that, they all start to feel attracted to him. It's a good job that holographic woman Geordi summoned up never met him or he would never have had a look-in.

I feel there should be some mention of this in the trivia section perhaps. I have been trying to gather evidence, but it's a slow process. I wonder if Frakes had some influence over the scripting, or if Riker was just written that way?

I don't recall Valdez being mentioned in any episode as Riker's birthplace. He was from Alaska, we know this, and he also lived in Canada for a time ("Lower Decks"). But I don't believe Valdez was mentioned except in the novel "Rock and a Hard Place", when he meets up with his childhood friend Carter and they recall growing up in Valdez. Once, a Valdez rep was at a trade show in my town, and I mentioned Valdez being credited as Riker's birthplace, so they could put up a sign, the way Riverside, Iowa has taken credit for James T. Kirk. GBC 20:30, 18 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

Valdez is mentioned in the Chronology as Riker's birthplace. I would guess his biography in "Conundrum" might show this : possibly "The Icarus Factor". Morwen - Talk 15:33, 19 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

Inspired by the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill???? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.196.114.55 (talk) 07:49, 3 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

How about inspired by Antonio Valdés y Basán? Anyway, Riker isn't Canadian, he was born in Alaska and has ancestors who fought in the American Civil War. Regarding the recent edit, how is it implied he's in Canadian? Vinithehat (talk) 15:39, 22 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

After careful review of every episode and movie, I can find no reference to Riker being born in Valdez. It may have been something some fan wrote at some point, but it is nowhere in canon. Certain active Wiki-toads seem intent on not presenting this false information. Most likely a Ferengi spy attempting to plant seeds of disinformation as part of a long term grift. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.54.41.46 (talk) 01:38, 4 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

In "All Good Things..." Riker is an Admiral. Yet Riker is not listed as an Admiral in this article. I realize "All Good Things..." had it's illusions, but I thought I'd mention this. anyone care to comment if Riker as Admiral should go into the article?

\ —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Caffeine USA (talk • contribs) 03:01, 11 December 2006 (UTC).Reply

Yes, I agree. Nicht Nein! 17:04, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Nah. He was Admiral in a possible future. In the current timeline of Star Trek:TNG, he is a Captain.Azn Clayjar 06:38, 28 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Can we list him as "Admiral (alt timeline)" just like Geordi is listed as "Captain (Alt timeline)"  ???? It think this is the best solution. Discussion, otherwise I'll change it in the next few days.

thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.45.195.197 (talk) 17:19, 28 September 2013 (UTC)Reply

Most of this article seems to be about Riker's history before his service on the Enterprise which is secondary background info. Most of this article should highlight his career on the Enterprise. DO NOT DO an episode by episode description though. Azn Clayjar 06:38, 28 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

• Alright, tried to fix the article to stress more on his TNG era career than his history. Hope you think it looks good. I know nothings cited, I still need to work on citing things, which I will just use Memory Alpha and startrek.com as my cites. I know there may be some typos here and there, if ya catch 'em , please fix them. Replaced with infobox picture with the red TNG era uniform, and other pictures are littered throughout the sections, to make it look more professional. I wouldn't however, add like 20 pictures to the article, it looks good the way it is.

If this goes over well, I may try to overhaul other Star Trek character pages that seem to need a lot of attention too. Ejfetters 06:33, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

when did Riker grow his beard post pls

This article is tagged appropriately because it lacks out-of-universe information, and is strictly in-universe style. Examples of needed information would be casting info, critcal commentary, reception, etc. Ejfetters 00:06, 8 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

• The in-universe tag is to be used when an article is completely written as if the person/topic were real. I don't know whether edits have been made since the tag was placed 2 weeks ago, but as it stands now there are sufficient references to novels, episodes and films that only the most naiive of readers would think this is real. That doesn't mean that additional sources can't be added; but that's the purview of another tag. 23skidoo 16:05, 22 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

• I think you're conflating/combining "in-universe" and "unreferenced." Being in-universe isn't so much about whether it is referenced, but rather the type of information presented in the article. This article is overwhelmingly plot summary from the TV show and movies; it is "in-universe." For the tag to be appropriately removed, the plot summary needs to be substantially cut and the content expanded to include "out-of-universe"/real-world information, e.g. critical reaction to the character, merchandising, how the character was developed and cast, etc. --EEMeltonIV 19:29, 22 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure why Troi's name is placed at the end of Riker's in the infobox and not anywhere else in the article. This information is not explained, and it doesn't have a reference. I suggest that the title of the infobox be changed to "William T. Riker" or "William Thomas Riker", based on the fact that "Riker Troi" is not listed within the article and that Memory Alpha has him listed as "William T. Riker" instead of "Riker Troi". The other option would be to change all other references to Riker to "Riker Troi" and to explain and cite a reference for this change within the article.

I believe that adding the prefix "then-" to a picture of Commander Riker is redundant, as it is a snapshot in time and cannot update along with the character's rank. The reader simply needs to look at the article to see that his rank changes as his character progresses. If it is unclear that this is a picture of a past Riker, perhaps a date or the name of the episode or movie it came from could be added. — OranL (talk) 05:33, 5 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

The website that you describe is a fansite, not an encyclopedia. I think the reference is ST:Nemesis. --< Nicht Nein! (talk) 07:36, 5 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

And what about the second thing? — OranL (talk) 21:27, 6 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Is it really correct to have things posted as "then-commander william..." or have his rank listed as "captain (current)" this is not current for 2 reasons:

1) the show is over, it is all in the past.

more paradoxically:

2) this also takes place in a fictional future while wikipedia is written from a present perspective.

perhaps leave his rank out of the opening of the article, and in the info box where his rank progression is listed we can also list during what seasons/movies his rank changes? A thought: If I am watching an old season 2 episode, he is a commander on the show, he is not a commander in the episode i am watching while being a captain simultaneously in real life... he does not exist in real life!

Vinithehat (talk) 12:44, 23 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Am I alone is thinking that this sentence is unclear, I boldified the part I do not quite 'get'. It's also a bit run-on-ish.

Of all these actors mentioned, only William O. Campbell and Erich Anderson have both made it to the bridge of the Enterprise-D acting alongside the character they auditioned for, the latter actually posing as a Starfleet Officer (The First Officer of the Enterprise-D he was posing as to be precise).

Vinithehat (talk) 16:01, 31 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

I have changed the lengthy hatnote to a link to a disambiguation page per WP:D: "If there are three or more topics associated with the same term, then a disambiguation page should normally be created for that term". I see no reason why this is not a "normal" situation. --MegaSloth (talk) 11:03, 27 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

Okay, my mistake, though I have to ask why half of the coding exists for Template:Otheruses4 if this is the case. That page even specifically says "When there are up to five other uses — You should generally create a disambiguation page at this point." Not helpful... --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 11:15, 27 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

The show is set in a fictional future. How can the character have a current rank? I say leave off the (Current) tag. Nutster (talk) 17:23, 17 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Even though the previous comment is rather old, the subject needs to be discussed because there seems to be disagreement about Riker's rank--and rightfully so. In light of all the temporal mechanics and different series/movies, why don't we just list his name in the lede as William T. Riker and explain it in the article body? It seems that might be less confusing.

If we don't, we're gonna have to find sources that pass WP:RS muster; it's not enough to "just know" it--we gotta be able to prove it with reliable, secondary sources.

Thoughts, anyone? — UncleBubba ^{( T @ C )} 00:34, 14 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

I agree, and he should be listed at his highest attained rank, which is Admiral, as discussed above. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.45.218.124 (talk) 21:48, 4 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

I just happened to notice four pins on his uniform in the image. In the Star Trek universe, this implies the rank of captian, which he only temporarily is in a few episodes. Should this be changed to an image with only three pins? interstatefive  (talk) - just another roadgeek 20:58, 2 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

I don't think it should be changed because of the rank issue you mention. Although, I see your point. The image doesn't necessarily have to reflect the last rank held. It just needs to be a good representation of the person and fit well within the context of the BLPWritethisway (talk) 16:56, 3 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

It is a good photo and shows where he reached. --Seggallion (talk) 19:31, 4 June 2022 (UTC) sock puppet of banned userReply

• All else being equal, an image that is representative of his rank for most of the series would be better. This is not very important, though – the overall quality of the image, showing his appearance clearly, is more important. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 21:59, 20 June 2022 (UTC)Reply
• I just worry that a reader will see the blurry lighting pattern behind his head and be confused as to whether this is indeed the Enterprise-D Galaxy-class bridge set from the series run ('87-'94), or that of Generations (1994) (which was redesigned for among other things the widescreen aspect ratio), or that they may even confuse it with (god forbid) the Sovereign-class bridge! You request a comment, you get a comment! --SamuelRiv (talk) 03:47, 21 June 2022 (UTC)Reply
• As a general rule I would consider a three-pin image preferable, as better reflecting the most common rank and portrayal for this character. However the pins are a relatively minor detail among many important factor in evaluating which image is "best" for this article. No alternative image has been proposed for consideration, rendering this RFC unnecessary and substantially pointless. If there is a specific alternate image available, and someone believes it overall does a better job serving this article, anyone is invited to WP:Boldly make the edit changing the image. If someone else considers the new image unacceptable or inferior for some reason, they may revert the edit. At that point we can have a concrete discussion comparing the merits of the two (or more) candidate images. See Bold, revert, discuss for more explanation of this common process for editing Wikipedia.
  P.S. I would suggest this discussion does not need a formal RFC closure. Alsee (talk) 03:03, 18 July 2022 (UTC)Reply