Archives

• Talk:Main Page/Archive

---

---

New and Future releases

Surely it is past time to get rid of June here and put up the August stuff. I believe that the main page is locked so that only administrators can do this, correct? --Jdvelasc 22:01, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

I didn't get around to it at the time as I was planning on changing the way stuff was added. This has now been completed and now displays the currently released items for the two main producers of Star Trek media (e.g. Pocket Books and IDW Comics). Its my aim to update the page whenever a new item is released, it also has more context and images to help brighten the main page up, rather than the old list that was there before, sort of taking the look from the retro main page we had before. --Dr. John Smith 15:22, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

What happened to the new and future release page?

Why has the new and future releases page been replaced by the 2007 page? ��� JDB 15:38, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Because they cover exactly the same information? --8of5 15:43, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I guess. I just liked that page's set up better, is all.– JDB 02:21, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Latest Releases

Could someone please change the latest releases section Night of the Wolves isn't even the latest Star Trek: Terok Nor book.--Long Live the United Earth 18:57, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Once again could someone change this; I believe the most recent book is ENT novel: Kobayashi Maru.--Long Live the United Earth 00:15, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Isn't the latest book one of the Star Trek: Destiny books?--Long Live the United Earth 22:01, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Yup, the comic was out of date too. --8of5 22:47, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

August 2010: To whoever can edit the front page, "Progress (eBook)" needs a second "s", and "10 is Better Than 01" needs its capitalization fixed. Thanks. --Seventy 14:51, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Seventy, fixed now. For future reference, the future releases info is actually put on the page by use of a template ({{Releases}}) which isn't protected in the same way as the main page itself :) --8of5 19:27, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

Award?

I know that the award is a wonderful thing, but does it need to be on the page months after the fact? Perhaps a page should be made detailing it; or placed n a forum?--Long Live the United Earth 00:45, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

I moved it further down the page if that helps. --8of5 01:23, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Featured Article

Why is it that the featured article on the main page has remained unchanged for so long? It's been "Flesh of My Flesh" for what seems like months now.Mbruno 19:57, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

It was up for a while, but we've had several changes of Featured Article in the last couple of months. It just happens that this has come around again in the cycle. --The Doctor 20:03, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

Actually that one keeps popping up because I set it as a stop-gap for when there wasn't a new featured article template ready for the given week. I couldn't figure out how to set the template to refer back to the most recently displayed article if there wasn't a new template to replace it, so I set it to go to the oldest template instead (which happened to be Flesh of My Flesh). If anyone knows how to fix that, or some other way of randomly generating a backup position for when there isn't a new template feel free to fix it. --8of5 13:37, November 28, 2009 (UTC)

Destiny vs. STO timeline

Since I have been asked by some friends, who are interested in Trek and check out things on Memory Beta, I will adress this issue here.

Has it been discussed to split both timelines (Destiny and STO) in all the related articles?

It is obvious that the "Path to 2409" completely ignores keyevents from the books (Borg Invasion of 2381, foundation of the Typhon Pact). We have seperate timelines here. The problem is to indentify the origin. I asked on trekbbs.com if Q&A could be marked as the starting point, where different realities merged into eachother. Maybe STO simply follows one of those alternate universes. -- unsigned by Captain Storma

The Latest Releases On The Main Page Needs Fixed

Could someone fix the Latest Releases on the main page? It's messed up for some reason. Mbruno 21:08, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

The problem is that nobody created the file for January until I did it a few minutes ago. I did it in December after I realized no one had done it, too, and based on my experience then I think it can take a while until the main page "grabs" the file.

I think in the past 8of5 has done this, but he hasn't been here for a while it seems. --Defcon 22:33, January 8, 2011 (UTC)

Latest Releases

The Latest Releases on the main page needs updated. Mbruno 05:00, March 31, 2011 (UTC)

Now we just need someone to actually create the file for April. Mbruno 02:36, April 1, 2011 (UTC)

Well, feel free. Memory Beta is a community wiki after all. :) --The Doctor 06:07, April 1, 2011 (UTC)

Done, thanks for pointing it out. Although as the doctor pointed out, you are entirely welcome to fill in the blanks should you spot such missing information again :) --8of5 07:54, April 1, 2011 (UTC)

Adding an "Appearances" line or section to articles

I think it would be beneficial to add an "Appearances" line or section to articles about characters, locales, and the like. For example, when I look up "Elias Vaughn," an officer on Deep Space 9, I'd like to know in which novels he has appeared. I think it would also be good to cite the work in which a character, et. al, first appeared, and even perhaps what their first and latest appearances are from a chronological standpoint. So we could add something like this (this is an example and not a complete list for this character):

Appearances

Entries are listed in order of publication date/air date.

• (DS9 novel: Avatar) (First appearance)
• (DS9 novel: Abyss)
• (DS9 novel: Demons of Air and Darkness)
• (The Lost Era novel: Serpents Among the Ruins) (Earliest chronological appearance)
• (DS9 novel: Unity)
• (Typhon Pact novel: Zero Sum Game) (Latest chronological appearance)

Good idea, so good we already do it ;) It's not on every article, it's down to editors to choose to implement it, but several do, Elias Vaughn is one of them in fact! A few more examples: Mandana, which notes the nature of various appearances; Donatra, which has several "referenced only" citations; Atalskes phaser IV which has quite a long list; Vesta class, which has extensive annotations. --8of5 09:25, August 4, 2011 (UTC)

If it's any help to you all, I'm in the beginning of an extensive sweep - adding an Appearances scrool box, that lists every appearance of a particular character, ship, object, etc, in chronological order (again, as above, just as example):

2364 TNG episode & novelization: Encounter at Farpoint TNG episode: "The Naked Now" TNG - Double Helix novel: Infection TNG episode: "Code of Honor" 2366 TNG episode: "Evolution"

If you are going to follow this, then please PLEASE don't just assume that even a major character is in every episode of whichever series they're in (Kira Nerys, though credited for all 173 episodes of DS9, only actually appeared in 171 of them), so just try to be careful, and triple-check everything you do. --Fagley 19:20, May 18, 2012 (GMT)

Series

Hi there, I had a few questions/suggestions about the wiki's policy regarding what constitutes a series. I posted it on the Series template page, but I realized this is probably a better place for the discussion. So I'm copying and pasting what I wrote over here:

How many titles does a potential series need before it's considered a "series"? Like, for example, Star Trek: Challenger was intended to be a series, but only had one novel released under the banner of Star Trek: Challenger. So I assume only one title isn't enough. But what is the minimum number?

Also, should the Starfleet Academy video game series count? It has an original cast of characters, a few distinct games (including the one for super nintendo, the one for PC, and a few expansions for the PC game), and a novelization. I understand that most video game series fall into one pre-existing series or another, such as the Armada games and the Elite Force games, for example. But Starfleet Academy seems different to me in that it focuses on a cast of original characters, with TOS characters having only guest roles.

Another question. Since "The Original Series" seems to cover a wide range of stories, ranging from Robert April's command of the Enterprise to stories about Spock in the 24th century. Given that, it seems strange to me that "early voyages" and "the animated series" are considered separate series. Both are clearly based around characters and settings from the TOS tv series (Both series depict an era within the setting of TOS, in other words; same ship, same crew, more or less). Perhaps they could be classified as some sort of sub-series of TOS? Which would make the template look like this:

Star Trek series
Enterprise • Vanguard • The Original Series ( Early Voyages • The Animated Series • Captain Sulu Adventures ) • The Lost Era • Stargazer • The Next Generation • Deep Space Nine • Voyager • Starfleet Academy • New Frontier • Corps of Engineers • Klingon Empire • Titan • Online
Series listed in chronological order based on the starting date of the primary era each series takes place in.

Although "Captain Sulu Adventures" could be argued to be a separate series from TOS, much in the same way that Titan is separate from TNG. Both feature a new crew and new ship. I included it in this version to show that other potential TOS "sub-series" as I'm calling them could be included in the parenthesis like that.

One last thing. Should "The Lost Era" be considered a series? I haven't had the chance to read it, but it seems like it's a miniseries that fills in backstory material for characters from TOS, TNG, DS9, and Voyager. In which case it probably shouldn't be considered that in my opinion -- it's a crossover miniseries, like Star Trek: Destiny, that deals with characters from a few different series but has no series of its own. -Xaqimorp 6:51, February 27, 2012 (UTC)

I like the idea of combining the TOS spinoffs.

One interesting note is that they have the Captain Sulu Adventures moniker as a series, but then subtitled (as a prefix) later books with Excelsior -- but they seem to be part of the same idea. Perhaps Captain Sulu Adventures and Excelsior should be combined?

I think that TLE is decent as a series on its own, they still bandy about ongoing continuations of one sort or another. Terok Nor (the novel miniseries) was promoted as a subseries of The Lost Era so it seems this is in continuous use.

One missing piece perhaps is Star Trek: Mirror Universe as this seems to be building into a bigger piece of the franchise with new releases. This isn't a series of regular characters, but a catchall that covers all such stories - giving it enough girth to be considered "a real thing"

As for Starfleet Academy, perhaps we could consider this another "catchall" - we have the comic series and the unrelated game sharing the title, but they are identically conceptually - they follow a regular cast of cadets. We could combine them with the proviso that we establish that there are two versions under the same title. this could be even more inclusive if we include the two separate TOS "SFA" bannered ideas - the Shatner novel that was to have been the first of many, and the nu-Trek novels which are ongoing.

As to Challenger, this was another series that simply didn't last. I think i edited the series page a bit to specify it was a continuation of New Earth - and that perhaps the New Earth and Challenger "series" are actually one that went through a name change. It's a gray area. -- Captain MKB 16:47, February 28, 2012 (UTC)

As for combining the TOS series -- cool. Is it okay if I start doing that?

And as for the Captain Sulu stuff -- I totally agree, they should be combined. I've long felt that the adventures of the Excelsior should be considered a series. There's two separate lines that cover adventures of the Excelsior, but even before that, there were novels and comics and such who did the same, but didn't have a different banner. Granted, that would lead to a lot of grey areas, because the Excelsior makes appearances alongside the Enterprise many times. But I do feel that if the story mainly follows the Excelsior and its crew, well, that feels like it should be considered part of an Excelsior/Captain Sulu series. (Example: Seize the Fire does not bear the moniker of Star Trek: Titan, but it is considered part of that series by this wiki, presumably because that's what it is -- an adventure of the starship Titan).

And on the subject of Starfleet Academy. This is definitely a complicated one. The various SFA series do share a setting in common, but they have different characters. Which is fine, it could be considered like two generations of the same thing (a la SCE, which has a 23rd century set of characters as well). But it gets trickier when you get to the young adult novels, both the old ones and the "nu-trek" ones, as you've called them. These novels are clearly associated with a pre-existing series, such as TOS. They exist mainly to flesh out the backstories of TOS characters (or TNG or VOY characters, in the case of those novels). So how would that work, if we called SFA one blanket series? Would you cite info from such a novel like this: (TOS/SA novel: "Cadet Kirk") ?

When I first started editing here, I thought that they should be combined, like you say. And I still think so, but now it just seems more complicated to me, because Starfleet Academy is a general moniker that could be used for prequel stories for any potential series, because it's at such a central location to the ST universe.

I definitely think that it would make sense to combine at least the video game series with the comic series, tho. But the thing about that is that if we combined those two, we'd pretty much have to combine anything that has the moniker of "Starfleet Academy" into a series.

I'm not sure what to do. Maybe that is the best thing, is to combine them all and then to consider SA novels that are also based in another series as "TOS/SA", for example. Any thoughts on this?

Oh, and another random note: Star Trek: Crew should be considered a part of Early Voyages (It expands on the backstory of Number One). Though, I guess if we did that we'd have to make Early Voyages into another catch-all, as you called it, for any stories that take place during Pike's command of the enterprise. Which I'm in favor of, anyway. :D --Xaqimorp 00:33, February 29, 2012 (UTC)

Temporal Investigations

Given that the second Star Trek: Department of Temporal Investigations novel is released next month, surely this constititutes DTI as a book series, and should be added to the "Star Trek Series" list on the right side of the main page?? Geek Mythology 21:58, March 25, 2012 (UTC)

Memory Delta

Every one should check out Memory Delta at http://dealta.wikia.com/wiki —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rock band (talk • contribs) .

Er... why? -- sulfur 00:43, April 6, 2012 (UTC)

STRAGEMA???

Can I just ask, why is there not a Stragema page on this wiki? You know the game that that guy obliterated Riker at and lost his temper after playing against Data in a rematch??? Data was playing for a draw while the other guy aimed to win. The TNG episode Peak Performance --Brian 08:04, June 3, 2012 (UTC)

This wiki is primarily for non-canon Trek, and Strategema maybe hasn't been mentioned yet in a novel/comic/etc. But it's on our sister wiki Memory Alpha, here. If you know of more non-canon but licensed-source information about Strategema, then please feel free to start a new page here.

BTW, it would be easier to ask this question in a forum post. This Talk is specifically for Main Page issues. -- BadCatMan 08:12, June 3, 2012 (UTC)

Gray spot?

Is there a big gray area on the left side of the main page for anyone else or just me? I don't know if it's just Internet Explorer doing it or if its the page's design.--Long Live the United Earth (talk) 20:00, July 27, 2012 (UTC)

New Category(s)

Might I make a suggestion? Would it be possible to add a new category to sort ships by century? Would make finding ships of a particular era much easier, especially Federation ships since they have a massive number of classes. Near-sighted Jedi (talk) 02:13, February 10, 2013 (UTC)

Fixing the layout

Can someone please fix the layout of the main page? Having to scroll down a bit to view the right hand column with the menu links in it is a pain in the tuckus...--Aceman67 (talk) 03:08, March 17, 2013 (UTC)

That was broken in the Oasis skin in a Wikia update some time ago. User:XD1 recently removed the offending line. Removing the line:

<div style="margin 0 0 0.5em 0; border: 1px outset #222;background:#666666;padding:3px;">

has now removed the old grey background as well.

Having developed a main page myself, I believe the actual cause of the problem is the border setting. Simply removing "border: 1px outset #222;" from the above should fix it. That is, try:

 <div style="margin 0 0 0.5em 0; background:#666666; padding:3px;">

That will give a grey background and no border. — BadCatMan (talk) 13:44, May 9, 2013 (UTC)

Star Trek: Trexels

Trexels is a new iOS game taking place in the "Trexelian Expanse", and starring George Takei as the voice of Hikaru Sulu.

How should references to this game be handled?

The game is very tongue-in-cheek in many places, so I'm not sure if we should update existing pages (such as Sulu's biography) to reflect the events of this game. However, someof the new places and species, such as the Valkar, may warrant their own pages.

Thoughts? --LoghaD (talk) 15:13, December 21, 2013 (UTC)

Shouldn't Discovery be between Early Voyages and The Original Series in the right-hand sidebar on the homepage?

It might be a bit nitpicking, but, in the right-hand sidebar that shows the various series, which I assume is in reasonably chronological order, shouldn't Discovery exist between Early Voyages and The Original Series, rather than after TOS? Just a thought. Navypiper (talk) 12:31, July 4, 2019 (UTC)

They aren't in a strict chronological order. captainmike 12:34, July 4, 2019 (UTC)