Fandom

Memory Alpha

Talk:Reference books

Back to Category

41,937pages on
this wiki
Add New Page

Ad blocker interference detected!


Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.

this is a list category, remove instances of "The," "A," and unnecessary instances of "Star Trek:" from the sort key. (ie [[Category:Reference books|Worlds of the Federation, The]] or [[Category:Reference books|Spaceflight Chronology, Star Trek]] )-- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 10:19, 27 Mar 2005 (EST)

Category:Reference worksEdit

To be contained in the "meta-trek" supercategory -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 02:07, 12 Apr 2005 (EDT)

One question, one request Edit

First, I never bought any star-trek-reference-book...because I'm afraid the discontinuity of the series (primarily warp-scales) isn't corrected but continued (ok, in that case it would be a sort of continuity ;))

And thats my Question: (dis)continuity???

Now my Request: would it be a good idea to add a reference_books/continuity_proofed - category reference books?

--Taragond 06:24, October 28, 2010 (UTC)

To be honest, I'm not really sure what your question/request is, but each reference book should be consistent for it's subject. Since I don't own any myself, I can't check, but the warp scale issues seem to be mostly on screen, due to the writers being more concerned with telling a good story than keeping to the formulas in the books, so in that regard the books themselves should be very consistent. There was a change between TOS and TNG though. - Archduk3 07:12, October 28, 2010 (UTC)
Ok, that seems right. But can I assume, in any reference-book regarding the "new voyages" since tng, warp-scales (and other stuff of this kind) are identical? Just because the writers don't bother to disregard warp-scale-continuity, concentrating on a good story (absolutely understandable), it shouldn't be so difficult to correct such mistakes afterwards... So I thougt, there is no such thing as a binding definition or formula...why should anything in this books be worth the effort if I can't talk to someone whose conception is based on another (different) book regarding the technology and definitions of the same time? --Taragond 14:57, October 28, 2010 (UTC)

Parody booksEdit

Shouldn't parodies and fun books such as Redshirt's Little Book of Doom and A Very Klingon Khristmas have their own category? They're not meant to be taken seriously. --LauraCC (talk) 19:22, March 21, 2016 (UTC)

Also on Fandom

Random Wiki