Military log Edit

Same as combat date, except should be merged and made a redirect to Captain's log. --OuroborosCobra talk 20:57, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Hmm... again, I gotta go with keep, although I will certainly understand if others vote for it being merged (and might even change my vote to agree). --From Andoria with Love 11:07, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Looking at Category:Logs, and seeing how many variations of the term we describe, I really don't see an issue with having military log as a separate entity. I think one significant difference between the military log and captain's log (and even combat log) is that the former is an alternate universe variation, and signifies the difference between the wartime Federation of that era and the "real" Federation. --Alan del Beccio 02:01, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

captain's log vs. supplimental logEdit

what is the difference between the regular captain's log and the supplimental captain's log? -<unsigned>

I am pretty sure the difference is that the Captain's Log is it's own "file", if you will, with a stardate, where a "supplimental" one adds to an existing log file. That is why they do not specify a date. --OuroborosCobra talk 22:44, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Supplemental logs are logs that are added on to a first log report. Basically, the first log starts out with information about a particular mission. Supplemental logs add on information regarding that mission as it progresses. Beyond that, there is no difference: both are a captain's log, it's just supplemental logs are a continuation of the first log. --From Andoria with Love 22:51, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Isn't that what I said? :P --OuroborosCobra talk 23:03, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Yeah but FAwL was more eloquent--Six of Six 06:27, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Acting captain's log... Edit still a captain's log, serving the same purpose, and written by the same role in ships function, except, it is written by someone who has temporarily become CO, instead of being given the ship as CO. this link would go to an exorbitantly short article, and eventually merged and redirected anyways... Removed the link. It really should be a section on this article if its worth mentioning at all. --6/6 Subspace 21:15, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

  • Actually, no, it would not be "exorbitantly short", as this is a way to further break down various log types. First off, this concept is still growing. In the case of acting captain's log, there would be a number of instances of "acting captain's logs" listed in such an article to denote examples of when an officer recorded the log as an "acting captain's log" versus stating "captain's log." Additionally, there are several instances of when the first officer was in command and yet continued to refer to his log as the first officer's log, rather than captain's log, captain's starlog, OR acting captain's log-- yet we will still have those logs written into separate articles. Basically what you are suggesting is we merge all like logs together when our intent is to grow, not condense. --Alan del Beccio 21:36, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Who said the intent was to grow? Indeed it is NOT. it is to provide accurate and concise display of information. if merging all ships activity logs (separate from personal logs) achieves that, that IS the FAR more desirable situation. breaking down information into infinite categories is meaningless. also, when someone is looking for a log entry, they will look for the captains log entry, or a specific persons personal log. they will not care if it was acting captain or not. What about log entries for captains that only held the ship for a few days? does it make sense to have a separate article for them? indeed not. If i want the log from "Chain of Command, Part I" or II, i would look for the captains log! not the acting captains log or anything else! Additionally, a first officer maintaining the first officers log, while in temporary command of the ship (what you are referring to is the first officer just having the bridge while the captain is indisposed) is exactly what the first officers log is for. a second account of events on the ship. --6/6 Subspace 04:35, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Night Alien? Edit

I had removed Night Alien off the "see others" area. I do not see why it is needed, the only mention of a log is in the background area- not directly related to logs. Also is Trekkies 2 considered "cannon proof"? Dlc2006 00:25, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

  • You should sign your posts with ~~~~. It will make something that looks like this --6/6 Subspace 00:22, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Also, i re-removed it. Its a reference to a captains bowel movement and really shouldn't be in MA at all let alone as a reference in an article about the actual ships record kept by the captain. --6/6 Subspace 00:22, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Captain's starlog naming Edit

Is it at all possible, or references seen/mentioned that a Captain's starlog, is the same, or recorded under the assignment (IE, Enterprise Starlog), but titled as such to signify who is recording it? Perhaps saying Captain's Starlog was something said to be quicker then always saying "Enterprise Starlog, Captain...". Not trying to speculate, or cause speculation discussion, I am just unsure if it ahd ever been mentioned or specified of a difference other then title. -- Terran Officer 14:44, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

I've never heard it referred to as Enterprise starlog. All I've ever heard is [insert position here]'s starlog, usually the Captain's starlog. I can't remember whether T'Pol or Tucker or Reed ever recorded a Science officer's starlog/Engineering starlog/Tactical officer's starlog. -- From Andoria with Love 14:53, 13 June 2008 (UTC)