Is there any other citation for this term beyond the Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Technical Manual? If not, we should scale back the massive speculation going on in the text. Aholland 03:19, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
- Scaled back. Although i can't pin it down to an episode, i wonder if the EX designation is purely a TM/Encyc concept or if it has translated into an episodic inclusion -- like in dialogue, writer's guide, on set graphic, etc -- Captain M.K.B. 04:25, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
The rewrite you did to the body of the article was very nicely done. However, I can't find anything in the Technical Manual or Encyclopedia on "Explorer". It is in the DS9 Tech Manual (just associated with the Galaxy without explanation of what it means), though. Was that the reference you meant? As to whether it worked its way into any scripts or such, my quick review says "no", and unless someone comes forward with a cite I believe we will have to assume it didn't and just live with the DS9 Tech Manual and whatever other sources you have for a citation. Aholland 12:40, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
- Try looking:
- Star Trek: The Next Generation Technical Manual, section 1.3, page 5: "The USS Enterprise is classified as an Explorer, the largest starship in a classification system that includes cruiser, cargo carrier, tanker, surveyor and scout."
- You are right that the Encyclopedia omits this data. i had thought both sources contained it. -- Captain M.K.B. 13:45, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
- from scripts:
- STAR TREK: THE NEXT GENERATION "Yesterday's Enterprise" #40273-163 ... FINAL DRAFT DECEMBER 8, 1989 STAR TREK: "Yesterday's Enterprise" - 12/08/89 ... bridge is more like the nerve center of a battleship than of an explorer. ...
- STAR TREK: THE NEXT GENERATION "The Royale" #40272-138 Written by ... FINAL DRAFT JANUARY 10, 1989 STAR TREK: "The Royale" - 01/10/89 - CAST STAR ... Stephen Richey was the commanding officer of the explorer ship Charybdis ... -- Captain M.K.B. 14:11, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Nice find in the Tech Manual! In "The Royale" that was not a 24th century ship and so outside this classification listing (which is probably why you didn't mention it!) But in "Yesterday's Enterprise" the description is, I think, less a technical use of "Explorer" as a classification and more a descriptive phrase from the writer to distinguish it from a "battleship". But as it is in background, probably nothing more than a note that it wasn't in dialogue but in a scene description in the script should do it. Since our only sources are the TNG Tech Manual and the DS9 Tech Manual (and maybe the descriptive phrase in the script), any problem with expanding the description to include the bit about "cruiser, cargo carrier, tanker, surveyor and scout"? In for a penny, in for a pound, so to speak? (Of course, why a tanker would be this classification is beyond me!) And, of course, the bit about non-canon as to the fact we're getting all this from these books written by production staff. Aholland 14:33, 24 April 2006 (UTC)