Wikia

Memory Alpha

Talk:Earth-Romulan War

36,872pages on
this wiki

Back to page

Past and special-purpose discussions related to this article can be found on the following subpages:
Help icon
Earth-Romulan War/archive

Memory Alpha talk pages are for improving the article only.
For general discussion on this subject, visit the forums at The Trek BBS.


New Romulan Symbol? Edit

If the war was hundreds of years before the symbol of the Romulan Empire was changed,why is the new symbol used. Shouldn't it be the symbol we saw before Nemesis or even the tos romulan symbol? The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.66.212.175 (talk).

The "TNG-romulan symbol" is used, because that was established as the symbol romulans used in the mid-22nd century in season 4 episodes of Enterprise. --Pseudohuman 10:34, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Shran & I checked it out a couple days ago and there is actually a new symbol on the walls of the remote control-room. It looks like a modified version of the one seen in Nemesis. --Morder 10:43, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Indeed, but the computer monitors use the TNG-symbol, wall symbol is just art on the wall.--Pseudohuman 10:51, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
The correct symbol would be the TOS Romulan symbol seen in the Enterprise Incident.--Chroniton 16:36, 6 Apr--Chroniton 17:32, 6 April 2009 (UTC)il 2009 (UTC)
Did you bother reading the above conversation? Besides, why does it make sense to use a symbol from over a hundred years after the war when we have the symbol they used maybe 5 years before the war? --OuroborosCobra talk 16:40, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
They only used the TNG symbol because that is more widely known to be the Romulan symbol, the correct historical logo would be the TOS symbol. Why drop the patroitic symbol of the eagle just to reuse it 2 centuries later in the TMP era onwards in many forms~? The Romulansd are not that stupid.--Chroniton 16:44, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
What is "historically accurate" is what is actually on the show, not what you want it to be. --OuroborosCobra talk 17:07, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
The war was created before Enterprise and Braga got his hands on canon. The Earth-Romulan War is called the EARTH -Romuluan War for a reason.--Chroniton 17:32, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
Funny, since down below you want to treat it as the UESPA-Romulan War. I guess your following of your own canon is only skin deep. Doesn't matter whether the war was "created" before Brannon and Braga were around, the details on it were never established until they did. Also, guess what, the Korean War had tons of other countries in it, like the United States and China and stuff, despite the name. --OuroborosCobra talk 17:44, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
The name of the war and the inclusion of none of the other races is pretty clear in the pre-Enterprise materail this was a war of pure attrition ending in a stalemate after a long and bloody push to Romulu, (see the closeness of the Romulan homeworlds to the Neutral zone. teh correct logos for both sides are pre-Enterprise, the United Earth logo is the United Earth logo that features on the UESPA logo that has appeared on every single on screen UESPA craft, while the romulan empire logo would be that of a mroe primitive, spiker, two terfoil version of the terfoil design seen in TOS. The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chroniton (talk • contribs).
ENT is canon, deal with it...or build a Quantum Leap accelerator and "set right what once went wrong." - Archduk3:talk 17:07, December 11, 2009 (UTC)

We're contradicting ourselves... Edit

We are accepting Colonel Green's first name and the details of his actions as seen in this viewscreen graphic as canon. So why are we not accepting the years in which the Earth-Romulan War was fought? Those years are listed on the graphic, as well. Are we picking and choosing what we like and don't like? (Note: this is not an invitation to move the Green page to another name, that must be discussed first). --From Andoria with Love 06:44, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

The years 2156-2160 should be accepted as canon. No need for the vaguenes. --Pseudohuman 10:05, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
I implemented the changes. With eco-terrorism, Phillip Green and 2160 taking the screen at face value (but noting contradiction) there is no reason not to do the same here. If there are contradictions we follow our normal policy. Here there is none. I rewrote the background info accordingly. While doing so I removed the following as it is now redundant:
  • Contrary to the unseen article and the unreadable graphic, no other sources have indicated if this war occurred before or after the founding of the Federation. However, if the succinctly named "Earth-Romulan conflict" is any indication of the involved parties, then this would seem to imply that this event occurred before the foundation of the Federation, and was fought between Earth/Humans, the Romulans, and their respective allies; nothing so specific as the Federation or the Coalition of Planets.
This is exactly the same situation as Daffyduckium and all the horrible in-joke elements we accept from a display in TNG: "Rascals".– Cleanse 06:54, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
The Earth-Romulan war was the reason the Federation was created! It is implied and also would make good common sense. The other powers are suprised by Earth's ability to force the Romulans into a stalemate, by pure attirtion and then only began to help during the long, "push" to Romulus.--Chronitons 22:38, 28 March 2009 (UTC) Edited - 09:53, December 11, 2009 (UTC)
ENT is canon, deal with it...or build a Quantum Leap accelerator and "set right what once went wrong." - Archduk3:talk 17:07, December 11, 2009 (UTC)

Giant logos Edit

Seal of United Earth

Is it just me or are the logos in the sidebar displaying at 292 px? The code in the article has much more reasonable sizes (100 and 120 px respectively) so is this a template problem, a page problem, or something on my end?– Cleanse 03:25, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

From what I understand, all images within templates are automatically fixed at 292px (or, if it's smaller, the largest possible size) to better conform to Wikia's new and hopefully short-lived style. --From Andoria with Love 04:14, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, looks like you can still override it - see Template:Sidebar government, which sets a 150px size to avoid the giant logo problem.

But I think I see what's happened here. The template (Template:Sidebar military conflict) at one point must have had such parameters for setting the size of the images, but they aren't in the current code.– Cleanse 04:47, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Why not use the .U.E.S.P.A. symbol that is Voyager as your supposed to? The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chroniton (talk • contribs).
UESPA is not a governing body, so we are not "supposed" to use it to represent one. --OuroborosCobra talk 16:41, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
The .U.E.S.P.A. was the governing bodie of Earth's space activities. As no battles were fouught on Eath or Romulus it would be better to use the space agencies logo wouldn't it?--Chroniton 16:57, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
No, not in the slightest would it be better. UESPA was an agency, not a governing body. That would be like using the logo of the US Air Force for the war in Kosovo, rather than the American flag. --OuroborosCobra talk 17:08, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Okay use the United Earth logo that features on the onscreen canon UESPA logo,the modified UN one with the primitive laurel reef. The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chroniton (talk • contribs).

No, we will not reject canon and call anything your deluded brain came up with as "canon." Not even if you wait another half year to come off with the same baked proposals. --OuroborosCobra talk 16:04, December 11, 2009 (UTC)

Yet you accept information off an information panel that was hardly seen and has been said by it's creator as a joke. If that modifie un logo is not eh symbol of united Earth what is it doing on the United Earth space Probe Angency ships and probes then?.--Chronitons

First, learn to type. Second, what's seen on-screen is canon. We accept what is on the screen. Joke or not, we document it. Period. --From Andoria with Love 07:29, December 12, 2009 (UTC)

Redux Edit

Just to have a place for the (probably) following discussion. Yes, I removed the image resizing option from this template again. Yes, those logos are gigantic... but no, I don't think that the only way out here would be to revert my changes and include smaller images. Instead, why don't we just use a single, other image - the map of the Earth/Romulan border? That's the only "image" we really have from the war, and even spares us the endless discussion of whether the logos we use are the totally correct ones? Why do we need logos here, if no other military-conflict-sidebar uses those? Unless someone brings up good reasons to keep those, I'm going to do this change later. -- Cid Highwind 11:06, February 3, 2010 (UTC)

Oh no, it's me again! I would prefer not to lose the option, as one of my many back projects is to see if there are any other conflicts that could use the logo option. I'll move it to the front and get back to this soon. - Archduk3 21:49, February 3, 2010 (UTC)

To be honest, while it's probably possible to add logos to many other conflict pages, I'm not sure that any single one of them will become more informative in that process. Replacing an image of the actual conflict with two images just consisting of "random shapes and colors" isn't really that helpful, I guess. -- Cid Highwind 21:58, February 3, 2010 (UTC)

Much like this page, the often referenced, never seen Federation-Cardassian War has enough info to actually make a sidebar work, but no images beyond the emblems of the governments involved. There are a few more that don't currently have a usable image in the database either, one could be added at a later date of course, but the two image option would work well for all of these until then. That was just a quick check of the usual suspects, a full check may find more. - Archduk3 22:12, February 3, 2010 (UTC)

Spaceflight Chronology Edit

Why should the Spaceflight Chronology be in background rather than apocrypha? It's a non-canon account, just like the novels. Certainly on this page, the information provided fits much better in the Apocrypha section than the Background section.– Cleanse 11:41, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Because our content and resource policies lists it as a permitted background resource, just like the Encyclopedia and TM. --OuroborosCobra talk 14:22, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
Despite the fact it was used as refence materail for the majority of the 22nd century references in the first four television series and First Contact, and makes more technological sense then Enterprise. The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chroniton (talk • contribs).
What you think makes more sense, whether it be technological or otherwise, is not really relevant, is it? ;) This is an encyclopedia for what is canon in Star Trek canon, not an encyclopedia for what one person thinks should be canon. --From College with Love

And as such a responsible and noted Star Trek refernece site you should be able to realise that theres i more then one timeline to Star Trek: Ex Astris Scientia [http://blog.mygeeklife.net/articles/2008/01/10/star-trek-the-three-timeline-theory-part-i/ Geekvolution

Currently this wiki is purely about Timelines 2 and 3. Chroniton

Fan theories do not concern this site, sorry. Memory Alpha a site for canon information only. Offering fan theories to argue what is canon does not help your case in the least. --From Andoria with Love 07:30, December 12, 2009 (UTC)

Spocks description of early earth ships in 'Balance of Terror'Edit

Hi, Just watching 'Balance of Terror' on the new remastered UK boxsets and noticed Spock talks about early Earth ships in the Romulan war and that ships of that time used atomic weapons and had no ship to ship communications. From Enterprise we know this is not true, just wondering if anyone could shed some light on this :) Thanks The preceding unsigned comment was added by 92.12.126.236 (talk).

I don't believe it was said there was no ship-to-ship communication, just that there was no visual communication. We know that the treaty ending the war was negotiated over subspace radio. As for the weapons, maybe the Romulans used them, or Earth's allies, or even Earth if they couldn't make photonic torpedoes fast enough, there are many possible answers.--31dot 18:21, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Very good answer, thank you very much. I thought it meant they had no visual communications at all, obviously just meant with the Romulans, which Enterprise did explain, silly me. Thanks for clearing it up :) The preceding unsigned comment was added by 92.11.37.195 (talk).

The real answer to this question is that only audio subspace communicatons was used, the Romulan may have had a primitive version of visual subspace communication but as we know they never used it. No photon torpesoes of any kind was used the weaponary was primitive lasers and nuclear warheads for both side, (the use of nukes goes a long way to explain ing whay itis refered to as the second most bloodiest war in the galaxy). The inclusion of visual communications and photonic torpedoes on Enterprise wer two of the main canon contradicitng technological errors on Enterpise that was used to help new comers to realise it's Star Trek. The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chroniton (talk • contribs).
That's not actually the "real" answer, that's just what you think is the answer. For example, we do not know that photon/photonic torpedoes were not used at all, as this was not stated. We know phasers were not around in the 22nd century, but photon torpedoes could have been. It also wasn't stated that nuclear warheads were used on both sides; you could make an argument that it was implied, but nothing else. There is also nothing in canon stating that they used "primitive lasers." Also, the Earth-Romulan War was never referred to as "the second most bloodiest war in the galaxy;" never use fanon, non-canon, or reference information to argue canon facts as they simply detract from your argument, as they obviously did here. As for the visual communication, we know that there was no ship-to-ship visual communication between Humans and Romulans; this does not mean there was no ship-to-ship visual communication period. In fact, being out in deep space and encountering other ships without the capacity for visual communication would not make much sense, would it? Also, as you know, the Humans on Enterprise still never saw the Romulans, even though they have visual communication. So, no, Enterprise does not really "contradict" anything in this regard. Using a bit of imagination and thought to explain apparent "discrepencies" goes a long way, I highly recommend it rather than merely dismissing everything because they don't fit your out-dated idea of canon. --From College with Love

1. The lasers were primitive because it is stated that the laser technology was devleoped only two years before the war. And lasers were still being used in TOS: The Cage which means they were continued to be developed making those of the war less advanced or as it's otherwise known= primitive. 2. No human ever saw a Romulan. The existance of visual subspace communication cannot be reconciled with a treaty negoigated purely by subspace radio. And the reason they never saw any Romulans is another reason why Enterprise is not canon, a ship that can self repair, and mimmick other ships right down to the weapons signatures, yet the Romulans then abandoned these highly advanced technologies for a more advanced cloaking device. Explain that. 3. I never said that both sides didn't have veiwscreens just that, earth at least didn't have the technological knowledge of visual subspace communications. 4. There was no Coalition of Planets because surely the combine forceas of Vulcan, Andoria, Teller, and Earth would literally en the war very soon after it began, and not result in the stalemate most sources say it was. .--Chronitons

1. Nowhere in canon was it stated when lasers were developed. Considering laser technology existed as early as 1960, it would be stupid for the writers of a show made several years later to declare that laser tech would not be invented until the 2160s.
2. No Human ever saw a Romulan during the war, check. Enterprise does not violate canon in this regard. Also, the existence of visual subspace communication on Enterprise does not preclude the possibility of a negotiation conducted purely on subspace radio. The Romulans merely chose not to use visual communication -- and there you go, you have an explanation. You have a mind, please use it. And Enterprise is officially canon, period. Whether or not you accept it as canon is irrelevant, both officially and thus on Memory Alpha.
3. That was never specifically stated, either. Spock said there was "no visual ship-to-ship communication," he didn't give specifics, nor did he mention which side didn't have the capability (or, as the case may be, which side refused not to use visual communication -- in this case, the Romulans).
4. Spock stated there were allies in the war beyond Earth and Romulus. Vulcan, Andoria, Tellar are all allies. And seeing as how a Coalition was shown on Enterprise, and since Enterprise is canon, there was indeed a Coalition.
Now, if you have any further comments which would help to expand or improve this article, feel free to post. If, however, you only want to comment on why you believe Enterprise is non-canon, don't bother. These talk pages are for discussing the content and quality of the article, not for you to try and convince us why Enterprise isn't canon. Officially – and thus, on Memory Alpha – the show is canon. That is it, end of story. Again, any helpful comments are welcome, but any further comments like the ones you have been posted will simply be removed as they do not help this project at all and are not what these talk pages are here for. So you can A.) accept that Enterprise is officially canon (this is an inarguable fact, one you cannot change) and move on; B.) don't accept it, but move on anyway; or C.) keep posting such comments, which will continue to be removed until we get tired of it and block you from editing. I don't foresee it going that far, but I am letting you know that it can if you let it. --From Andoria with Love 07:47, December 12, 2009 (UTC)

bring back star trek enterprise Edit

bring back star trek enterprise its a fantastic show The preceding unsigned comment was added by 110.32.76.9 (talk).

Not going to happen. The only way you'll get your Enterprise fix is to read the new novels. -- sulfur 11:52, February 11, 2011 (UTC)

Things from "In a Mirror, Darkly" are in an alternate timeline Edit

Why is there information from the two episodes from Enterprise "In a Mirror, Darkly"? That was an alternate time-line that was corrected so it never existed at all. Things of course went different then. Dream Focus 03:54, August 12, 2011 (UTC)

The information from that episode is from this computer screen on the USS Defiant that originated from the prime universe where this war took place. --Pseudohuman 04:16, August 12, 2011 (UTC)

Romulans saw Humans, didn't they? Edit

"In fact it would be over a century before any Human or Romulan would even see what their enemy looked like."

Didn't the Romulans see what Reed and Trip looked like in "United"? - Mitchz95 01:23, February 23, 2012 (UTC)

It should probably simply say that Humans didn't see Romulans.--31dot 01:28, February 23, 2012 (UTC)
Is it possible Humans assumed the Romulans hadn't seen them... --Pseudohuman 01:34, February 23, 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I think that was the implication. I've made the change. - Mitchz95 01:40, February 23, 2012 (UTC)


Spaceflight and a 150 years Edit

Since there have been several attempts to move these sections of the article to the apocrypha section. I thought we should have a longer note about them here in the discussion page so the attempts would stop and to explain why they are where they are, since that seems unclear to some people.

I want to say first of all that I understand the reasoning for the move attempts. There are two types of reference works. And two types of apocryphal works. There are the sort of real-world point-of-view reference works where everything is stated by the authors as behind-the-scenes commentary and then there are these "filling-in-the-blanks"-books that are written as if they were an "in-universe book" with maps and made up technical information, blueprints, and details about what happened in the history of the trek universe that supposedly haven't been revealed in canon yet. Then we have the two types of apocryphal works that are these similar in-universe background information source book types and then we have narrative stories and novels and games and such.

I understand that since some of the reference books and apocryphal resource books are both written from an in-universe point-of-view with new made up shit, they seem similar as they contain new information in the in-universe style, and it seems stupid to divide them up. Why not put them all into apocrypha. The difference is that some are intended by the writers as official authorized reference sources for the canon episodes and films, while the others are reference works related to the comics, books and games. Spaceflight Chronology and Federation 150 Years, like the Star Charts and Technical Manuals are reference works for canon.

If we were to move them all to apocrypha, and keep only the behind-the-scenes commentary in bg, we would need to move all of these in all articles. That would need a policy change, and that discussion needs to be had elsewhere. This article cannot just be an exception to the rule. --Pseudohuman (talk) 15:18, April 6, 2014 (UTC)

As the one who made the last attempt, and sorry if that has irked you a bit, I operated on the current understanding that they are not considered "valid" production BGinfo material (anymore). While it is too soon to say anything about Federation and may have jumped the gun on this one, this is IMO especially the case with The Chronology which has gone the way of Star Trek Star Fleet Technical Manual, and, though both licensed, these two are and not written by actual production staffers (whereas the other examples you mention are, using production derived material), and hopelessly outdated by later established canon. Therefore I assumed they must then be apocrypha. Hence my action. That being said, I'll abide with current policy, though you were right that I was led astray.--Sennim (talk) 17:13, April 6, 2014 (UTC)

I was not annoyed at all. I simply wanted to bring clarity to the policy. We don't currently have a policy that entire reference works turn into apocrypha after new canon creates a contradiction with some aspects of the reference work. Those specific notes from the work simply become outdated. If you want to establish a policy that an entire reference book becomes apocrypha when this occurs, it also needs to be argued somewhere else, as that would be a big change to many articles in MA. --Pseudohuman (talk) 18:04, April 6, 2014 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki