Memory Alpha
Register
Memory Alpha
m (Undo revision 653238 by 211.121.112.88 (Talk) - please do not edit other user's comments)
m (→‎Tenses: consolidation)
Line 24: Line 24:
   
 
==Tenses==
 
==Tenses==
  +
:''moved to [[Memory Alpha talk:Point of view]]''
Alright here is where I am confused. I re-read the POV article and I don’t think that there is enough information on it to be applied to every article. For example, when writing an article about a person or event past tense is OK because we are supposed to be writing the articles from a post-Nemesis time period. I would ague that something like a sport, belief, planet, science related articles, etc. would be referred to in the current tense because the item would be more likely to be in existence. Would you say that [[Earth]] was, or Earth is? I looked around and it seems like this article is different than a lot of the others in the way it is written. It looks like this has been discussed in length on [[Memory_Alpha_talk:Point_of_view]] but I don’t think it was ever resolved.
 
 
I guess the real issue is whether this article flows while reading it. To me it seems to just stick out as incorrect.--[[User:AndreMcKay|AndreMcKay]] 02:13, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
 
 
:The current policy is fairly clear through the only example it provides to clarify its text. "Spock '''was'''". Not "Spock "''is''" or "''will be''". The reason for that is we need to discuss things in a consistent manner. One cannot do that if we talk about 29th century events in a past tense, but describe other things in the 24th in a present tense. It would be chaotic and, unless someone pinned down a single year to be the "present", totally random from article to article. Hence the policy, hence the example. The argument about "likely" to be in existence is both speculative and has been shown to be incorrect. Sports, beliefs, planets, entire races come and go in the Trek universe. The only consistent way to address them all is the past tense. Which is current policy - unless the suggestion is that the example is somehow incorrect. So I propose that we continue to follow current practice and use past tense. Including in this article. [[User:Aholland|Aholland]] 02:27, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
 
 
::OK, I see your point of view (no pun intended), but I don’t see that supported in [[Memory_Alpha:Point_of_view]].
 
 
::''All other articles should be written as if the described person/object/etc. actually exists, exactly like a normal encyclopedia. Think of Memory Alpha as an encyclopedia that exists in the Star Trek universe.''
 
 
::Look in any encyclopedia and you see articles dealing with objects, places, and sports written as “Baseball is a game…”, “There are 7 continents…”, “A car is a mode is transportation.” The [[Spock]] examples shown are dealing with writing the articles in a Star Trek Universe POV, and I don’t think that that clarifies the tenses issue because it deals with a person as I stated up above. Now I will not revert your revert because I see that as a pointless exercise, but I do think that article tenses needs to be dealt with.--[[User:AndreMcKay|AndreMcKay]] 02:40, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
 
 
:::Yet if you look at articles that in regular encyclopedias you will also find things like "Dodo birds were" or "The continent of Pangea was", or "the French game ''la soule'' was". (These are all from an encyclopedia I just pulled off the shelf.) Real encyclopedias are written from a single point in time and so tense is pretty self-evident; this site in dealing with Trek has to address time from the creation of life on Earth to the 29th century and beyond. If we pretend that MA exists as an encyclopedia, it has to have been written sometime ''after'' all Trek events have taken place. All of them. Throughout all past and future series (so we don't have to massively change tense to account for a 45th century series.) And since we know that sports fade (like Baseball), people die (like Spock - but most only once), and whole races vanish from existence (like the [[Husnock]]), past tense seems the only rational answer that can be consistently applied across the board in the absence of knowledge whether the subject is still around in the far flung future. That is why there is only one example given, I believe: it applies regardless of subject matter. [[User:Aholland|Aholland]] 03:08, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
 
 
::::I guess what it boils down to is whether we assume that '''everything''' in the Star Trek universe has ceased to exist in the time frame we are writing from. Or if we assume it may still exist. Again it seems like what ever the policy is, every other article is either incorrect and this is one of the only correct ones, or this one needs to be redone. Whatever happens, the policy absolutely needs to be made 100% clear. I enjoy discussing this with you [[User:Aholland|Aholland]], and I would like to have other people's input because who knows, we both could be completely wrong!--[[User:AndreMcKay|AndreMcKay]] 03:24, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
 

Revision as of 13:10, 17 September 2007

It would be great to see this article have a description of the arena, as well as a description of the kanji used on both the arena floor and the uniforms. -Unfortunatly I dont have the DVDs to view this and find out, but I'm sure someone does. Plus a screen capture of this would be cool.

Changed some phrasing, primarily to take out POV Mask 20:16, 22 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Ultimate Human Martial Arts

I belive that "Anbo-jytsu is considered the ultimate evolution of the human martial arts." should be kept since it is nearly a direct quote from the show and they way Kyle states it seems to indicate that many people consider it this. --Lt.Com. Andrew L. Riker 20:57, 22 Jul 2005 (UTC)

The problem with this is that MA should be written like it is an encyclopedia. A better way of saying this is to include it as a quote. Ill change it to this format, and tell me if that is acceptable for you. Mask 21:35, 22 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Very nice, you seem to have more experience a this than I do. Thanks. Lt.Com. Andrew L. Riker 05:57, 1 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Spelling

Unless some canon source actually spells "Anbo-jytsu" this way, the proper japanese->english romanization would really be "Anbo-Jutsu" (the current romanization would imply that it would be written あんぼーじつ in japanese which is meaningless.) I would reccomend the title of the article be changed to match the proper spelling, and this page be turned in to a redirect, even if it's only written this way in novels. Oh two more things: I added the japanese tidbits earlier, and Anbo might be a contraction for something but on it's own I don't think it has any meaning.Onlysolution 08:25, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

It is spelled "anbo-jyutsu" throughout the script of "The Icarus Factor". I don't know if there's some on-screen spelling (perhaps on one of the Holodeck program listings?). If not, this page should be moved to that spelling. -- Cid Highwind 12:16, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
This spelling seems most likely a way to get the actors to pronounce the word correctly. Jutsu is often mispronounced "ji'tsu" for some reason, but "jyutsu" pronounced in english sounds roughly like the proper Japanese pronounciation of the word.Onlysolution 20:17, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Each script has a pronunciation guide, with phonetic spellings of all names and unusal words. So the word can be spelled any way at all - the pronunciation guide does the trick. In this case the script has "ANBO-JYUTSU" pronounced "AN-bo JUT-su". So it seems "jyutsu" is right for purposes of Trek. Aholland 21:33, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Thinking about it more I am forgetting there are two romanization standards for moving Japanese to English, I don't feel like actually checking for sure but jyutsu is probably the other (and legitimate, though less common)romanization.Onlysolution 01:53, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Tenses

moved to Memory Alpha talk:Point of view