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.
Is there any proof that this was a city, as opposed to some other type of location (a region or something) - I don't see any evidence for that, plus this city seems to grow crops. -- Capricorn (talk) 17:20, July 9, 2014 (UTC)
- FWIW, the Star Trek Encyclopedia identifies Ilvia as a city, so that seemed to be the assumption of Trek staff. No reason a city can't grow crops, especially if it is a consolidated-city county covering a large area, or a Regional Municipality also covering a large area(Canada has those). 31dot (talk) 21:30, July 9, 2014 (UTC)
My concern isn't so much that it can't be a city, but that we simply might not know. What the encyclopedia says about the matter is interesting, but it's only good for background information. -- Capricorn (talk) 09:37, July 10, 2014 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what else you would call it- though Memory Beta calls it a settlement. 31dot (talk) 03:24, July 12, 2014 (UTC)
- There is such a thing as being too vague and unnecessarily vague(people have common sense). Every point in the Galaxy is a "location". I think "settlement" (a location where people live, which is the case here) works better. 31dot (talk) 21:57, July 14, 2014 (UTC)
My point is, I'm not sure we know it's even a settlement. From what we can see all we have a name that is associated with some habitation and events. It could be like "Siberia" or "Transylvania"; not all named inhabited things qualify as settlements. I thought "location" or something noncommittal like that was standard practice in cases where all we have a name too. I hope I'm not flogging a dead horse here, but I'm genuinely surprised that this is so controversial. -- Capricorn (talk) 11:16, July 28, 2014 (UTC)