removed passageEdit

These taps are usually designated Level 1. For less energy-demanding systems, smaller taps are used, for example the weapons assemblies such as the phasers and photon torpedoes require Level 2 taps, as do the shields, transporters and deflector dish. Even smaller systems are connected to Level 3 taps, these include the replicators, life support, computers and so on. All of these systems have backup in case a failure occurs.

Pending a canon source, I'm disincluding this. -- Captain Mike K. Bartel 23:05, 18 Nov 2004 (CET)


Definetely needs some refs. Like fast! -- Redge | Talk 14:03, 15 Aug 2004 (CEST)

Most of the information provided is likely derived from the Next Generation and Deep Space Nine technical manuals. -- 20:29, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Those passages need to be removed then or moved to a subsection dedicated to those manuals to help the readers better understand the article. Otherwise, they do not belong in the main context of the article. --Alan del Beccio 22:40, 15 Oct 2005 (UTC)
I think a good method would be to remove (or reconstruct) to the talk page a fairly good summary of how the tech manual describes the EPS -- and then try to find individual episodes that cite (or possibly contradict) the processes described in the Technical Manual. That way only canon references would be included in the main article, and perhaps a background section could list the references from the TM that didnt make it on screen. -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 02:08, 16 Oct 2005 (UTC)
  • Maybe it should have a apocrypha section, the way we do with characters that show up in novels? Jaf 02:30, 16 Oct 2005 (UTC)Jaf
    • However, the Tech Manuals are written by actual tech consultants, and the like, who write or contribute to the show, so they are not so much apocryha, in the sense that novels written by Joe Blow authors are. --Alan del Beccio 04:22, 16 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Needs AttentionEdit

I changed the needs attention catagory from inaccurate to general as there is more here than possible innaccuracies.

Looking at this, I think we need more citations in the early paragraphs. The page hasn't seen any significant changes in over a year, despite being flagged with pna-inaccurate for much longer. How much of this is from canon sources? Also there are five inactive links to various elements, in which it needs to be determined if there is sufficient canon information to create the linked articles or to remove the links. I don't have the knowledge of the EPS system to make that judgment so help would be appreciated. -- Kooky 22:01, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Additional references Edit