- polywater -- not even sure its an appropriate article, regardless it needs a hand --Gvsualan 00:33, 10 Jan 2005 (CET)
- Is that image the best that exists for that graphic? It seems insufficient to support an article that has no other basis as far as I remember. Are there any valid resources for this article? Aholland 03:58, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
- Absolutely! :) But I don't recall the term "polywater" being mentioned in either one; that was my (admittedly poorly presented) point. Was it spoken on-screen - in which case it is golden - or only shown in a graphic? I was guessing it was a graphic and was hoping that an image existed that was actually readable (unlike the one associated with the article currently). Any ideas where the term came from? Aholland 12:13, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
- I think its probably devised by a MA archivist to describe (i paraphrase) "long strings of water molecules bound together in such a way that they act like alcohol on the brain" -- someone with chemistry background (and possibly also the person who added the "water polymer" note) decided that this would best be described as a "polywater"
- So no, not a canon term, but named for what it is. I'm not sure where things like this fit into our policy these days, but after all, if a rock appears on Star Trek, but no one canononically calls it a rock, does that mean we shouldn't refer to it as a rock -- or at least try to come up with something descriptive? hard, rock-like object? -- Captain M.K. Barteltalk 13:48, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
- It's a scientific real-world term, see Wikipedia:Polywater. This theory was devised in the 1960s, so it probably was the source for Trek's "water molecule strings" - and unless we find a better on-screen term for it (which should be preferred, of course), I don't think this one is "wrong" in any way... -- Cid Highwind 14:01, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
- Interesting. I read both Captain M.K. Bartel's note and Cid's links (and thank you for both). If we accept that a polymer - a long molecule - is what is meant, the term is probably okay to use here, much like "rock". :) Supporting this would be "The Naked Time", where McCoy said "Somehow on this planet, water's changed to a complex chain of molecules." And "The Naked Now" where Picard (reading) said the substance was "complex strings of water molecules". So I withdraw my objection to the term. (The article still needs a little help with its content, but that's a separate matter.) Thanks for taking the time to discuss it! Aholland 15:23, 1 March 2006 (UTC)