Can we be sure that Draylaxians even exist? Please put a reference on that species' page, if possible - we shouldn't speculate on such things... -- Cid Highwind 13:52, 25 May 2004 (CEST)

They exist. They are mentioned by travis mayweather in broken bow to have three breasts. --BlueMars 13:53, May 25, 2004 (CEST)


What is a Foxoleon? I can't find any reference to it anywhere. -- EtaPiscium 20:35, 14 Oct 2004 (CEST)

The Q Edit

I added The Q Continuum and the Q - I know its not a "homeworld" in the most strict of the sense. Yet I feel that there is enough argument that "The Q Continuum" exists in a "place" that could be considered their homeworld.--Jlandeen 15:59, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Well it appears that The Q Continuum was removed... It IS the resting place of The Q. Which if im not mistaken is a race? Thoughts?--Jlandeen 16:00, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

It's not a home world. We don't know what the Continuum is. But it ain't a "world". :) -- sulfur 16:09, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

I beg to differ :) In the series at many times the Q Continuum manifested its "location" in a physical form that the crew was able to visit. If it did not exist in some form of a world, they would not have been able to go there.--Jlandeen 16:16, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, they manifested it as that. And then proceeded to state that the actual state of it was not something that Human minds could cope with. Oh, and there's not _ in the name. -- sulfur 16:21, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

So then for it to be a homeworld it has to be a planet created through natural processes? If that is the case we need to revisit the list. (p.s. formatting of the words matters in Talk?)--Jlandeen 16:33, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

By definition of homeworld, "The designation homeworld refers to the planet, or in some cases moon, where a certain species originates from."
So... yes. The Q Continuum "state" that was shown to the Voyager crew was only something that they'd understand. For all we know, it's an entire dimension, or perhaps a different plane or universe. -- sulfur 16:40, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Ok then, I will be editing the list to remove any "homeworlds" that are not naturally occurring planets or moons that a species originates from. As the list contains both worlds that the species did not originate from, and worlds not occurring through natural means :P--Jlandeen 18:51, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

What should be included/excluded Edit

Well it seems to me that "worlds" (meaning planets or moons) that an emerging culture ADOPT as their homeworld would be acceptable for this list -- for example, members of the Vulcan SPECIES eventually ADOPTED the planet Romulus as the HOMEWORLD of their ascendant CULTURE -- and it is considered the homeworld of their culture, if not their species. But it is in fact a WORLD. -- Captain MKB 19:00, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

I think that Romulans would be an exception, as technically they were Vulcans who evolved into a race which became Romulans. So strictly speaking they are listed with their correct homeworld. But let me illustrate the problem with going with just "adopted planets." For starters early in the list you see the Ba'ku and their "homeworld" Ba'ku. The problem is that is only a colony. This is not their homeworld, nor is an adopted planetary body, simply a colony. I propose we set these new guidelines: #1. It must be a stellar body of a known type (stars, planets, planetoids, moons and so on.) #2. It must either contain A.) the entire known population of a species/race or B.) Be the planet the species was formed/ evolved on or C.) A cannon reference that declares the world the homeworld of a species. There are items in the list that do not fit these guidelines: for example Aaamazzara (Aaamazzarites) is listed, yet there is no cannon reference that I can find for "Aaamazzara" nor a place where Aaamazzarites call home. By the same token we could just say Borgia, Continuumia and so on. So I propose we re-examine the list, remove any entries that don't fit the above guidelines.--Jlandeen 19:13, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
I'd suggest approaching it by putting together a list of ones to possibly remove and listing them here, so that it can be determined where the names/worlds/etc came from. -- sulfur 23:02, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
I agree, I will do that now. Should be ready in a bit.--Jlandeen 22:24, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Borgia? continuumia? this doesn't make sense -- no one was suggesting that we start devising ridiculous planetary names. are we part of the same conversation here? -- Captain MKB 23:27, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, that is exactly what I was trying to illustrate. There ARE names in the list that are simply that, created by devising names not in canon. I will clear this all up with as Sulfur suggests, a list of names we should remove.--Jlandeen 22:24, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

List to remove?Edit

Ok this is what I see for problems so far, Let us start here and then I have more.

  • Unicomplex - Borg (self explanatory? Not a planet any more then the continuum is.)
  • T'Lani Prime (T'Lani) (although there are references as it being the main planet of the T'Lani system, it is not clear if the race originates from T'Lani III or T'Lani Prime. It could be argued that either planet is considered the homeworld in my opinion.)
  • Kurill Prime is not a cannon reference to the Vorta homeworld. It was a DS9 reference based on a fictional story a character told. This one needs to be removed for sure.
  • Founders' homeworld (Founders, Dominion) This is not appropriate, there are a bunch of problems with this. First the Dominion are a number of species, none of which reside on the Founders planet other than the Founders. Secondly the link leads to 2 different planets both of which are unnamed ... not really sure what to do with that.
  • Fabrina is no longer the homeworld of the Fabrini as their star went Super Nova. I would say that Yonada would be a better fit (a hollow asteroid used to transport them to a new location.) I am not familiar with their race.. did they eventually find a new home?
  • "El-Aurian homeworld" is not fitting for the El-Aurian's. We should delete that entire page after reading it, and merge that information to the El-Aurian species page, as it is all a stretch. It is a page of assumptions mixed with facts. For starters "El-Aurian homeworld" doesn't say where it is nor its name.
  • We should Remove Voth from the Earth listing, it is a race "presumably" having evolved from people from Earth and on top of that vagueness is the fact they do not reside on Earth.
  • Cetacean should be removed from Earth as it is as vague as saying, "Whales" which could be a number of species across numerous worlds.
  • Aaamazzara, There is no canon reference that the Aaamazzarites call this world their home, nor if they even have a home.
  • Ba'ku planet - it is unclear if the Ba'Ku's original homeworld was actually destroyed, or if the planets majority of the population relocated somewhere else. It was only 600 that originally settled on what they came to call Ba'ku. If we are to keep it, we would need to know that there are no more Ba'ku on their original homeworld (which we do not know the name of.)--Jlandeen 23:44, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

So if no one has any more comments on the above mentioned, I will remove them...--Jlandeen 18:13, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

So, instead of hiding this in the middle of a prior conversation, I've split it off into its own. And waiting half a day is definitely not sufficient. I've also added some links to the planets listed so that they can be looked and one at a time. After doing this, I'll look at them a bit later today. :P -- sulfur 18:23, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
For starters (and in a random order), the Founders' homeworld is fine. Remove the "Dominion" tag from it maybe, but the Founders were the origin of the dominion. As far as we know, they originated from the first planet. Once that planet became lifeless, all of them moved to planet #2. And now they originate from there. :)
The El-Aurian homeworld is perfectly fine as an article on its own. We don't know the name of it, but it was referenced as Guinan's home planet at least once.
Aaamazzara, sure. Non-canon reference. Shouldn't be here.
Fabrina. Canon reference. To the best of our knowledge, it's their homeworld. Or was.
Now, remember that from our POV, everything's something that was in the past. For all we know, there are no more planets, and again, for all we know, the universe no longer exists in the form that we know if from the Star Trek times. Ergo, strictly speaking, every planet is a "was". -- sulfur 18:33, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes I understand they are "all gone" from POV, but i'm just saying Fabrina was toasted and the inhabitants left on a floating rock. Then left in canon floating off to an unnamed world... Perhaps we could call Yonada their home? Or do we follow the guidelines you hint to in the founder's reference. They had a home and moved to a new one when the original became uninhabitable, and as you mention we don't know the name of the new world.. should we call the new Fabrina something like Fabrini Homewold?--Jlandeen 22:37, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Did they specify whether or not there was in fact a new homeworld? Wouldn't it be non-canon unless we saw them get there?
As to the original Fabrini homeworld being toasted -- who cares? It was still their homeworld!. Just like all the other homeworlds being toasted by the eventual collapse of the galactic center -- it doesn't change the fact that they were the homeworlds -- so we won't be removing destroyed planets from the list. -- Captain MKB 04:56, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

First, I care. The problem is the confusion on what homeworld means. It does not necessarily mean where they evolved or were created on. For starters, we could say that races like the Founders and Romulans are incorrectly listed in that case. Instead, we are saying that if they were from a world that they moved from in canon, we need to take into account their new home. For example, the Founders have the Great-Link on 2 different planets in canon, thus we pick the one that occurs last chronologically. And we WILL be removing some of the destroyed homeworlds from the list. Namely anything that has a replacement location in canon.--Jlandeen 20:18, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

The unicomplex isn't a world (is it.. im sure its not) -- Plus we don't even know the original Borg homeworld.--Mafeu 20:42, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

I am going to go ahead and remove the Unicomplex. It was never listed as the origin of the borg, never listed as a "world," and never listed as the primary population. For all we know there is a higher concentration of borg somewhere else.--Jlandeen 20:23, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

I am going to go ahead and remove Voth from the Earth listing. It is not fitting for the definition of Homeworld this Article is currently using.--Jlandeen 20:23, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

I am going to go ahead and remove Cetacean from the Earth listing. It is not fitting for the definition of Homeworld this Article is currently using. And it does not refer to a specific species any more than Humanoid or Reptilian does.--Jlandeen 20:23, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

We will be removing those destroyed worlds? No we won't. Otherwise, we'll be removing the entire list. From the MA POV, nothing is there anymore (for all intents and purposes). It was still their homeworld.
The Romulans arguably have Romulus as a homeworld, because that's where they transitioned from being Vulcans to Romulans. The Founders have two homeworlds. The first, which may or may not actually even be their original homeworld, and the second, which has become their homeworld. We don't need to state that only one of them counts.
It might be best to clear up what "homeworld" means to you. The way I view it, and the way others seem to also, is that the homeworld is the planet(oid) where the species originated or viewed as "home". If it were "home location", then Unicomplex stays on, Q Continuum goes back on the list, etc. -- sulfur 20:27, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

If we adopt such an odd definition then we need to make room on the list for very strange issues. Such as plots that place species having been created somewhere other than what they consider their homeworld, multiple planet listings for cannon examples that don't tell us which planet the species evolved on and ultimately defeat the purpose of the list.--Jlandeen 20:32, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Ok. Stop. Stop removing stuff and hiding comments in the middle of the bits above.
Now... Cetaceans were stated to come from Earth. So, maybe we should indicate that "some species of". Voth were stated to originate on Earth too. The definition in homeworld states that right out, so if we remove them from here, we have to remove them from homeworld, and remove the mention of their original homeworld from the Voth article. That contradicts canon, so...
And how is that an odd definition that creates issues?
Maybe we should just get rid of this entire list. Especially since this kind of crap comes up about once a year as relates to it. I give up. Remove whatever you want. Remove it all. -- sulfur 20:40, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
It seems to me that the homeworlds list should just be replaced with a Category and be done with it. As far as I'm concerned multiple homewords is just fine. My home country might be Japan but I moved to the US. Now my home country is the US...but others like me also consider their home country to still be Japan...who cares? If I want to look up the homeworlds for the Changelings for instance I think i'll just go to the page Changelings rather than this I don't see the need for this page at all — Morder 20:54, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
The purpose of this page seems to be to list objects that are both "home" to some race, and a "world" (as in "planet" or "planetoid", excluding weird sorts of artificial habitats)... yeah, you may call me Mr. Obvious now. :)
Anyway, this list article has not been turned into a category during the last five years, because it contains more information than a category could have - which is the direct connection between the "homeworld" and its inhabitant species. If the consensus is that we might as well lose that information, we could turn it into a category, but I don't see the pressing need for that (and not to even talk about double-categorization as both "planet" and "homeworld").
And finally, to the OP: Are you sure you aren't just discussing this because your initial addition of "Q Continuum" has been removed - it reads a little like it, although I hope I'm wrong... :) -- Cid Highwind 14:00, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Pictures Edit

Would it be appropriate to include pictures in a category article like this one? Maybe a gallery for images for the homeworlds listed?--Jlandeen 22:42, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Removed Edit

  • Pales IV (Distant Human Colony)
    Ogminia Prime (Ogments)

...because I could find nothing about them and presume that they are fanon. --Golden Monkey 19:58, March 2, 2010 (UTC)

Ad blocker interference detected!

Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.