I've heard that the Aenar have long been referenced in Star Trek publications, but have only now become canon. If so, could a reference of such be added as background information? – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 18.104.22.168 (talk).
- Definitly, do you know which non-canon sources? - AJHalliwell 02:20, 29 Jul 2005 (UTC)
Re-use of set pieces?Edit
The Aenar are said to be extremely secretive, however they buy furnitures from the "regular andorians" : the door in the Aenar city (ENT: "The Aenar") is extractly the same one seen in Shran's Ship (ENT:Kir'Shara) ;-) --rami – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 22.214.171.124 (talk).
- I wouldn't read too much into the expedient reuse of set pieces. 126.96.36.199 01:21, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Quote from the article: "A hybrid Aenar/Andorian individual, such as Talla, will have a greenish skin tone." Is there any source to that? It is known that Andorians childs have greenish skins and become blue during puberty, that's why I thought Talla has a green tone, because of her age. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 188.8.131.52 (talk).
- I don't think it was said in canon that Andorian children were green. Is that from a novel or something? We don't consider those canon, but it might still be interesting to note in the background regarding possible reasons for Talla being green. -- Capricorn (talk) 12:43, February 1, 2015 (UTC)
Thelin bg noteEdit
As much as I like the idea, it's speculation. These issues are mentioned in the more appropriate Thelin and Yesteryear articles in greater detail. Also Thelin is categorized as Andorian and not Unceartain Andorian/Aenar. Compvox (talk) 10:19, December 16, 2015 (UTC)
- I disagree with cutting Thelin completely. Coincidence or not, the fact that Thelin looks, not somewhat similar, but exactly like a known race is hard to ignore. I've acted bold and put in a new note, that does not say "The guy from yesteryear might be an Aenar" but merely briefly notes that "Yesteryear includes a character with the same look", without commenting further. I hope that's acceptable enough. If anyone thinks it is not, feel of course free to remove again and/or discuss further... -- Capricorn (talk) 18:47, December 16, 2015 (UTC)