Were the stats for Kolarus Prime in the sidebar box ever shown or discussed in a canon source? -- Renegade54 13:57, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Kolarus III datascreen

Data on Kolarus III.

Right here --> -- Michael Warren | Talk 14:09, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Cool, thanks! :) -- Renegade54 14:13, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Does anybody know where the surface scenes were filmed? would be a nice piece of background information -- Capricorn 15:15, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Background Edit

The entire background section should be removed. It's speculative. — Morder 09:53, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

I agree entirely, and removed the following:
The Enterprise crew seemed to commit a major violation of the Prime Directive in flying down to the surface of Kolarus III with advanced technology, to say nothing of shooting at the natives. One might speculate that the natives had already been exposed to off-worlders, perhaps the Romulans since they probably have no prime directive of their own. If this is the case, then the damage to the native culture may have already been done. Picard also states that "There's no foreseeable danger", indicating that the landing party was beaming down to an unpopulated area, so they may have considered actual contact with the natives of Kolarus III unlikely.
It should also be noted that the Enterprise was investigating this planet in response to detecting positronic technology which revealed a level of expertise at least equal to that of warp drive. There are precedents which show that the Federation is willing to make contact with species who they believe to have developed an advanced level of technology while unable or unwilling to develop warp drive, such as the events in TNG: "Encounter at Farpoint". Interestingly enough in both cases, the advanced technology discovered is not an original product of the indigenous population.
It is also possible that the presence of positronic technology, which would generally seem inconsistent with a pre-warp society, was considered a great enough threat to the native's natural development that the risk of landing was deemed acceptable.
It's nothing but "may have"s, "might have been"s, and "it is possible"s.– Cleanse 10:08, 20 January 2009 (UTC)