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.
Could someone tell me why we have two locations for the news? --From Andoria with Love 20:02, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- The template is superfluous, it can be merged into the news panel. --Bp 21:15, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- One's for the Bush lovers, the other is for the rest of us. No, one's for the real news and the other is for the fake news al-a Siddig in BSG...--Babaganoosh 21:19, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
News of 19 MayEdit
Shouldn't the news be somewhat related more directly to canon - as when ST actors are mentioned even on other shows, etc. - and/or to canon-derived material, such as books, video games and so on? The news about the ST-themed apartment seems a bit too general to me, since no one involved somehow with ST is related to the event. -- Gabriel O. Brum 18:45, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
- I was kinda wondering about that myself... but apparently someone thinks it's news. :P --From Andoria with Love 22:03, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Well, tell me about stretches... Anyway, it probably won't hurt much. :) -- Gabriel O. Brum 03:52, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Are there any possibility of getting these news in RSS or email? --ReCover 17:29, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
How about just "who played Commodore Stone" not "the actor known to Trekkies for playing Commodore Stone".
Deep Space Nine Virgin 1 launchEdit
Could someone add the info from this? The channel's biggest puller last night was Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, which picked up 226,000 viewers and a 1.2% share.  -- DS9 Forever 12:24, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
McNeill directing Samantha Who Edit
Could someone please add that Robert Duncan McNeill is directing the pilot episode of Samantha Who? premiering tonight? It should note that he was Russ' Voyager co-star. Thanks. --From Andoria with Love
Star Trek: The Continuing Mission Edit
Could someone add that the independent Star Trek audio Production, "Star Trek: The Continuing Mission" (www.continuingmission.com) reports the pilot episode "Ghost Ship" is wrapped and is fully ready to premier on on Christmas Day 2007.
While you reading this it is also note worthy that this production has not been added to the "non-canon" productions page here on Memory-Alpha.--SebastianProoth 16:04, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
- I don't know what precedent there is for putting a fan production on the news, give me a few minutes to look at the archive and see if we have had that stuff before. As for your "noting" that it has not been added to the "non-canon productions", as we told you on Forum:Star Trek: The Continuing Mission, that isn't going to happen until you get what we consider "non-canon status" by receiving licensing from Paramount. Until then, you aren't even non-canon, you are fan production. A very good one, perhaps, I haven't had a chance to look at your stuff, but fan none the less. --OuroborosCobra talk 16:43, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
- The only fan productions listed in the news are ones that feature Trek people. For example, the only mention of New Voyages is in relation to George Takei appearing in one episode. The mentions of OGaM are due to Tim Russ' involvement (among others). -- Sulfur 16:50, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
- In my opinion, the only fanon works the news should cover are those high-end fan productions that have been getting a lot of press – namely, New Voyages and Of Gods and Men. If we announced every single fan production, it would be a bit overboard, methinks. But that's just my opinion. --From Andoria with Love 19:25, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
January 6, 2008 Edit
He was protesting China's support of Myanmar's military junta. --Orlando Rays 16:13, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- That seems more accurate, since Burma (Myanmar) actually is ruled by a "military junta", and China is not. --OuroborosCobra talk 20:05, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
startrek.com all got fired. It can't be true that the teaser will be there. 188.8.131.52 02:01, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
- The teaser won't be at StarTrek.com, a link to the film site will be at StarTrek.com. And even though the team was fired, CBS still has people working on it. --From Andoria with Love 02:23, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Spoiler photo from new movie Edit
Can we please take down the spoiler photo from the new movie? We seem to have a policy of keeping spoiler information from unreleased products in the single article on that product. It is one thing to have the actor announcements and such, but a screenshot from the new movie to me is taking it to far. We don't need a picture spoiler to report on the new trailer. In addition, the presence of it on the main page is being used as an argument for its addition to USS Enterprise. Perhaps we should even consider removing spoiler type information (even text) from this panel, and instead having a link her to another article with news style updates on the new film? --OuroborosCobra talk 22:26, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
- We could remove it... if the teaser were an unreleased product. Remember: Warning: Memory Alpha contains spoilers to released material only. The teaser was released midnight on January 18th. According to our policies, it's free game. As for the Enterprise article, however, since the teaser isn't really a canon production, the info from the teaser should only be added in that article's background section. --From Andoria with Love 01:36, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- Actually, since the spoiler warning is not posted on the Main Page, which is likely to be the first stop for visitors, I've removed the image. --From Andoria with Love 01:48, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- I actually intentionally slimmed down the description of the teaser too, because the original described it second by second (essentially), and figured that it makes sense to let people enjoy it on their own.
- Also, in terms of the images and things that happened in the teaser... just because it has been released doesn't make it canon. Why, you ask? Who says that any of that footage will even be in the final movie? Maybe they put that together to signify that things were under construction. Ya know? -- Sulfur 01:51, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Shran, come on. You know that teaser is material for an upcoming product, for the movie. Would you have allowed screencaps from episode previews for Star Trek: Enterprise and articles based on those previews before the episode aired? No. --OuroborosCobra talk 01:57, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- RE: Sulfur -- I never said the teaser was canon, I said info on the teaser can be added to the background section of the Enterprise article.
- RE: Cobra -- The teaser is a released product, and the scene depicted in the teaser will likely not even be in the film. I wasn't around when Enterprise was still on the air, so I don't know how images from previews were handled. Would we accept them now? Not sure... doubt it, since they would be low-res, watermarked, etc. --From Andoria with Love 02:31, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Shran, I really can't believe what I am reading here. Are you telling me that the new Enterprise model seen in that teaser will not be in the new movie? Because otherwise, it is a spoiler of what will be in the new movie. I don't care if it isn't the precise frame in the teaser or not. Hell, it is a spoiler that the Enteprise will even be in the movie at all. --OuroborosCobra talk 02:48, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm not sure about this either. The image is a bit much, if you put yourself in the mindset of an archivist who doesn't want to know any of the plot details of the movie (it is *possible* that the E might not appear, but the fact that it was in the teaser points towards an appearance).
- The image is on the Star Trek page (which has a big honking spoiler notice on the top) and has been removed from the main page. The aforementioned archivist would notably avoid the page(s) (Star Trek, and to a much lesser extent the related actor and production personnel articles) that would have spoiler info. Some months ago, I edited the Spock page to list that Zachary Quinto will be playing him in the upcoming film. This was removed as a spoiler and is (I believe should be at least) followed on all non-real world articles.
- I believe the understandably small mention of the teaser's "plot" (the fact of the Enterprise's appearance) should be also removed from the Main Page, perhaps linking to a description of the teaser that an archivist can choose to click or not. Because of what happened on the Spock page, and my subsequent understanding of it, I don't think any Star Trek (film) info should be added to background sections in *non real world* articles (possibly not until December 25th).
- As for the Enterprise images, I *was* around for a short time when Enterprise still aired (admittedly mostly as a reader, and not contributor). No images were added to the episode articles (even though there were some released beforehand), the episode articles themselves were protected to prevent people from adding (generally non-released) spoiler information, and articles were reverted with spoiler information. I don't think we need to protect Star Trek (film) at this point, since there's virtually no non-officially released plot details, I do think we should be careful not to alienate archivists who might want to wait 11 months.--Tim Thomason 05:05, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- For the record, I meant the actual scene depicted in the trailer likely won't be in the movie. The Enterprise definitely will. However, if you think a teaser trailer that has already been seen by an estimated $16.75 million worth of people (not counting those who saw Cloverfield on Saturday and those who watched the bootleg version) is a spoiler, then by all means... ;) Speaking of spoilers, though, how about all those casting announcements that were posted (Chris Pine signs on as James T. Kirk; Leonard Nimoy returning as Spock, etc.) Those might be considered spoilers by some, yet no one had a problem with them. That's probably because they're not really spoilers... they reveal little, if anything, about the plot. The filmmakers themselves have kept the plot tightly under wraps, but they don't hesitate to say that the film features the Enterprise and the original series crew. This much has been revealed in news sources worldwide, and the teaser trailer is being viewed, as we speak, by millions of people worldwide. It was also previously announced in the news section that the Enterprise would be appearing in both the film and the teaser, so that much has already been "spoiled." I do agree that information such as characters, etc. should be kept within production-type pages, but the fact that the Enterprise will be appearing in the new film is now known by millions thanks to the new trailer. In other words, the filmmakers themselves, chose to reveal this little spoiler to the general public. That's just my take on this whole thing. --From Andoria with Love 07:03, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Shran, all a teaser is is a released spoiler. As for the actor stuff, look above at my first comment in this discussion, where I talk about moving all of the movie news to a separate page with a link to it on the main page. Besides, as you already know, Memory Alpha does treat actor announcements and stuff as spoilers. That is why they have been removed from character articles, our spoiler policy. By the way, even being shown at Cloverfield doesn't make it any less of a spoiler. When I go to movies with my sister, for example, she covers her eyes and ears during many previews. Why? Because they are spoilers. --OuroborosCobra talk 07:09, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- I know, Cobra, and I agree that it is a spoiler. Just saying it's one millions already know, is all. But what I'm mainly talking about is revealing this stuff on the news section. No one had problems with the casting announcements, but nobody wants to hear about the Enterprise appearing in the teaser. How is one more of a spoiler than the other? --From Andoria with Love 07:12, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
I'll say it again more clearly with no ambiguity. I don't want to see the actor announcements. Can't use that now. I am making it an issue if that helps. I've even made a suggestion on how to deal with the whole thing, so that we actually start following our spoiler policy again. --OuroborosCobra talk 07:14, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- Ahh, ok. I did not get that from the above at all, lol! However, since I'm normally the one who adds the casting announcements, I guess I'll stop until this whole thing clears up. 'Tis a shame, because there are at a few people appearing in the movie who will be announced in the coming weeks (one has already been announced). Maybe if we just give the actor and not the character? --From Andoria with Love 07:31, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
We could do that, or we could have a separate article specifically for movie news announcements (done similarly to the News panel) that is linked to at the top of the News panel. Or we could do both. That would be awesome, I think. --OuroborosCobra talk 07:37, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- that could work. I would go for that, but let's see what others have to say. On a side note, I now see where you suggested removing such text from the panel. I either missed that or misread it, sorry. --From Andoria with Love 08:25, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
News on Star TrekEdit
Could someone please implement the following news: http://www.space.com/entertainment/080211-star-trek-advisor.html --BlueMars 22:04, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
New item to add to news: CBS Streams Original Star Trek Episodes for Free Edit
I saw this article on Wired: "CBS Streaming Original Star Trek Episodes for Free". The entire first three seasons from the original series of Star Trek are available to be streamed online for free. Pretty newsworthy, if you ask me. :) -Rhinecanthus rectangulus 17:26, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
- Agreed. Done. :) btw, the entire first three seasons? You mean there were more?! :-P --From Andoria with Love 22:08, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, yeah. That was a copy/paste from the article. :) -Rhinecanthus rectangulus 23:31, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
CNN story Edit
Saw a story on CNN just pop up, regarding John Cho and the upcoming Star Trek flick:
-Rhinecanthus rectangulus 15:55, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
- That's not really "news," per se. That's just Cho describing being part of Star Trek. The line stating he's finishing his scenes, however, could be considered news. For the record, please leave news tips related to the new movie on this talk page. That said, thanks for this! :) --From Andoria with Love 10:26, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
March 12, Orci/Kurtzman on Superman?Edit
i removed the following bit...
- Star Trek scribes Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci are reportedly in talks to write the next Superman film, tentatively titled Superman: Man of Steel, to be directed by Bryan Singer. 
according to Aint It Cool News...
- Orci and Kurtzman not only aren't writing the film... they haven't even been approached. http://www.aintitcool.com/node/35964
Deevolution 02:35, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
- Well, so much for that. Then again, neither IESB, AICN, or CHUD are particularly trustworthy sources to begin with -- but there is usually a kernel of truth to each story. So it's most likely that Orci & Kurtzman were being considered but were not actually approached. News that they were being considered got leaked and, naturally, press outlets exaggerated things. I'll check up on it. --From Andoria with Love 03:10, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Harlan Ellison suing CBS-Paramount, Simon & Schuster and CBS Corp. for breach of contract Edit
Caught this news item today: No 'Star Trek'-ing on Ellison's work
A snippet: "In 1968, science fiction writer extraordinaire Harlan Ellison helped "Star Trek" do what many thought could not happen: win a major mainstream award. Now comes word that the acclaimed writer is suing CBS-Paramount, Simon & Schuster and CBS Corp. for breach of contract. The author says the companies failed to pay him "for use of elements of a 'Star Trek' screenplay he wrote in a trio of 'Star Trek' novels." -Rhinecanthus rectangulus 14:00, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Star Trek: The Experience officially closed yesterday (Sept 1) Edit
Patrick Stewart to appear on Doctor Who Edit
"It's a crossover of epic proportions for geeks – Captain Picard from Star Trek: The Next Generation will be appearing on the next season of Doctor Who. According to London's the Sun, Patrick Stewart will be making an appearance on the show as a renegade Time Lord known as the Meddling Monk." Story here. -Rhinecanthus rectangulus 16:39, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
- Thus far, it's only a rumor. I'm waiting for more valid sources to confirm the news. Thus far, it's only appeared in Brit tabloid magazines and sites. --From Andoria with Love 18:44, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Youtube eps Edit
I'm getting a "This video is not available in your country" message, so I'm presuming they're US-only.– Cleanse 22:57, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
- Wouldn't be surprised. Updated news to match. Sorry :( — Morder 23:12, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
It's all right for me, seeing I have the DVDs. :-) Just thought I'd check. – Cleanse 23:57, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
IDW to Publish New Star Trek Comic Book Series Edit
...And it appears to be old news as MA already has an article. Disregard. :) -Rhinecanthus rectangulus 20:07, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Star Trek The Experience Is Coming BackEdit
Confirmed that Star Trek The Experience is returning in Las Vegas. A contract has been signed with CBS/Paramount to reopen the Star Trek The Experience exhibit in Las Vegas on May 8 —starting with at least a new restaurant and retail shop—to coincide with the opening of J.J. Abram's Star Trek movie. http://scifiwire.com/2009/02/confirmed-new-contract-to-keep-star-trek-the-experience-alive-in-vegas.php Miraxian 15:51, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Family Guy TNG reunionEdit
Wow, nothing in the news on the TNG actors that were on Family Guy last night? It is currently being featured on Hulu.com right now. Patrick Stewart, LaVar Burton, Michael Dorn, Gates McFadden, Denise Crosby, Wil Wheaton, and Brent Spiner all voiced themselves in a Trek-centric episode. Clearly worthy of at least a mention on the front page, methinks. -Rhinecanthus rectangulus 17:35, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Sequel to Star Trek film on trackEdit
As Paramount Pictures readies the May 8 release of its "Star Trek" franchise relaunch, the studio is moving forward with a sequel, and has hired Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman and Damon Lindelof to pen the screenplay. Full article at Variety. -Rhinecanthus rectangulus 13:04, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
- Whoa partner, a little slow on the draw, we already have Star Trek Into Darkness and the full report at Portal:Main/Panel/Movie News, as of last night. :) --Alan 15:31, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
- Is there any reason that can't be mentioned on this page? The purpose of the Movie News page was to prevent spoilers from getting on the main page, while still allowing us to have those news items. I don't think the fact that they are releasing a 12th movie really counts as it is not a spoiler for the new movie, and most especially is not a news item pertaining to that movie directly. --OuroborosCobra talk 23:17, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
- Hello? I'm not a sysop, I can't implement this. --OuroborosCobra talk 18:38, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
- Done. Boo-yah. :-P --From Andoria with Love 18:46, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
- Any registered user can edit the page. Ignore the text at the top of the edit page, it is the cake. The main page is protected from anony-mouse editing, but the "cascading protection" protected pages always say "only sysops" regardless of the actual protection level. Notice the "Save page" button? --bp 12:41, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
- Done. Boo-yah. :-P --From Andoria with Love 18:46, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
- I noticed it, and figured the button was the cake. I've been filling out online applications for a month where the buttons are all lies. Thanks for the tip for the future, though, and that explains why no one had come along to respond to me sooner, as it wasn't necessary. --OuroborosCobra talk 19:19, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
The number of articles in "Recent News" seems to be inconsistent, though some users are keeping it to three news items at a time. Is this the intended policy? Is there a reason behind it? Would it possibly make more sense to have news from the last month instead? Having four or five items doesn't seem too much for me. On the main page, the central column isn't nearly as long as the slim right column. Plus with the Star Trek Movie warning at the top, users have to scroll down to see the article of the day anyway... For visitors that don't check the site every week, having news from the last month would be helpful.--Sunakk 14:50, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Unblock this page Edit
This page should be editable by auto-confirmed users. --bp 19:47, December 7, 2009 (UTC)
- Could you explain why? And could someone explain why they can't?(I think I know, but I want to hear from others who have been here longer.)--31dot 21:47, December 7, 2009 (UTC)
- They can, the reason they couldn't is because of cascading protection from another page that transcluded this page in it. Shran tried to fix it but failed. :) Previously it was a page that was vandalized by registered users and anons alike. If it starts being vandalized again it will be protected again. — Morder (talk) 21:50, December 7, 2009 (UTC)
I can certainly empathize with someone losing a favorite animal, but we should always ask ourselves, "What is the headline?" The headline on a Star Trek site is that John Eaves is selling interesting Star Trek artwork, while the reasons behind that are only additional context, just like Archduk3 said. When I read the original opening sentence, I thought for a second that MA is now covering the lives of Star Trek designers' children, which would exceed even TrekMovie standards of irrelevance, and then I read the remainder. Such reactions can easily be avoided by proper phrasing. -1312.4 20:49, November 23, 2010 (UTC)
Lisa Hoyle Edit
The TV Guide page linked to from the Lisa Hoyle page indicates she was injured during a television show, not a feature film. I can't correct this, but hopefully someone can.
- Done. Thanks for the reminder. Tom 23:07, February 17, 2011 (UTC)
Be Serious GuysEdit
I just wasted 5 minutes of my life watching that lame Bruno Mars video, and no sign of Leonard Nimoy. You should specify that it's the ALTERNATE version of the video/song that features Mr Nimoy. And btw, this alternate version video is really good. Leonard Nimoy like we've never seen before. LOL. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 184.108.40.206 (talk).
Protection 2013 Edit
I've upped the protection here for a week so hopefully the spam bots will "learn" they can't edit the page. Not sure if the auto-confirmed protection will have to be re-added at that time. - Archduk3 09:29, September 30, 2013 (UTC)