Forum icon  ForumsTen Forward → In-universe links for unreleased material (replywatch)
This forum discussion has been archived
This forum discussion has been archived and should not be added to. Please visit the Forums to begin a new topic in the relevant location.

We don't have a firm policy written up on this (and perhaps we should, if only because there's such a long gap in releases of new canon material now), but historically, our practice was that:

There should be no new information added to any of the "in universe" articles pertaining to the episode until its release.

That's the way it was here when ENT was still airing new episodes, and the way it should remain. Back in '04-'05 article pages of up-and-coming episodes were locked to keep new information from being added to them. Same thing went for character pages of "announced" characters (vs ongoing ones).

We hiccoughed a bit along the way with the 2009 film release, but for the most part, we did not have any major issues with that movie. The main reason for this (and this was really covered when it comes to someone like Kirk's mother or father) is that we still don't know if people are pre-timeline change or post-. In the case of the new film, one of the recently announced characters is definitely pre-change, but for some reason, there seems to be a desire to create links to him as an "alternate universe" character.

There is no issue with production material going on the main article or actor articles, but there should be no in-universe material (or links) being created from those articles, except to characters/objects that exist from the first film. -- sulfur 20:06, May 2, 2012 (UTC)

I have no issue with links being created for this, because if we do find out that there is an issue, it's actually easier to find the info that needs to be changed. It also should be pointed out that none of the links already created are "in-universe" either, as they are all from "real world" sections or articles, which means they are well within the policy. I also don't see any reason to assume that any "new" info or events that Khan, or anyone else for that matter, won't take part in the alternate reality. It's a far larger assumption that they wouldn't be IMO, since the whole point of the alternate reality is to be able to tell stories without being beholden to the old one. - Archduk3 20:18, May 2, 2012 (UTC)