Wikia

Memory Alpha

Talk:Human-Klingon history

37,578pages on
this wiki

Back to page

Revision as of 22:40, July 27, 2011 by Archduk3 (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Factual accuracyEdit

Everything in this article is Canon, it is just not well known. It includes a few misc facts that I discovered. If there is anything you can not establish, I'll explain my source here. --TOSrules 23:53, 1 Oct 2004 (CEST)

Generally, it would be nice if you could start by just noting the relevant episode for each section. The proper format to use is: ([[TOS]]: "[[Episode Name]]"). Specifically, I'm interested in the exact quote that explains the first paragraph - where's that "70 years" figure from, and where exactly was it said that first contact occured at the beginning of that time period? Also, please don't sign articles - they might be rewritten by someone else later. -- Cid Highwind 00:11, 2 Oct 2004 (CEST)

First, According to Spock said in "The Trouble with Tribbles", "The Conflict begun on initial contact over the possession of Sherman's Planet". It gives a location and suggest that First Contact must have occurred at roughly that time. The 70 years comes from Spock in Star Trek VI, when he said that the conflict has been on going for almost 70 years. In truth the way he said it pins the date down to 68 or 69 years.

I'll add Episode references, the signature was to show that I was the one to initially write the article.--TOSrules 00:26, 2 Oct 2004 (CEST)



I'm having trouble swallowing the factual accuracy of this article. First off though, in reference to your dating, Spock's comment in ST6 doesn't "pin down" the date of anything. Just because you think "almost 70 years" is a precise reference to 68 or 69, I don't see the reasoning of it being possibly 67 or 65 years.
I doubt that Spock said "The Conflict begun.." since he is well-known for using proper grammar. And the conflict he would be referring to in "Trouble With Tribbles" would the the conflict of interest of developing Sherman's planet. There was no actual combat occurring at that point, as per the Organian influence. Since this was a conflict based on terms of a very recent treaty, I fail to see your reasoning in extending the Sherman's planet issue to a seventy year debacle bassed on your misspelling "the conflict" as "The Conflict." There's simply no evidence that the Planet in question was a long-standing issue. Manufacturing a connection between the events is a product of sheer imagination.
Also, on the larger issue of the events of Enterprise versus the 70 year cold war, Since Spock simply said "70 years of unremitting hostilities," there's no real link between the beginning of the cold war and the first contact with the species. Again, a product of imagination. Based on that reference alone, there could have even been early conflicts with the Klingons, followed by a remittance of the hotilities (before they finally became "unremitting")
--Captain Mike K. Bartel 04:50, 2 Oct 2004 (CEST)
The exact line is, "Under dispute between the two parties since initial contact." Kirk was asking for a history lesson on events on the sector. Before replying, Watch the beginning of "The Trouble with Tribbles" Spock was implying that we met the Klingons at Sherman's Planet, where both sides laid claim to the planet. I think Spock was pretty clear as to that point. This is what gives me the authority to suggest this.
Now you seem to think that this conflicts with Enterprise, but it does not. Remember, The "Broken Bow" first contact would not have occurred, void of a temporal Cold War. If it was not for that incident even other episodes where they have contact with the Klingons may not have occurred because of a later launch date. --TOSrules 05:52, 2 Oct 2004 (CEST)
But that argument would imply that Enterprise has rendered all subsequent Trek history void by creating an alternate timeline. I don't think that's advisable. -- EtaPiscium 06:01, 2 Oct 2004 (CEST)
The current state of things, in Enterprise is miscellanies contacts, the history should bear large resemblance to the normal history. it also would have little effect over the Klingon meet up over Sherman's Planet. Just Spock of that History would no longer say Initial Contact. Star Trek has gone against TOS history for a long time. Also The Sherman's Planet First Contact plays better into Picard's line of "Disastrous contact". You have to agree "Broken Bow" would not have occurred if not for the Temporal Cold War. --TOSrules 06:19, 2 Oct 2004 (CEST)
But as much as I'd maybe like to pretend certain things never happened, they did, and now it's canon and the articles should reflect that. We can't pick and choose which facts to accept when there's such a large body of contradicting evidence as Enterprise has provided. -- EtaPiscium 06:24, 2 Oct 2004 (CEST)
But as I stated, there is no conflict because the Enterprise first contact was created by the people from the future. I'm not willing to throw away The Trouble with Tribble Canon, just for Enterprise.--TOSrules 06:31, 2 Oct 2004 (CEST)
The thing is, Enterprise is canon. As much so as anything else. And the fact that the direct evidence it provides contradicts the inference made from Spock's dialogue means that the information from Enterprise takes precedence. And if any allowance were made for timelines (and I don't think there should be in this case), it should be for the Enterprise timeline, since it happens "after" the TOS one. -- EtaPiscium 06:35, 2 Oct 2004 (CEST)
I disagree, TOS canon should takes precedence. what you suggest is like saying that Leonardo Decapro's Romeo and Juliet should take precedence over the original version. --TOSrules 06:40, 2 Oct 2004 (CEST)
Leonardo DiCaprio's Romeo and Juliet would take precedence if whoever made it travelled back in time and changed Shakespeare's original version to his version. In the Trek universe, the fact that Enterprise aired after TOS means that the Trek universe is "living" in the Enterprise timeline, if indeed there actually was a timeline. There's no evidence to suggest that there wasn't a Temporal Cold War on Earth a century before TOS, aside from some inconvenient implications. -- EtaPiscium 06:45, 2 Oct 2004 (CEST)
You both seem to be missing something entirely. Spock identifies himself primarily as a Vulcan, not a Human, and thus any reference to "first contact" or even "our first contact" is most likely the Vulcans first contact with Klingons. Sherman's Planet could have previously been within Vulcan territory, and would therefore be absorbed into the Federation later. Granted, "Sherman" does not sound very Vulcan, but then again, the Germans don't call themselves German, only foreigners do. "Sherman's Planet" could be a name derived from a Human astronomer who looked through a telescope and discovered a planet before ever reaching it, and the name stuck in English (or Federation Basic or whatever) despite the discovery of the Vulcan name for it. To assume that "first contact" even remotely referrs to Earth's first contact is highly arrogant and unfounded, and it is obvious from "Broken Bow" that the Vulcans also had at least political tension with the Klingon Empire. We didn't see any Vulcan embassies on Q'onos, now did we? --The Rev 18:59, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

How exactly is this period of intermittent hostilities without full-blown war different from any other such historical period between the Federation and various powers that it requires its own article as a "cold war"? The same title could be applied to the period of intermittent hostilities between the Federation and the Romulans, or the Dominion before the actual war, or the Tholians, or any others. Not to mention that relations between the Federation and the Klingons weren't exactly friendly before Organia either. I don't really see the need for a separate article covering this particular period, unless it was specifically referred to as a discrete historical event like the Cold War on Earth was. -- EtaPiscium 04:58, 2 Oct 2004 (CEST)

A cold war, is a time of political tensions, that avoids out right war, but Before the First Klingon Episode there were conflicts, like the Federation Blockade of the Klingons, and there invasion of Federation worlds. So it is surly such a conflict, but not a war, except in "Errand of Mercy".--TOSrules 05:52, 2 Oct 2004 (CEST)
I would agree that this period was a cold war at times, but I argue that it was not actually a distinct historical period. Armed skirmishes occurred directly between Klingon and Starfleet forces during this period. There is no evidence that Federation or Klingon historians treated this block of time as a single unit like the Cold War on Earth is. I think it'd become troublesome if we start making up titles for what we perceive as a historical block of time in Trek, but was not canonically established. -- EtaPiscium 06:01, 2 Oct 2004 (CEST)
Excuse me TOS, but haven't you recognized the possibility that Spock's reference was to large tracts of Federation and Klingon territory that was under dispute. I remember no specification that Sherman's planet was the "only" such situation, and at no point in TOS is first contact with the Klingons mentioned any more specifically. I think that, bacause there is no definite proof of this, we should avoid manufacturing a version of events that can (and wiil) be provable as false. -- Captain Mike K. Bartel 10:11, 2 Oct 2004 (CEST)

but whether you are saying he was referring to the Area of Space, or Sherman's Planet, it still tells us that The conflict between the federation and Klingon Empire begun on Initial Contact. I am not suggesting that Shermans Planet is the only place of dispute. that is obvious from other episodes like "Errand of Mercy" and "Elaan of Troyius". --TOSrules 10:25, 2 Oct 2004 (CEST)

But you just stated that Sherman's Planet was unequivocably the point of First Contact, and that ENT data is to be disregarded. This is disallowable. This article will be rewritten so that all references to the beginning, duration and end of this conflict are accurate to the references, and the inferences removed. This may mean simply listing conflicting data points factually together, because even seemingly contradictory data is all equally valid and researchable. -- Captain Mike K. Bartel 10:32, 2 Oct 2004 (CEST)
At most it would be re-written to say, "The Federation Klingon Conflict began upon initial contact with the race, over the possession of the quadrant in the area of Sherman's Planet."
Your point has chanced my thinking. you are factual in the sense that he did not necessarily say it was Sherman's Planet, but only that Area Spock was referring to as the sense of the dispute. Although the sentance would still sugest that Conflicts begun on Inital Contact and in the area of Shermans Planet, good point. --TOSrules 23:37, 2 Oct 2004 (CEST)

Three-year peace Edit

If I remember correctly, there was a reference in "Day of the Dove" that stated the Federation and the Klingons had been at peace for three years at that point, which was believed to be 2268. If that was the case, that would mean the events of "Errand of Mercy" took place in 2265, which would pretty much mean that the time elapsed between episodes is longer than we think. Could somebody check up on this? --From Andoria with Love 21:37, 12 Nov 2005 (UTC)

  • I believe you are taking "3 years" too literally. Depending on the individual, "3 years" could mean anything over 2 years and under 4--> so if "errand of mercy" took place 2 years and 3 months before "day of the dove", mccoy or whoever made the remark, could have simply said 3 years to round up to the nearest whole number. It is a well known fact that the crew rounded a lot, because Spock always tended to correct them whenever he had the opportunity. But it does seem that to be inconsistant, now that I look at it closer-- it appears to be, at most 1 1/2 years (2 years). --Alan del Beccio 21:44, 12 Nov 2005 (UTC)
  • I think it was Kirk who said it. I think he told Kang that the Federation had honored the peace for 3 years so there was no reason for the Klingons to have attacked them. --From Andoria with Love 22:05, 12 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Gorkon initiative and the Neutral Zone Edit

Recently, a line about the peace plan in 2293 was modified to remove a proposal to abolish the Klingon-Federation Neutral Zone. "Far be it for me to dispute my blue friend", but we have the following:

Cartwright: "Negotiations for what?"
Spock: "The dismantling of our space stations and starbases along the Neutral Zone--"

Here Spock was talking about Gorkon's proposal. This line would indicate, but not prove, the abolishment of the neutral zone. Then we have the conversation between Kirk and McCoy at Rura Penthe:

Kirk: "Some people are afraid... of what might happen. I was terrified."
McCoy: "What terrified you, specifically?"
Kirk: "No more Neutral Zone. I was used to hating Klingons. It never even occurred to me to take Gorkon at his word."

This conversation is about what terrified Kirk and others in Gorkon's proposal, in this new future. These together would seem to prove to me that the abolishment on the Neutral Zone was part of what was proposed in 2293. --OuroborosCobra talk 07:42, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Okay, okay, so there was talk about remove the Neutral Zone. Hey, I can accept when I'm in err, and I can take it like a man.
Bitch. :-P --From Andoria with Love 07:53, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Who called it a cold war?Edit

Is this just a term from the fan base? If it was ever used in canon or coined by the writers it should be mentioned in the article. If not, I would say that any attempt to prove that this time period was a cold war (which seems to be a thesis) would just be original research.--Hribar 14:16, May 8, 2010 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki