Memory Alpha
Register
Advertisement
Memory Alpha

as officers[]

"Tellarites served as Starfleet officers in the early 2370's, as Captain Laporin's helmsman was a Tellarite." Seemed relevant as not all Federation member species fill the ranks of the fleet. Tyrant 20:19, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)Tyrant

That's pure supposition. We've been limited to (essentially) 4 starship crews over the period of 40 years. That is hardly a representive sample of all species that serve in Starfleet. There are several obvious reasons, and some less than obvious reasons, why they were not shown, but you certainly haven't taken into account the potential crewmembers aboard the roughly 300 Federation starships that we haven't seen the crewmembers for. For all we know, 25% of those ships are completely manned by Tellarites and Andorians. Either way that is hardly cause to make such a boisterous claim as that of saying that they don't fill the ranks of the fleet. --Gvsualan 21:10, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Yeah, I'm not really firm on that myself, said it a while back but forgot to sign it. I was just assuming that some Federation member species must be too pacifistic to be in Starfleet, but it's just a guess. We don't really know if they all do or not, but we know that Tellerites do and that seems worth note to me. Tyrant 21:47, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)Tyrant

Physiology[]

I think a short Physiology section might be in order here. A place to talk about their hands and faces as well as compile anatomy references. Tyrant 20:19, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)Tyrant

My stance on this isn't as firm, but the way I see it: that too, is a "behind the scenes" issue, moreso, than a physiological issue -- which is clearly addressed at the bottom of the page. --Gvsualan 21:10, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Well, we also have the reference to them finding room temp cold, it's a little out of place in Society. I realize it will not be much of a section with that alone. However, a general description wouldn't hurt. Tyrant 21:47, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)Tyrant
I'd support this, the main paragraph could deal with their appearence from an 'in universe' perspective. It could talk about their hands, noses, eyes, beards, hair, height and body temp. Under it could be a little indented note dealing with the make up issues. (like at Yridian) Jaf 13:45, 18 July 2006 (UTC)Jaf
That edit is another reason for this section. Jaf 14:47, 2 December 2006 (UTC)Jaf

In a Mirror, Darkly[]

The Tellarite in the Agony Booth was named "Terev" onscreen, but I'm unsure as to the spelling. Also, I'm unable to find out who played him.

Votes for featured status[]

  • Tellarite - complete and comprehensive. 'Nuff said. --Gvsualan 19:16, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • Support Tyrant 14:04, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)Tyrant
    • Support -- Dmsdbo 21:12, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • Support -- A late support for the article. -- rebelstrike 17:59, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Tellarite liberator[]

The second Tellarite liberator that Archer asked about in "These Are the Voyages..." do anyone know the spelling? It should be added to this article somewhere. --Dalen 11:13, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

Tellarite Appearances[]

Did we really see Tellarites in TNG: "Conspiracy" and VOY: "Non Sequitur"? I don't think we did. --AC84 02:51, 7 March 2006 (PST)

We did: their appearances (with screenshots) are listed here: Unnamed Tellarites --Jörg 02:54, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
It was reused footage from Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home, but they still are Tellarites all the same. --Alan del Beccio 02:57, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Non-canon Source[]

The reference to TAS is in error due to its non-canon status. --<unsigned>

Memory Alpha considers TAS to be canon. See content and resource policies. --OuroborosCobra talk 21:20, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: Background - "Possible Tellarite female"[]

Again, see Worene, which explains the origin of this alien (she's not Tellarite, sorry). --Sasoriza 00:15, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Reversion of "Also see" line[]

Also see: This page for information on the Tellarite counterparts found in the mirror universe.

This was removed but that removal has been reverted.. but, um... the information on the Mirror Universe Tellarites can be found on the Tellarite page itself. So... why keep the disambig line? :-P --From Andoria with Love 05:34, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Don't, but when an anon IP removes something, they should put something more than "removed section" in their summary line, otherwise it looks like vandalism. --Alan 11:54, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Tellar-Earth distance[]

I've just removed a line saying that Tellar is "not far" from the Sol system. I'm about 98% sure that was never explicitly said, but should the other 2% win out it could of course go back. -- Capricorn 21:56, June 18, 2011 (UTC)

Removed[]

Cpt. Archer's trouble with pronouncing "Shallash" correctly might indicate it to rather be the name of a historic figure than a contemporary person as of 2161.

I don't see how that follows. All it indicates is that Archer wasn't familiar enough with the figure to know how to pronounce his name. -- Capricorn (talk) 09:49, March 4, 2016 (UTC)

I've removed the following 2 notes for being speculatory: "If this [the Tellarites' fondness for mud baths] is a reference to wallowing, it may be intended as an extension of their likeness to pigs," and, "In ENT: "United", Ambassador Gral complains about the inefficiency of Andorian communication codes. While this might be interpreted as a reference to superior Tellarite communication technology, it may simply be traditional baseless Tellarite complaining." The following 2 notes, which I've also removed, likewise deal with unknowns: "It was unknown how long his species had been trapped in that [Elysian] universe," and, "The Tellarites' fate in the 23rd and 24th centuries, particularly after the fall of the Terran Empire, is not known." --Defiant (talk) 08:43, May 28, 2017 (UTC)

Crewmember on Discovery?[]

Did anybody else notice a (male?) Tellarite crewmember walk past towards the end of Burnham's discussion with Saru in "Through the Valley of Shadows" (at about 11:30)?

They're out of focus. But they have the same beard/hairstyle we've seen on other Disco Tellarites (eg Gorch) and the hint of the porcine nose. It's hard to imagine it could be anything else.

I thought this would generate more excitement amongst fans, but nobody else seems to have noticed it.

Sojourner47 (talk) 21:03, April 12, 2019 (UTC)

Yes, there definitely was one, noticed him too. JagoAndLitefoot (talk) 23:13, April 12, 2019 (UTC)
For future reference, the rest of this discussion is here. In the future, try keeping it on one page. -- Capricorn (talk) 20:22, April 14, 2019 (UTC)

Pig-like??[]

I deleted from the introduction the characterization of Tellarites as “pig-like”, since that’s not something an in-universe Memory Alpha encyclopedist from the end of time would write even if they had proof of porcine ancestry, which I don’t see dispassionately explained and referenced at the very start of the History section. The Federation wouldn’t introduce their members that way. – PreviouslyOn24 (talk) 16:21, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Maybe change it to "porcine", so it sounds less crass. The Star Trek Encyclopedia describes Tellarites as "Humanoids with distinctive porcine physical traits". --NetSpiker (talk) 03:31, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

The Encyclopedia is free to make conjectural statements (like originally putting the warp flight in 2061 before it was canonized for 2063), mix canon and behind-the-scenes comments, but my question here is what has been established in the canon to suggest this is anything more than a superficial, insulting description by humans that has no place in a serious encyclopedia from the end of time, which is the conceit in the canon section. If evolutionary evidence exists, why isn’t it in the History section? If it helps, imagine you’re updating the Britannica long after we’ve made first contact with the Tellarites and you don’t want to lose your job when the Tellarite ambassador complains. – PreviouslyOn24 (talk) 04:51, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

This can be relocated to the physiology section and rephrased, but there are several background/apocrypha notes that should be included. "...piglike Tellurites [sic]..." (Cinefantastique, Vol. 22, No. 5, p. 34; Charting the Undiscovered Country: The Making of Trek VI, p. 90), Star Fleet Medical Reference Manual (p. 67) places them in the suidae family. My STE 3rd. ed. doesn't say "porcine," but "sturdy humanoids with distinguished snouts..." (p. 501), so NetSpiker may be referring to 1st or 4th ed. (Ah, "porcine" is not in the Tellarite entry, but used to describe Tellarites in the life-form list, p. 272.) - AJHalliwell (talk) 15:00, 28 March 2021 (UTC) Updated, AJHalliwell (talk) 15:38, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Referenced behind-the-scenes and non-canon info is fine in the relevant sections; I’m just trying to keep the canon segment factual and appropriate to an encyclopedia. Vulcans aren’t introduced as “pointy-eared” or “elf-like” either, so I was quite astonished to see the Tellarites summed up in this way, especially since I could only confirm two references to pig in this context, both of them insulting. There are more than enough pictures in the article showing exactly what they look like, without the need for such superficial characterization. – PreviouslyOn24 (talk) 16:26, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Actually I was referring to the 3rd edition. Here's a link. --NetSpiker (talk) 23:37, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Pig is the only canon term we have to use, we use what were given to work with. You see, pigs are also animals that look nearly like Tellarites; while insults are subjective, and quite frankly aren't even viewed the same way by Tellarites are by Humans, so stop Humanizing everything. Also, aside from the painfully obvious appearance factors, two references to Tellarites as pigs is no coincidence, much less the bg info that supports the piggy origins. Just like it's no coincidence Q refers to Humans as primates. If we had better terminology to work with, like reptilian which we use to describe all reptile-like aliens, then we could do better, but we can't. So accept what we have and leave it at that. As they say, if it oinks like a pink and wallows like a pig, then it must be a ... --Gvsualan (talk) 00:44, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Why not try using that “standard” of evidence in the real world and see how it goes with your credibility on the line? Again, when writing the canon section you’re writing as an in-universe encyclopedist living at the “end of time”, with in-universe scientific evidence available or not. You’re not going to rely on insults or superficial observations to introduce alien races. It’s almost as if something is forcing you to say that about Tellarites in the canon introduction, as if pictures and background notes are simply not enough. Why isn’t a Cardassian described as “snake-like” or “lizard-like” in the intro? As noted, there is no requirement whatsoever to give a quickie, off-the-cuff characterization in the canon introduction with only insults as evidence. What’s the point of having a canon section if people can’t resist breaking the conceit? – PreviouslyOn24 (talk) 02:25, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

When people stop taking everything personally, and returning the conversation back to rationality. "Pig" is the only canon term we have to use for this subject.
For the record, I'm not saying it has to be in the intro, not to say there are not a multitude of species who share similar references in their intros, but it certainly should not be mercilessly excised altogether over one person's interpretation of an obvious allusion to the truth through the form of an insult, as this would be just like saying that Humans really aren't primates because they were only called primates in Q's insults and jibes about the species, and not because of the obvious connotations. Unlike the absolutely ridiculous comparison of the Vulcan species being described as elf-like equaling this, had to be one of most asinine, unrepresentative analogies one could produce as counter-argument in that real straight line drawn from Humans evolving from primates, as being on par with Vulcans evolving from elves...
So because the term "porcine" is the best term of all terms we could use, which again roughly means "pig-like"-- and unlike the case of the writers tossing us a nice juicy adjective like "felines" to place in our coffers to reference with other species-- that term was never used on-screen. Therefore, we simply don't have the same luxury of using anything other than the best wording we can produce from our short list, "pig-like". Pigs are animals, and one mustn't try that hard to ignore even the most minimalist conclusion that Tellarites are very much pig-like: in resemblance, in certain behaviors, and in a number of heavily alluded direct and indirect references, both in-universe and behind the scenes.
With that said, I understand what an insult it, and this isn't a case of one foolishly trying to establish that Zeons or Troyians are a pig-like species because they were called "pigs"/"swine". This is simply an attempt to retain, or rather not completely eliminate, the factual references from the in-universe aspects of them being a "porcine" species, which you absolutely insist upon doing here. Once you can manage to see see beyond the fact that there is no coincidence that certain insults are built on the certain truths, and that two references to Tellarites as "pigs" is no coincidence, then this discussion might go somewhere.
The fact of the matter is, as an encyclopedia, we include any and all information we can to make this site useful, and thought it may not work for everybody and maybe you haven't been paying attention, but an insane amount of our content is built from an even more insane amount of really vague scraps of information we've been forced to consume. It is what it is. Learning to adapt to those flaws is what has made this encyclopedia thrive, and being lectured by you on how to write articles is certainly not the road you wish to take. –Gvsualan (talk) 15:25, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

What you don’t seem to appreciate is that behind-the-scenes and apocrypha sections exist in part because not everything meets the rigorous standards for inclusion into the canon section. You can’t even bury a canon note that Tellarites are insulted as “pigs” because they seem to resemble them: that would be a crass observation by our distinguished encyclopedist from the end of time working at the prestigious Memory Alpha institution. It just so happens that evolutionary evidence isn’t available so they can’t even say something in History, let alone make that observation in the most prominent section of all. Our behind-the-scenes info and apocrypha is nothing short of divine inspiration to them.

If you feel that a canon section is too short, which I don’t think it is here, it’s always possible to think of areas to elaborate upon that are supported by canon fact. For example, the stardate article can’t include any of the handwave-gobbledygook theories we see behind the scenes, but it can provide a table of stardates over the years, note the different formats available and the fact that calendar dates are rarely used. But stretching canon fact because you feel an urgent need to keep reverting my change in order to preserve a “precious” statement like this about Tellarites when there isn’t a similar one about the Cardassians or Vulcans is totally ridiculous. You don’t stretch canon fact, you use a background note smack in the middle of canon text if you have to, if such information makes sense in that particular place. Putting it at the start of the article with a link to pig on top of everything makes it seem like this makeup design choice is so fascinating it’s not to be missed! Vulcans can be a lot of things but Tellarites, well, they are “pig-like” based on two insults.

I’m telling you, think about what you’re fighting for here. If Tellarites were to land tomorrow, and you were an encyclopedia writer catching two people in a bar calling them pigs, with no access as yet to evolutionary information, I’d seriously hope you would not put your academic credibility on the line by jumping to conclusions. But that’s what you’re doing here on permanent record while roleplaying as our Memory Alpha encyclopedist from the end of time. You’re playing an encyclopedist who would rely on two insults and superficial observations in order to introduce Tellarites as “pig-like”, rather than show restraint by omitting such a characterization (you just said it doesn’t have to be there) and waiting for their colleagues to add evolutionary evidence to the History section, based on which they may or may not say something in the introduction as well.

That’s all. I just happened to notice it in this article, other articles may have similar problems, but that doesn’t mean Memory Alpha shouldn’t strive to follow its principles to the utmost and make corrections as needed. – PreviouslyOn24 (talk) 17:47, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Because I couldn't find a list of the on-screen references in the article or in this conversation,
  • "Apocalypse Rising", Klingon: "I beheaded their helmsman, a Tellarite. The pig didn't even have time to raise his weapon."
  • "United", Talas: "That Tellarite pig."
  • "The Escape Artist", Mudd: "...your pig-faced sister..."
Since the term "porcine" hasn't been used in canon, I again suggest moving this to the physiology section, working in language into the snout-paragraph that "Tellarites had pig-like traits, which were often referenced as a means of insult. (DS9: "Apocalypse Rising", ENT: "United", ST: "The Escape Artist")" That will give us a place for a bginfo box. That way the canon info is kept, we're using the language in the context we have it, and we can tie the bginfo in more clearly. To PreviouslyOn24's comment on why this wasn't in the "history" section, I don't think the intention is to say 'they evolved from pigs,' just that there was resemblance. If there's nothing about Andorians being blue or Orions being green in their opening paragraphs, we're not losing anything by including this in the physiology section. - AJHalliwell (talk) 22:44, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Also:
* "Babel One": Shran, "That Tellarite swine!"
* "United": Repeated from above, adding Shran's furthermore emphasis: "That Tellarite pig." / "Is there any other kind?"
For completionists. --Gvsualan (talk) 01:01, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Now imagine that on someone’s desk as a resource for the physiology section, which already makes specific observations about Tellarite appearance that tie into behind-the-scenes comments, without the need for our encyclopedist to suddenly reference galactic insults and supplement those observations with a superfluous, crude comparison such as “Tellarites had pig-like traits”. The only reason one might use that phrase is to make the reader speculate about shared ancestry, evolutionary evidence having apparently been lost in an apocalyptic event. But our encyclopedist is more careful than that and prefers to stick with the facts rather than reference hurtful comments as scientific evidence about any race or species in their encyclopedia. – PreviouslyOn24 (talk) 03:34, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

I think you're taking the idea of Memory Alpha as an in-universe encyclopedia from the distant future a bit too seriously. Memory Alpha is made for fans living in the real world, by those same fans. It only has an in-universe POV because it looks cooler that way. --NetSpiker (talk) 05:02, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

It doesn’t look cool if you pretend to write as a dispassionate scientist but then use “pig-like traits” with references to insults. The scientist is discredited because a hurtful, unsubstantiated element is introduced into the discourse, complete with a link to the pig article as if to make sure nothing is missed. – PreviouslyOn24 (talk) 05:56, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

I don't think the article is seeking to emphasize the insult; but I do think being definitive and accurate in this case, per our mission, goals and content policy, takes precedence over an example meant to illustrate what tense to use in articles. - AJHalliwell (talk) 13:49, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

There is nothing definitive or accurate about deriving a physiological term from racist insults. What seems to be happening here is that people are looking for the slimmest of in-canon excuses to insert behind-the-scenes or apocryphal comments into the canon section, which as noted before is the equivalent of our distinguished scientist claiming divine inspiration in-universe. – PreviouslyOn24 (talk) 14:14, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Moustache Reference[]

I didn't want to change it without checking, but I'm not sure why there's a [sic] after the word "moustache" in the quote from the "Journey to Babel" script in the Behind-the-Scenes section. That's a perfectly acceptable spelling of the word, although used less in the United States than "mustache."

Well, just in replying to this post, I can see that Fandom flags it with a red underline as a (possible) misspelling - "sic" notes that it was spelled with an "o" on the document itself, not erroneously by the poster. --LauraCC (talk) 17:56, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
What is underlined depends on your browser/system settings. It's not underlined for me, because I set mine to accept American and British spellings. That said, it's not an exclusively British spelling, Merriam Webster (an American dictionary) includes it too, just as a less common spelling. JagoAndLitefoot (talk) 18:35, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
A casual editor/reader wouldn't necessarily know that, I suppose. And preserving original spellings from edits by the same, however good their intentions, is the goal there. --LauraCC (talk) 18:39, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
Advertisement