For general discussion, please visit Memory Alpha's Discussions feature, or join the chat on Discord.
FA status[]
Nomination (09 June - 23 June 2004, Success)[]
Self-nomination. A detailed article about the history of DS9, plus a description of its structure. It could probably use some minor additions for incidental facts and the like, but it's complete enough to deserve Featured Article status! -- Dan Carlson 20:00, 9 Jun 2004 (CEST)
- Seconded. -- Ottens 20:15, 9 Jun 2004 (CEST)
- Seconded. -- Redge 20:25, 9 Jun 2004 (CEST)
- Support. -- Michael Warren 22:57, 10 Jun 2004 (CEST)
Reconfirmation (01 May - 18 May 2012, Success)[]
A featured article from back in June 2004. Haven't completely read it, so I'm not yet sure if we should keep it. - Archduk3 19:16, May 1, 2012 (UTC)
Did a once over one this and created a blurb, it seems to still be FA material, so support. - Archduk3 19:25, May 3, 2012 (UTC)
- Support. -- Still seems to be a good FA. 31dot 01:10, May 9, 2012 (UTC)
- Support. -- Room for improvement, but it's an acceptable FA, IMO. --Defiant 21:27, May 13, 2012 (UTC)
Review (20 Aug - 31 Dec 2018, Removed)[]
After splitting off the station layout information to Terok Nor-type, We should take another look at this article to make sure it's still up to snuff. - Archduk3 03:48, August 20, 2018 (UTC)
- I just went over the article. Apart from lks and stuff, I created dedicated sections about the Klingons threat (1 and a half seasons of the series after all) and alternate timelines. I also fleshed out or removed background infos which just listed several episode names, without any explanation why those exactly. In general, I feel that the article is still lacking some flavor. The station was threatened by computer viruses, actual viruses, hunters, tribbles, was the location of a major religious festival and an Orb of the Prophets, and was evacuated several times, but none of this is in the article. Kennelly (talk) 14:09, September 5, 2018 (UTC)
Note: Due to this being a review after a split, the deadlocked status results in the removal of the FA status. - Archduk3 (on an unsecure connection) 17:26, December 31, 2018 (UTC)
Split off layout info[]
Similar to how Spacedock One and Spacedock-type are different articles, this and "Terok Nor-type" should be different articles. - Archduk3 13:35, April 10, 2018 (UTC)
- Agreed. How will that affect the FA stuff for the article? (Asking for a friend). --Alan (talk) 13:49, April 10, 2018 (UTC)
The last time we split a FA both parts were reconfirmed, as it was called at the time, and made FAs, see Constitution class model (original) and Constitution II class model. A large split like this would force a review of this article. I'm assuming the type/class article will be formatted differently enough, and hopefully contain more info, to make that a separate nomination and not a review. - Archduk3 14:00, April 10, 2018 (UTC)
Deep Space 9 weapons[]
How does Deep Space Nine have 48 phaser arrays on rotary mounts; 36 phaser emitters on stationary mounts and 3 phaser emitters on sliding mounts? The 48+ torpedo launchers, 5,000+ photon torpedoes (after 2372 refit) seems correct, but I tried to count the phasers myself and got the following:
- 36 Fixed Weapon Emplacement phasers (the ones on the habitat ring)
- 18 Sail Tower phasers (the ones on the aforementioned Sail towers)
- and 33 other phasers
--50.148.12.9 16:27, February 7, 2013 (UTC)
Proximity to the Wormhole[]
In the episode "Emissary", after the station was moved to the approximate location of the wormhole, Dax says "Major... I'm reading a huge neutrino disturbance...fifteen kilometers off the forward docking ring." Yet the article claims DS9 was positioned "approximately a thousand kilometers from its event horizon." I'm just curious, where is this latter figure coming from? I can't find any mention of it being located that far from the wormhole in the episode referenced. - Dimitri the Echidna (talk) 08:02, October 24, 2014 (UTC)
USS Quito visiting DS9?[]
It was never specified in the episode that the Quito was visiting DS9, and we know there are other Terok Nor type space station, should the statement be changed to "...docked at a Terok Nor type station?" --Will74205 (talk) 20:32, September 3, 2020 (UTC)
- Do we have a reason to believe this isn't DS9 other than it wasn't explicitly referenced as such? If not, it's easier to note that the station wasn't explicitly referenced by name, but given the overall referential nature of the show we are assuming it to be DS9. After all, do we actually know of another Terok Nor type station in operation where a Federation starship is likely to have stopped? - Archduk3 20:48, September 3, 2020 (UTC)
If it was not explicitly stated or having other evidences such as the wormhole, quark, bajor, etc... to indicate that the station is DS9, then having such statement is speculation. Shouldn't Memory-Alpha be what's presented on the shows only, not speculation? --Will74205 (talk) 02:44, September 4, 2020 (UTC)
- Retain your indent.
- It is, but now you're speculating that there is a third station of this type that we have never seen nor heard about that a Federation starship would not only casually stop at in at most 2379, but also let the crew take leave on. That leap in logic is considerably further, and faulty as well since it only works if you ignore everything else. Speculation is a word reserved for what's beyond what normal people can put together based on the rest of the context clues in the scene, not for any connection that is made outside of what's explicit, which is literally thousands of connections in everything. Accessible is also part of the mission statement, and most of the people who watched that scene will either get the reference, or, for those who didn't and look it up, will see the note on our reasoning. For the minority who aren't either of those, they're their own problem. - Archduk3 03:35, September 4, 2020 (UTC)
I don't find it necessary to specifically point out "the station that the Quito docked with was the Deep Space Nine" in the article, as the episode didn't say so either in the dialogue or in any backgrounds. Besides, post Dominion War, which Mariner's flashback was likely set in, the likely-hood a Federation starship docked at a non-DS9 Terok Nor type space station would increase dramatically as the Federation helping Cardassian rebuilt. My position is clear, do not state what is not in the show as in-universe fact, it is okay to have a less specific statement. --Will74205 (talk) 05:24, September 4, 2020 (UTC)
I am also not speculating anything. The in-universe fact is that we don't know how many Terok Nor type space station existed. Since we don't know, and minus any supporting evidence, we should fall back to state that "the Quito docked at a Terok Nor type station during 2370s" as shown in the episode. --Will74205 (talk) 05:57, September 4, 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, you are speculating, quite a lot in fact since it's half your post, and you're argument is not only deeply biased because of it but you're also using some pretty faulty logic as well.
- We don't know there are any other Terok Nor type stations. There is nothing in any show to suggest there are more than two of these. We only know of two for certain before and during the war, and only one of those is actually active that whole time. There is nothing to suggest Empok Nor is still around by the end of the war either. DS9 also happens to be the only Cardassian station of any type we know Federation starships would dock at, since it is complete speculation to assume the Federation is helping the Cardassian Union rebuild after the war. There is, after all, nothing in any show to suggest that. So instead of basing any assumption we have to make on a simple process of elimination of the two stations we know exist based on the the facts we actually have, which completely ignores all the other real world reasons to assume that it's DS9, you would have us jump right over all of that to assuming some third station, based on a whole bunch of your own assumptions.
- As for having to even make an assumption, we're going to document this somewhere, so the only option is a third page if this can't be either DS9 or Empok Nor. That alone is assuming there are now at least three stations, which again is not supported by anything in any show. We don't ignore or not document things because it isn't convenient for some people either, so this is going somewhere. If you can't see how what you're suggesting we do, based on a whole lot of your own assumptions you seem to be ignorant of while also seemingly ignorant of what you are actually suggesting, is worse than putting this somewhere people will not only expect it to be, but can actually find, with a simple note explaining why it's there for accuracy, then I have to conclude the real problem he is you, and not us "speculating" about the identity of something that relatively simple logic, or common sense, or even a passing familiarity with Star Trek would allow most of the audience to ID immediately.
- That said, you're free ask the writers and creators of the show what station that was. - Archduk3 16:43, September 4, 2020 (UTC)
What the writer said outside of what's presented in the show most likely be non-canon, so I don't think it to have much value. You find there was sufficient reason to say the station in the flashback was DS9, but I don't find there is enough evidence to say so.
Again, my point was "don't make any assumption!" Simply state what we see in the episode that the station is a "Terok Nor type station" is not equal to saying there is a third, or fourth Terok Nor station! Lacking direct evidence, stating the station was DS9 is an assumption, no matter how likely it was. The reasoning of the station "likely" be DS9 belongs to the "Background" section, but not in the episode description.
I think we need other people to interject their opinions. --Will74205 (talk) 08:35, September 5, 2020 (UTC)
- This appears to be a similar type of situation as Talk:Spock#Spock's marriage (not to T'Pring) where Defiant argued that Sarek might've had some other son instead of concluding that the reference was about Spock. Or the Unnamed Alpha and Beta Quadrant planets#Klingon prison planet situation where we're not allowed to conclude that the planet is Rura Penthe in the main body of the article even though we know that was the intention.
- Where to draw the line between speculation and common sense is a difficult question. We don't know how many Nor-class stations have been built or how many of them may have been captured during the Dominion War and repurposed as Federation stations. But given the fact that just about everything on Lower Decks is a reference to something famous in previous Trek series, I have no problem assuming that the station is Deep Space 9.
- Furthermore, in some cases, Memory Alpha allows speculation when it comes to identifying unnamed characters that could be multiple people like the Galloway/Johnson situation or the Brent/Vinci situation, so the same principle can be applied here. --NetSpiker (talk) 09:54, September 5, 2020 (UTC)
- ...and regarding: "What the writer said outside of what's presented in the show most likely be non-canon"; if you were actually familiar with how this site applies its resources, you would already know that that production comments are valid sources on MA. So you might as well strike
that whole paragraph. - Otherwise, as the casual hardcore Observer of canon you are trying to be, I'm more surprised that you aren't first arguing that the Quito isn't really an Olympic class, because that fact (based on a production source) is about a bazillion times more prominent then where the ship is docked.
- Finally, due to the puerile, yet blatant references the show makes to everything every viewer has already seen on Star Trek, MA:COMMON most certainly applies. (As in, I'd only expect there to be a discussion of any sort at all ever about that ship docked image, if the ship was all cockeyed Vs. not cockeyed in space, a previous indicator that the other Nor wasn't our Nor, which is a detail this show would blatantly do.)--Alan (talk) 13:24, September 5, 2020 (UTC)
- ...and regarding: "What the writer said outside of what's presented in the show most likely be non-canon"; if you were actually familiar with how this site applies its resources, you would already know that that production comments are valid sources on MA. So you might as well strike
- Furthermore, in some cases, Memory Alpha allows speculation when it comes to identifying unnamed characters that could be multiple people like the Galloway/Johnson situation or the Brent/Vinci situation, so the same principle can be applied here. --NetSpiker (talk) 09:54, September 5, 2020 (UTC)
As for "common sense", people's individual common senses can be different, i.e. your common sense is not the same as my common sense. There is a section called "There is no common sense" in the Memory Alpha:Use common sense. So trying to invalidate my argument with "common sense" is insulting.
This episode is chronically first and the earliest in the Prime timeline to show a "Olympic-class" vessel, as it had a very unique design of all TNG ships. While the Quito class name was not specifically named, I am fine with saying that the Quito is a Olympic-class vessel due to how it was presented in the show: the unique design plus the name is enough until future episode disproves it.
Showing a Federation starship docking at a Terok Nor type station is not enough for me to say "the station is DS9". Without specifically named in the episode, I would like to see some specific evidence such as the wormhole or Bajoran crew members in order to say "the station is DS9". What I have problems with were we seem to conflate what's shown in the episode, i.e. in-universe fact, with conjectures. They should have some difference at least in wording. But if a majority of people don't have a problem with this, then I am fine with it as well.--Will74205 (talk) 08:59, September 6, 2020 (UTC)
- Sir, "common sense", in this context, is that generally the simplest answer is the best answer, and the correct answer. There is nothing insulting about telling someone to stop overthinking a simple straightforward presention based on obvious intent. Second, your argument is still flawed about your understanding of the Olympic class. That class was never named on screen and is technically not canon using your rule book, and second, this was not the first chronological appearance of that class. --Alan (talk) 14:31, September 6, 2020 (UTC)
An actual ship that is, but if we count the cited example in the Sacrifice of Angels (episode) then I stand corrected.
USS Pasteur dedication plaque article seems to indicate Olympic class was shown on screen.
Still, it would be more clear to include such statement in a clarification box: "While not named on screen, the Terok Nor-type station that USS Quito docked in the flashback was likely the Deep Space Nine as the only station of the type that Federation starships would regularly docked at during 2370s"
If we are making assumptions, then it would be good to see the reasoning written somewhere in the article.--Will74205 (talk) 22:15, September 6, 2020 (UTC)
- Mike McMahon confirms that it’s Deep Space 9 here. I don't think we need belabor this any further. —Josiah Rowe (talk) 17:07, September 7, 2020 (UTC)
Link is not working. Assuming this is true, we still need to cite it as it is outside of show and not obvious to at least some of us.--Will74205 (talk) 00:02, September 8, 2020 (UTC)
- Link is fixed now. -- Renegade54 (talk) 00:22, September 8, 2020 (UTC)
- You need to learn how to stop assuming and start presuming. --Alan (talk) 00:28, September 8, 2020 (UTC)
Again, the point is any assumption or presumption needed to be explained or cited somewhere in the article. We shouldn't assume every viewer understand the reference or have access to director/producer/writer's social media. --Will74205 (talk) 04:29, September 8, 2020 (UTC)
- No, we should assume the readers/viewers have seen Star Trek before and aren't complete rubes who are incapable of seeing the forest for the trees. A Federation starship docked at the only Nor-type station ever stated to be a Federation starbase. How much more fucking plain can they be? --Alan (talk) 04:38, September 8, 2020 (UTC)
A Wiki like Memory Alpha is meant to provide information even to new Star Trek watchers, so more information is always better than less information. If we have the source of something that was intended but not clear in the show, we should cited it. --Will74205 (talk) 11:39, September 8, 2020 (UTC)
- There needs to be no less than two sources, notarized (be sure to feel for the raised seal), in triplicate, and personally hand delivered in an envelope sealed with wax containing one drip of blood each from MacMahon, Kurtzman, and Roddenberry. Personally, however, I'm not sure if the YouTube video alone holds water, because it isn't being hosted on an official Paramount owned website, and is quite probably a deep fake. --Alan (talk) 13:33, September 8, 2020 (UTC)
- I know that y'all are joking, but in the unlikely event that somebody still ain't happy, the video is on startrek.com too. Here it is, if I can get the daggone template to work right (did I mention how much I hate all these different external link templates?): [1] —Josiah Rowe (talk) 14:57, September 8, 2020 (UTC)
The Youtube source is on CBS All Access verified channel, most likely carry the same weight as the one on startrek.com.--Will74205 (talk) 15:13, September 8, 2020 (UTC)
"Deep Space 9" or "Deep Space Nine"?[]
Can't seem to find a clear answer on this. The series is called Deep Space Nine, of course, and Wikipedia and StarTrek.com both spell the station that way (not that either website is necessarily an authoritative source on the topic). I don't know how the script or subtitles spell it, but it's frequent for numbers to be spelled out as words in dialogue, even when it's not the official spelling. We spell it with the numeral, but I can't find any justification for why we do that, apart from a short discussion from 15 years ago where someone suggests that it simply helps differentiate the space station from the name of the series. Perhaps this isn't a can of worms we want to open, since it would require a ton of revisions across the wiki, not to mention retitling the other seven "Deep Space" stations (though presumably we'd make an exception for Deep Space 253), but just curious of people's thoughts. If we do want to stick with "9", it might be worth a mention on our naming conventions policy. — C Teng [talk] 18:41, 29 July 2023 (UTC)