Past and special-purpose discussions related to this article can be found on the following subpages:
Help icon

Memory Alpha talk pages are for improving the article only.
For general discussion on this subject, visit the forums at The Trek BBS.

FA status Edit

Nomination (08 Sept - 22 Sept 2004, Success) Edit

James T. Kirk: Well written and detailed article. --BlueMars 19:57, Sep 8, 2004 (CEST)

  • Definitely support. -- Dan Carlson | Talk 20:57, Sep 8, 2004 (CEST)
  • Supported. Ottens 10:49, 15 Sep 2004 (CEST)

Removal (13 Jan - 05 Mar 2005, Success) Edit

James T. Kirk, for one, the page has an "attention needed" notice. It needs a rewrite, some facts checked, a number of wiki-fixes and some additions made, especially from TOS - which is otherwise seriously overshadowed by Movie references. --Gvsualan 19:07, 13 Jan 2005 (CET)

I agree. For some reason, the {{featured}} message is already missing on that article - and I think it can stay this way. No article that "needs attention" should be "featured". -- Cid Highwind 23:31, 2005 Jan 13 (CET)
According to the log, I evidently removed it. To my knowledge I did it unintentionally, that or I mistook it as improperly belonging there because of the attention needed notice and removed it as an oversight prior to realizing it was legit. I will restore it in the meantime due to the fact that it is, at this point, already considered "featured" it should remain there, as long as it is under debate. --Gvsualan 23:42, 13 Jan 2005 (CET)
Yes, that would be the proper procedure. Thanks. -- Cid Highwind 23:44, 2005 Jan 13 (CET)
I vote we take the FA off for now. Tyrant 19:39, 30 Jan 2005 (CET)Tyrant
The procedure has changed in the meantime, so I removed the message again and suggest to keep this discussion some more days (4-5?) to allow everyone to comment. -- Cid Highwind 22:06, 2005 Jan 30 (CET)

Nomination (24 July - 08 Sept 2006, Success) Edit

James T. Kirk

I'm nominating the large article on James T. Kirk for feature status. It's extensive, well cited, and well illustrated. It's broken down in chronological order and consistent in form and format throughout. It's is definitely deserving of feature status. --Bfgreen 11:37, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Oppose, if you look at the article history, it is in a state of flux at the moment (and that was before the nomination). In addition, I am not happy with the pictures, particularly the first one in the sidebar. All we can see is a silhouette of some person. It needs to be replaced with one of the great shots of Kirk from Star Trek VI, or something. The information on the movies is very lacking, particularly some of the relationships he had then, with very little on Carol Marcus, and nothing on Martia (who only has one sentence on her, and it is under McCoy), and very little about the events of Star Trek V and VI. I am sure if I read in more detail, I can find more problems. This article is long, but it's not ready, and articles don't just get featured because they are long. --OuroborosCobra talk 16:53, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Actually, the image in the sidebar of Kirk's silhouette was a nifty little addition, IMO. It was an image of his famous entrance in Star Trek II. The image kinda gave it that "Here he comes... you know who this is!" quality... if that makes sense. But, yeah... whatever. :P (by the way, that new image of Kirk from STVI? Yeah... that's gotta go, lol! Do you have a better image of him from the film? If not, I might be able to find one...) --From Andoria with Love 19:10, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
  • My opinion of the sidebar is that it should be an image of the character that actually shows the character. As for a better image than what I put up, that was done after spending about 5 minutes trying to find something from Star Trek VI. If you can find a better one, go ahead and upload over mine. --OuroborosCobra talk 20:10, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Support - Admittedly, I worked a lot on this article. I think it covers the all the major bases effectively, and I'm pleased to see it nominated. I do wish there was more to say about Carol Marcus' relationship with Kirk, but from canon sources, there just isn't a whole lot of hard data to use. Other subjects not covered in lenghty detail have links to their appropriate articles. --Aurelius Kirk 20:24, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. Looks good. Seems to cover almost everything (although it could use expansion in some areas). Just because an article is still being worked on now and then doesn't mean it doesn't qualify as a featured article, IMO. --From Andoria with Love 18:46, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. Well, the article ir pretty good. Revenge 16:05, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Conditional Support - I did some sp. edits, but otherwise the article seems really good. I would like to see this picture thing figured out before we make it featured though. I know it's traditional to have the "last time we saw them" pic at the top, but why not just have a '60s promotional image of him at the top? It's the first thing people think of about Captain Kirk anyway. (Maybe the one with the PADD, but I'd like to see that replaced.) We do do it sometimes, ie: Uhura.
Also: if we can replace any images of "peoples heads" with images of them with Captain Kirk, that'd improve the article a bit. IE: Janice Rand and Rayna is a persons head, where as the Edith Keeler image is a great example of him actually being involved with said person. And the "2266 and 2267" years have just peoples heads, can't we involve Kirk in'm ala 2268? - AJ Halliwell 16:21, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Support - The article is impressingly comprehensive. The objections are insubstantial and/or subjective. -Skon 22:45, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
    • I'm sorry Skon, but you are not yet eligeable to vote here. Per Memory Alpha:Featured article policies#Voting for nominations, you need to have been both registered for at least two weeks (you've only been making edits for 4 days), and have made at least 20 significant contributions to Memory Alpha. --OuroborosCobra talk 00:15, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
      • Ok! Would be nice if there were an automated notification for that. That would save a lot of work.-Skon 00:58, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • I am changing to support in recognition of all that is here. I still think the areas I outlined above need work, but I am willing to see that done after FA status, as they are relatively minor. --OuroborosCobra talk 00:08, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. As Skon said above, the article is incredibly comprehensive. It is well-organized, well-referenced and has a plethora of links to complementary articles. I'd like to see the few red links (gang, rehabilitation colony and Jon Povill resolved to a page or removed, but that's just a personal preference. -Dave -TheBluesMan 01:52, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Featured: 8 Yays, 0 Nays --Alan del Beccio 04:37, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Reconfirmation (08 May - 23 May 2012, Failed) Edit

Featured articles simply shouldn't require citation as long as this one has. There's also issues with notes on the Enterprise-A being renamed (something that isn't clear as far as I remember), info missing in the background section even though there are links from other sections of the article (namely the link from Kirk's 2281 retirement, and these links could be improved with divs if they all need to be in the bg section at the end of the article), amongst other, more minor issues. I think this article needs be looked at with a critical eye before being reconfirmed, and that five votes are called for here. - Archduk3 22:17, May 8, 2012 (UTC)

  • Oppose. - Archduk3 22:17, May 8, 2012 (UTC)
  • Oppose; an article on one of the primary characters in all of Star Trek should be one of our best, and this one is not there yet. 31dot 22:58, May 8, 2012 (UTC)

Youngest Captain Edit

I changed the outdated information on Kirk being the youngest captain in the fleet's history to this date, since TNG's "Conspiracy" makes undoubtedly clear that Tryla Scott has aquired that title at some time in the 24th century. – Ambassador 00:30, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

When was it first established (in canon) that Kirk was the youngest captain in streerfleet history? Is it confirmed that he first became captain at the age of 31? --MShivers 22:10, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
I added a "cite your sources" tag to this entry on 1/17/2011 and no one has come forward yet. At some point this needs to go, but I'm reluctant to do it myself. --GNDN 15:43, August 15, 2011 (UTC)

The 17 Violations Edit

I think I figured out what Kirk's 17 temporal violations were based on stuff seen in movies/episodes and wondered if those were worth listing anywhere, or if they're too superfluous? – Ostron 20:11, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I would not consider them too "superfluous", but it might be worth putting them here for others to look at first. --OuroborosCobra talk 20:27, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
A lot would depend on what you consider "violations"...are we talking about time travel incidents in general, or ones where the past was interfered with in some way?
The only ones I can come up with on the top of my head that include actual temporal tampering are: the Edith Keeler incident, the Capt Christopher incident, the Gary Seven incident, and the "Whalesong" incident. If you are referring to general time travel, then the Psi 2000 incident would also apply.
It is possible that each "incident" may involve multiple violations, in the same manner, for instance, that if you were to hold a gun on a group of 5 people, you would be charged with 5 counts of "assault with a deadly weapon". That would make it easier to come up with 17 violations out of those few incidents.Capt Christopher Donovan 00:57, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Since the definition on here of the Temporal Prime Directive simply stated interference as a breach and not time travel itself, I didn't count just incidents of time travel as violations. However, in order to reach 17 I had to assume that Kirk would have been held responsible for actions of his subordinates. The ones I came up with follow (these are not in order):

  • Abducted/transported John Christopher
  • Enterprise photographed by 1960s earth military
  • Security guard abducted/transported
  • Record tapes from military base stolen (this done by members of crew; violation under "captain's responsible")
  • Allowed Gary Seven to alter history
  • Was arrested and threatened travelers in Sarpedion's past
  • McCoy traveled back in time and prevented death of Edith Keeler (violation under "captain's responsible")
  • Allowed Spock to travel back in time and guide his younger self (violation under "captain's responsible").
  • Sells glasses from the future to collector in 1986.
  • Formula for transparent aluminum given to engineer in 1986 (violation under "captain's responsible")
  • Tells Jillian Taylor about future origins
  • Klingon equipment confiscated by US military in 1986 (violation under "captain's responsible")
  • Made Chekov "disappeared" from Mercy hospital, leaving records of his stay.
  • Reveals Klingon Bird of Prey to a 1986 whaling crew.
  • Brings 2 Humpback whales from 1986 to 23rd century.
  • Brings Jillian Taylor from 1986 to 23rd century.
  • Exits the Nexus in the 24th century and disrupts plans of Soren.

That's 17. Ostron 16:06, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Another actor that spoke like Kirk? Edit

I thought I found an article that mentioned a guest star, who copied William Shatner's speech patterns as Kirk when doing his character. I can't find the article again for the life of me. I don't suppose anyone has got any idea which guest star I'm talking about? I think it might have been a captain or something, in either TNG, DS9 or VOY. Also, the actor may have played other characters - I think the character where he copies Kirk's speech patterns only appears in one episode, but I'm not sure. Sorry it's so vague! Can anyone help? Thanks! 08:24, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't know if it's the one you're thinking about, but J.G. Hertzler based his performance as Laas on Shatner's performance as Kirk, according to the Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Companion. Have a look at the background info on "Chimera" - there's a quote from Hertzler on the topic. – Cleanse 03:22, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, that was it. Thanks! 04:59, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

No problem. ;-) – Cleanse 06:26, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Winona Kirk Edit

Under "Apocrypha", this article says, "The novel Collision Course by William Shatner gives James Kirk's father's name as "Joseph Samuel Kirk". The name of Kirk's mother is said to be "Winona Kirk"." It's not clear (to me, at least) whether the name "Winona Kirk" comes from Collision Course or some other source. Where was it first used? —Josiah Rowe 21:00, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Kirk's birthEdit

Are we sure Kirk was not born on the Kelvin in the prime timeline? Winona was very close to giving birth. Am I to understand that had the Narada not arrived, Kirk would somehow have been born in Iowa? 17:35, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Nothing ever said Kirk was born in Iowa. In Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home, Kirk said he was "from Iowa" (and he only works in outer space), but didn't specify if he meant birth or simply where he grew up. It's different for many people, including myself.--Tim Thomason 18:00, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
Actually, File:Historical archive, Starfleet (production resource).jpg – from ENT: "In a Mirror, Darkly, Part II" – makes it clear that James T. Kirk (prime) was born in Iowa on 2233 March 22. Since it is also now canon that his mother was on board the USS Kelvin just before giving birth, one would presume that she originally got home just before she delivered. This implies that the Alternate reality Kirk was born a little early due to the stress of Nero's attack (so probably mid-March rather than March 22). —MJBurrage(TC) 20:19, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
There is no evidence from the TOS or the first 6 movies that Captain Kirk's Father served in the Star Fleet. The reference to the Alternate Reality movie needs to be removed to an isolated section about the alternate reality movie. Magnumserpentine 21:35, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
See my comment in the following section. —MJBurrage(TC) 02:08, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

=> modifications in 2233 are wrongs (?) Prime Kirk is born in Iowa ; and alternate kirk is born in the medical shuttlecraft Kevin. I agree with: Winona delivered due to the stress !!!

=> The farm, where he lives, is his uncle's farm ? sources Star Trek Generations. In Star Trek who speaks in car's nokia ? is his uncle ? C-IMZADI-4 22:24, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

I forgot about the bio screen earlier. The uncle's farm in Generations was in Idaho not Iowa, so it has no bearing on the film.--Tim Thomason 02:31, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
Since the writers have stated that the USS Kelvin was on its way to Earth when it intercepted readings from the black hole and that the attack on the Kelvin caused a premature birth, and since there was a cut line stating that Prime Kirk was born on a farm in Iowa (see comment #488 here, there is no longer any real evidence to contradict that Prime Kirk was not born in Iowa. The alternate reality and the prime reality stay separate, and in the prime reality, Kirk says he is from Iowa, meaning he was born in Iowa. Had he actually been born in outer space, he would have said so, since Gillian asked him if he worked in outer space. When someone explains where they are from, they normally say something along the lines of "I was born in Russia, but I grew up in Kentucky." Kirk said he was from Iowa, meaning he was born in Iowa. I say we should just state that fact rather than circling around it just because he was born elsewhere in an alternate reality. Saying he wasn't born in Iowa is speculation, IMO. --From Andoria with Love 05:12, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
I still think that John McCain would never say he was "from the Panama Canal Zone", even though he was born there. But since the writers have confirmed that Kirk would have been born in Iowa were it not for Nero's incursion, that takes care of that. —Josiah Rowe 05:46, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
Glad we're all in agreement! :) Since no one has opposed the idea, I'll make the changes. --From Andoria with Love 19:16, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Also, the file is seen in the episode, in case anyone was curious. As seen in File:Historical archive, Starfleet.jpg. Roger Murtaugh (talk) 10:49, August 16, 2014 (UTC)

Alternate Reality Related material. Edit

I feel that all Alternate Reality material needs to be excised and moved to a separate section. There is no evidence in the TOS or Movies 1-6 that gives what Kirk Sr. was doing. Some fiction stories have him in Star Fleet. But there is no evidence for it. Just my two cents worth Magnumserpentine 21:35, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Incorrect, prime Spock told alternate Kirk of his father who lived. That was not alternate reality related material. --Alan 21:39, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
The alternate reality does not begin until Nero shows up, so George Kirk being first officer of the USS Kelvin with his pregnant wife aboard is canon in both realities. —MJBurrage(TC) 02:08, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Pre Enterprise Service HistoryEdit

I know its mostly accepted that Kirk served on the Republic first and then the Farragut, but this really makes little sense. I think its the other way around and here's the clear facts as to why:

1) There is no data on where Kirk served after the Farragut attack. This is a swatch of history left wide open. 2) Kirk says he served with Finney on the Republic some years after the Academy, not during. 3) Kirks admonishment of Finney move him up on the Ship Captain's list. Obviously this was sometime near his promotion to captain otherwise why would he even be on the list?

--Mark 2000 23:37, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

It's been established that Kirk was an Ensign on the Republic and a Lieutenant on the Farragut. Ensign comes before Lieutenant. -- Captain MKB 00:24, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

I think Kirks admonishment of Finney moved him up on the PROMOTION list, not the Captain's list. Therefore, it is not clear, that he was a commander or at least a lieutenant commander at that time. --Captain Wiesel 14:23, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

They clearly referred to him as "Ensign Kirk of the USS Republic" at numerous points in that episode. -- Captain MKB 14:49, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Which only confirms my argument... --Captain Wiesel 15:20, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you are trying to argue, then? Didn't you just say you thought Kirk was a commander or lieutenant commander when it's been proven here he was an ensign? -- Captain MKB 12:29, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

No, I was trying to explain that there is NO argument to assume Kirk was a commander or lieutenant commander during his time on the Republic because there is no mentioning of a "captain's list" in this context (compare Argument 3 of Mark 2000). There is only a "promotion list". So, I completely agree with you! --Captain Wiesel 16:05, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

A few notes:
  • We know that in TWOK, senior Academy cadets serve as midshipmen on "live" missions.
  • Also, from TWOK, we know that Lieutenant (not Cadet) Saavik was taking the Kobayashi Maru scenario to test her command ability at the Academy.
  • Kirk beating the Kobayashi Maru at the Academy, as a cadet, is from Trek 09, post-AR interference and can be reliably ignored as a Prime reference.
My suggestion then, is that for his Midshipman tour, Kirk served on the Republic "as" an Ensign. (This presumption can be inferred when compared to real-world Military Academies when fourth-year cadets are imbeded with active-duty units for a semester, they are treated (and referred to) as O-1's, not as cadets.)
After graduation, Kirk is assigned to the Farragut under Garrovic for a 5-year mission, then as a LT, returns to the Academy for Command training where he serves as a student-instructor to Gary Mitchell and beats the Kobayashi Maru.
After Command Training he is assigned to the Republic again where he serves with Ben Finney, who he met "some years earlier" during his Midshipman tour. During this 5-year mission, he "rapidly advances through the ranks" up to Commander before earning Captaincy of the Enterprise in 2265.
Considering all of that, I would submit that the timeline should be correctly listed as outlines here:
This timeline (1)incorporates all of the available information, (2)does not contradict itself (Lieutenant no longer comes before Ensign), (3)is comparable to real-world counterparts, (4)is compatible with similar training schedules that are seen in the future (i.e. Academy, cadet cruise, command/department head training as mid-grade officer, instructor assignments are only 1-2 years long, etc.), and best of all, (5)it narrows the blonde lab tech down to either Carol Marcus or Janet Wallace.
Gawain VIII 21:42, February 15, 2011 (UTC)

Awards after "Court MartialEdit

Something curious here about TOS: "Court Martial". The list of Kirk's medals and awards that is read aloud in this episode already shows Kirk as a highly decorated combat veteran of Starfleet. I am curious if there is any reference in a novel, book, or live action show about what awards Kirk had amassed at the end of his career (well over twenty five years after "Court Martial"). I have also found it interesting that in Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country Kirk shows up the high level briefing without ribbons while the admiral's all wear thiers. One has to wonder if Kirk would have soundly beaten the flag staff in number of awards displayed.

So, anyhow, just curious about if there is a list somewhere. On my own website I have a (very non-canon) list of awards which I have speculated on but none of that is in any way offical. -FC 16:49, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok...what? Edit

How did Sandra Smith portray Captain Kirk? Last time I checked, she has a vagina. come this dosnt even mention Chris Pine at all?-- 10:47, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Re:Sandra Smith - see "Turnabout Intruder". Regarding Pine, he played the alternate James T. Kirk.– Cleanse 10:49, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Removed Edit

"154 (current year in canon timeline)" ...why do we need to note the current age for a dead character? Shouldn't we leave it at physical and relative age at time of death?--Golden Monkey 21:30, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

we don't. — Morder (talk) 22:01, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Is this legit Edit

There has been speculation that Kirk and Spock were romantically involved, some even suggesting that soon after the V'Ger incident the two were married/bonded. There has been much evidence cited among believers such as the creation of the word t'hy'la, a Vulcan word meaning friend/brother/lover, to explicitly describe the relationship of Kirk and Spock. Star Trek: The Motion Picture (novel) Despite the myriad of analysis nothing has ever been officially canon-ized about this relationship.

I haven't read the novel, so I don't know, but this seems like hogwash to me(the interpretation, anyway, not the passage). I removed it from the main article and if this is something legit it should go to the apocrypha section.--31dot 23:26, December 31, 2009 (UTC)

You did? I don't think so :) - Yeah, it's not legit. "He had long ago decided that he would neither return to that place nor move among its people ever again. Jim! Good-bye t'hy'la." Clearly it's all just fan speculation and almost all Kirk/Spock lovers crap seems to come from a single episode of TOS where spock gave kirk a backrub. — Morder (talk) 23:31, December 31, 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the humourous reply. :) Just thought I'd check.--31dot 23:42, December 31, 2009 (UTC)


See: Forum:Beam me up, Scotty

Gary Mitchell Edit

Mitchell was a helmsman. Pavel Chekov replaced the last regularly posted navigator, whoever that might have been. 03:05, April 22, 2010 (UTC)


Kirk has at least 7 personnel enemies:

Gary Mitchell-turned into a insane superman who tries to kill Kirk

Charlie Evans -see discussion on Star Trek: Of Gods and Men in which he hunts down Kirk after 40 years

Khan Noonien Singh -tries to kill Kirk but only succeeds in destroying himself

Arne Darvin-tries to kill Kirk for being banished from the Klingon Empire

Ben Finney -will probably be acquitted but insane-also has grudge against Kirk for destroying his career in Starfleet

Janice Lester -also goes insane

Tolian Soran -insane scientist who finally kills off Kirk!

The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

Do note that "Of Gods and Men" is irrelevant to any conversation, as it is fan fiction. -- sulfur 15:48, May 28, 2010 (UTC)
Was Soran even an enemy of Kirk? He didn't even know him! – Fadm tyler 22:26, January 7, 2011 (UTC)

From Evil KirkEdit

I assume this refers to "The Enemy Within". Is each version of Kirk in this episode a separate entity, and thus worthy of separate articles? If so, is this the best title?--31dot 08:33, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

I don't think that we should, but this is a terrible name. And where's the other half? "Good Kirk"? I don't think so... -- sulfur 12:28, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Is the script available, to see how it dealt with this situation?--31dot 19:31, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
If we want to keep this, we could title it as James T. Kirk with some sort of disambiguation qualifier, but I'm not sure what it could be- "duplicate", "Alfa 117"? --31dot 01:01, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

We'd need to have a page for the "good" split too then. And both pages would be pretty slim of information too. -- sulfur 01:04, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

One could make the argument that the Kirk page would be sufficient to talk about both, since both are him. Of course, we have a separate Tuvix article. I don't know.......I would need to see how this page benefits us.--31dot 01:09, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

In response to an earlier question, I doubt the script for "The Enemy Within" is available online; as far as I can tell, the only TOS scripts that are (as found here) are "Where No Man Has Gone Before" and "What Are Little Girls Made Of?". --Defiant 01:19, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
Reply to the first question: No, "Evil" Kirk is not a a separate entity. Tuvix is the combination of two separate entities to create a new, different entity. Kirk, and B'Elanna Torres for that matter, had parts of their personality given form, but they remained just a part of the original. As such, I've put this up for a merge with James T. Kirk. - Archduk3 08:40, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

Works for me. --31dot 10:21, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

And for me; it's a good solution. :) --Defiant 10:49, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

Crew Deaths Edit

Why is it that nowhere on this page is a total number of the crew members who died swerving under Kirk's command? ToS was infamous for the number of red shirts who died. There HAS to be some listing of on-screen deaths (without revival) on this site. The info isn't on the redshirt page, but of all things it should be listed here! -- 03:44, May 8, 2011 (UTC)

See Starfleet casualties (23rd century) for a nice, illustrated list. The parent page, Starfleet casualties is already prominently pointed to in Redshirt. It doesn't really have much to do with Kirk personally, so it doesn't need to be duplicated here.–Cleanse ( talk | contribs ) 03:53, May 8, 2011 (UTC)

Kirk secret?Edit

In Star Trek V what is the Secret that Kirk will not reveal-even to Spock and McCoy? The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

Never said in canon. I don't know if the novelization provides any insight into it, but such an explanation would need to go in the Apocrypha section and could not be in the main article. 31dot 22:40, April 5, 2012 (UTC)

Fiver-year mission covered in just three seasons? Edit

Moved to Forum:Five year mission in three seasons?.

Movie Separation Request Edit

I've noticed more and more people are trying to work the 2009 movie into standardized canon. The problem with this is that nearly everything in the movie directly contradicts not only character behavior, but standardized canon within the Star Trek universe from TOS through to TNG and DS9.
Could we please separate canon whose roots are exclusively in 2009 into separate sections such as what they do with the Marvel Comics wiki? i.e. a subsection called Abrams' Canon?
That way people won't be arguing or throwing fits or trying to delete/recorrect what's being written down? I mean this for all the pages affected by Abrams' re-write. 19:12, March 4, 2013 (UTC)

They are already separate. James T. Kirk. For those items that are cited to the movie, it is because they take place before any timeline changes that derived from the film. We view those as "canon". Not "Abrams' canon". -- sulfur (talk) 19:17, March 4, 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, the problem is I'm seeing "canonical entries" into the mainstream portions of this site despite the fact their only citation is from Abrams Canon. That's why I brought it up. Star Trek 2009 shouldn't have any citation in standard ToS canon universe, not while even Paramount considers it to be a wholly unique and separate timeline. 20:06, March 5, 2013 (UTC)

Things like the names of Kirk's parents, and info from the prime reality, such as the fact that George Kirk proudly lived to see James take command of the Enterprise, are perfectly acceptable. To what other facts are you referring that would not be applicable for the prime reality? -Angry Future Romulan 20:08, March 5, 2013 (UTC)
They consider it a separate timeline as of Nero's arrival in it. Everything before that? Non-contradictory thus far. -- sulfur (talk) 20:19, March 5, 2013 (UTC)

Re: Kirks Name Origin Edit

I noticed that under the origin of Kirk's name it uses what was said in the new J.J. Abrams movie of it coming from Kirks two grandfathers, although, if you are trying to keep true to the cannon, Gene Roddenberry's story, that is incorrect. I recently picked up Star Trek: The Motion Picture (novel) from my bookstore and on the fifth page in the beginning of Admiral Kirks preface he says;

"I received James because it was both the name of my father's beloved brother as well as that of my mother's first love instructor. Tiberius, as I am forever tired of explaining, was the Roman emperor whose life for some unfathomable reason fascinated my grandfather, Samuel."

There are lots of little differences in the J.J. Abrams story than in the cannon and I just thought I should throw this little bit out there. The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk • contribs).

The novels are not canon. --Alientraveller (talk) 06:21, July 12, 2013 (UTC)