User Report Edit
Anon user Edit
After making several additions on an "edit" page I could not find a SAVE/PRINT/or publish button anywhere so I clicked "need help editing?" and all my additions to the STAR TREK notes about me on the TOS COURTMARTIAL episode #15 went up in smoke. Winston de Lugo (Timothy in COURTMARTIAL) I hope U have ways of finding it, I can't. - – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 22.214.171.124 (talk).
- If you went to a different screen from the edit screen without saving, anything you did is gone. The Save button should be located to the right of the posting area (if you are using the default skin). 31dot (talk) 01:26, January 2, 2014 (UTC)
Voth Ship STO Edit
I don't know why you undid the edit in the Voth city ship ship article as there are many articles of ships where in the Apocrypha section there has mention of their appearances in other non canon sources such as video games, books, comics etc. --BorgKnight (talk) 11:03, January 6, 2014 (UTC)
Also just to say that mention of their appearance in the game, as well as the appearance of their City Ship is already in the Apocrypha section of the Voth article anyway. --BorgKnight (talk) 11:08, January 6, 2014 (UTC)
- STO is not an ordinary non-canon source; it purports to be a recreation of the entire Star Trek universe. We generally only have Apocrypha information from it when something significant is revealed in STO (such as the death of a character, major change in occupation, destruction of a known ship, etc.) If we did not do this, virtually every article here would have a "This was in STO" in it. We aren't the STO wiki(which we have a link to on the main page). Please see Forum:STO References for more information. In all truthfulness that should be the case with any non-canon source(only revealing major information), though one-time appearances in a non-canon product are OK depending on how it is written. 31dot (talk) 11:15, January 6, 2014 (UTC)
- In the case of the Voth page, more than their appearance is mentioned, such as their attempts to obtain Omega particles. A larger ship than their ship seen in Voyager is just game-specific information and reveals nothing about it. 31dot (talk) 11:17, January 6, 2014 (UTC)
formal complaint against you Edit
By removing my comment from a talk page, you violated the rules of this wiki. I will be finding a senior admin and filing a complaint against you. 126.96.36.199 11:41, January 28, 2014 (UTC)
- If you will look carefully, I did not remove it, but moved it out of an old discussion into a new one at the bottom of the page. 31dot (talk) 11:42, January 28, 2014 (UTC)
Removal of Bajoran and Regalian phaser rifles from type 3 phaserEdit
This should be put back on the page. The page is about phaser rifles (Bajoran, Regalian and Federation.) This has been on the page for years. Should this be put back or not?.--TyphussJediVader (talk) 13:38, February 20, 2014 (UTC)
The Kelvin's Blue BoltsEdit
Further discussion on that topic would be pointless: they want the pulses to be torpedoes. I have already canon-referenced my claims otherwise, and my statements have been flatly ignored. (and an attempt was made to say that I was using the "sophistication" of the effect as evidence, when I was using the function.) The weapons on the Kelvin act like exactly disruptor fire. What is the idea with calling this 23rd century weapon a photon torpedo? I can't find any logic in it at all. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Idazmi (talk • contribs).
- All I know is that there was no consensus or agreement to the change; you shouldn't make a disputed change just because you think you are right, as that just causes edit wars. 31dot (talk) 22:25, March 7, 2014 (UTC)
Why did you remove content I placed on that page? I did the research and found what I had edited to correspond with another source. (Roddy229 (talk) 02:39, March 28, 2014 (UTC)Roddy229Roddy229 (talk) 02:39, March 28, 2014 (UTC))
- The USS Magellan needs to be protected now. Can you do that, thanks.--TyphussJediVader (talk) 02:54, March 28, 2014 (UTC)
Archduk3, the sources on said page, and several online including three pages cited from Google confirmed accuracy of what I put. I'd appreciate it being corrected (Roddy229 (talk) 03:29, March 28, 2014 (UTC)Roddy229Roddy229 (talk) 03:29, March 28, 2014 (UTC))
- Ex astris scientia, and published manuals that were authorized by paramount for starters, were two of the sources I used to ensure accuracy. (Roddy229 (talk) 03:32, March 28, 2014 (UTC)Roddy229Roddy229 (talk) 03:32, March 28, 2014 (UTC))
Is that so? Then why would such content be ddisplayed on the page? Seems like this wiki has evolved into a one sided discussion where the average person has no right to put their two cents into it. I'll be speaking with people above you about this matter (Roddy229 (talk) 03:39, March 28, 2014 (UTC)Roddy229Roddy229 (talk) 03:39, March 28, 2014 (UTC))
- Good luck with that. Why do you sign your name twice? If you feel there are similar materials, please suggest their removal.
--31dot (talk) 03:44, March 28, 2014 (UTC)
I'll admit, I'm not the best at using some of the HTML stuff here. But just like you, and everyone else within this group, I have a right to defend my position. DS9 episode sacrifice of angels. Sisko orders the Magellan and Venture to protect the Defiant, both ships engaged a Galor class to clear the way for the Defiant's run past the dominion line. The Venture is the only one seen docked at DS9 after the fight is over. Roddy229 (talk) 04:02, March 28, 2014 (UTC)Roddy229Roddy229 (talk) 04:02, March 28, 2014 (UTC)
- Signing posts should be done by typing ~~~~ at the end or by clicking the Signature button located above where you type your post. You don't need to type your name or have more than four tildes(~).
- I'm not sure who isn't being civil to you. Where was the ship identified as the Venture? I realize it was reused stock footage of the Venture from "The Way of the Warrior" but the ship was not labeled in either episode(it was named in dialog in TWOTW}. A lot happened in Sacrifice of Angels between where the Venture was mentioned and the end where the stock footage was used, and many Galaxy-class ships were seen in that episode without specific identification.
- Regardless, we need direct, specific evidence of your position stated in the episode or even by Trek staff who worked on the episode, not fan website analysis. Information from a novel could be put as Apocrypha information, but not in-universe information. I urge you to review the above-linked policies as Archduk suggested. And please stop complaining about your "rights" being violated. You have no more "rights" than anyone else; all edits here are determined by consensus of the community, not just by the person who made them. 31dot (talk) 11:45, March 28, 2014 (UTC)
help requested Edit
fine got it only administrators can do it thanks.--188.8.131.52 20:18, April 7, 2014 (UTC)
Tora Ziyal Edit
- That is absolutely correct; apologies, and thanks. 31dot (talk) 12:19, May 18, 2014 (UTC)
I just wanted to say thank you. This is a cool site with a lot of great information. I am using this as a helpful resource for my writing.
Keep up the great work!
Star Trek episodesEdit
Hi, I want to watch all Star Trek episodes and movies. However, when I wanted to start, I found out some of the movie and stuff are set before the first season. Could you please tell me where to start? --Finn Tracy (talk) 07:57, June 3, 2014 (UTC) PS: I changed the name link, because I forgot to log in :P
- If you are saying that you want to watch the episodes in chronological order(within the Star Trek universe) you will want to watch Star Trek: Enterprise first. 31dot (talk) 09:07, June 3, 2014 (UTC)
Writing ability Edit
I received this message from one of the members of this board.
- What makes you think, a maximum degree of fragmentation is what any wiki-article should aim for? Go look at any random featured article in Wikipedia (e.g., ::Virginia, Mauna Loa, Istanbul), and understand that a string of a dozen 5-8 word mini-sentences is much less comfortable to read than 3-4 sentences with ~20 words each. Anyhow, by now it would be a mammoth-undertaking to reverse/improve those 1000s of edits you've done so far... I've been an active member of the MA-community for 10 years or so, and I certainly do not feel up for the task. I cannot be the first one addressing this. Can I? --36ophiuchi (talk) 12:08, July 12, 2014 (UTC)
I would like your opinion on this matter. Am I causing damage to the wiki? I will be frank - I know my communication skills are not say at the level of other writers. I have been diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome, with high levels of anxiety/depression and agoraphobia. I have been rated as having a Global Assessment of Functioning of 45. () A range between 40 and 50 is, Serious symptoms (e.g., suicidal ideation, severe obsessional rituals, frequent shoplifting) or any serious impairment in social, occupational, or school functioning (e.g., no friends, unable to keep a job, cannot work). I have never shoplifted; however, my severe obsessional ritual could be considered what I do on this wiki. I have trouble concentrating, so for me, I write like I think or say in dialog. I use short sentences. For instance, I was working on material from "Whispers". For this paragraph, the area in bold is what I wrote.
- The ITA Elmira was a starship that was registered for Federation travel in the late 24th century. In 2370, the captain of this ship was G. Gulliver. The starship's point of departure was Carinae Delta V. The starship arrived at Deep Space 9 on stardate 47552.9. The ITA Elmira was listed on the space station's arrival roster. (DS9: "Whispers", production art)
- I am willing to comment, but I am unable to do so at this time due to time issues; I will try to comment within the next 24 hours. 31dot (talk) 16:51, July 12, 2014 (UTC)
- The comment seems a bit harsh to me, even if the general point being made has some truth to it. Even if it is a legitimate issue, I don't see it as a major problem or somehow "damaging" the wiki. There are very few perfect editors here, or perfect articles. I certainly don't write everything perfectly. I don't know if I have much specific advice for you; possibly if you undertake a major edit to an article you might want to request that it be reviewed by others, or even beforehand draft the changes you want to make and request comment or advice. Clearly you are acting in good faith to add information to articles; style can always be changed as this is a group effort.
- Most importantly I want everyone to feel welcome editing here. I don't think it was 36's intention to be unwelcome, but just an expression of what to them is frustration. 31dot (talk) 03:19, July 13, 2014 (UTC)
Voyager Flight Path Edit
We have a map that was seen in Season 7 of Voyager. It's a map of the galaxy. Look here. 
On the bottom of the map, there is Voyager's flight path marked out by stardates. Now, look to the map. There is a red rectangle. One of the stardates is marked in red - 48315.8. These two, the rectangle and the stardate are the beginning of the journey. There are eight rectangles in all. It can be confusing, as they overlap. Each rectangle matches up to a stardate. The last stardate, in yellow, has a corresponding yellow rectangle. There is a white line that goes through the rectangles and the galaxy; this is the flight path of Voyager.
For the worlds visited by Voyager, I would check the stardate for the episode, then I would do a cross check on where Voyager would be. Where would this place Voyager, according to the map? I would then write in the article where the location was situated in the galaxy and provide a short explanation in the talk page on how I came to my conclusion.
- Yes, I would say analyzing such a map would be original research for our purposes. I'm sure it was created without regard for the actual position of Voyager and I'm not even sure the stardates on it all come from episodes(if they didn't, that would be even more original research). I don't recall what episode it appeared in, either. 31dot (talk) 10:06, July 13, 2014 (UTC)