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.
- the name most consistently comes from the Star Trek Encyclopedia and the DS9 Technical Manual, but the ship is also referenced by name in the Star Trek: The Next Generation Companion. the name USS Budapest labels the CG model of the ship, which can be seen clearly in the Star Trek: The Next Generation Sketchbook: The Movies. as the ship hasn't appeared outside of Star Trek: First Contact, i am certain no on-screen reference to the ship has ever been made. Deevolution 21:25, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- pretty sure that would be a no. i am pretty certain Akira-class and Saber-class have also never been referred to in dialog, but they are accepted as canon. i could be wrong, but i'm thinking it's 'one of those things' you just accept. Deevolution 22:46, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- I think that would be a very bad idea, on all three accounts. --Alan 23:50, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- because there are many 'canon' facts about the series that have gone unspoken, including ship class names. fairly certain the USS Enterprise-E was never explicitly called Sovereign class on-screen, Miranda-class has never been spoken. also, while some parts of it are contradictory, doesn't this site consider the Encyclopedia canon? Deevolution 04:51, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Our canon policy only considers the Encyclopedia a "permitted resource" for background notes, not canon information. With the Miranda, as with the Akira and Saber, we have seen a great many of them, so I can understand personal feelings making people want to assign a class name. I can even understand the same with the Sovereign class. I don't with this ship. It was a background design barely seen once. The Valdore type was seen on screen in greater numbers, detail, and time than this one, yet despite licensed sources calling it the "Norexan class", we do not do the same here. Granted, that isn't the Encyclopedia. Two more relevant ones are the USS Rutledge and USS Renegade. The Encyclopedia call those "New Orleans" class, yet we do not. In fact, I believe we recently got rid of a number of Encyclopedia only class articles or just this reason. I don't see a compelling reason for a background design that was barely seen to be treated any differently. --OuroborosCobra talk 04:58, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- Edit conflict-- I'm not sure we need to "establish" a *new* name for this class, when "Norway class" has been identified by background sources as "Norway class" for over 10 years, much less, universally recognized as that by fans worldwide. If by taking the initiative of changing it to a name based on the name of the ship on the model (that is far less identifiable than "Norway class")-- "Budapest type"-- is only going to create havoc from anyone familiar with the design. Also, this is not same case as the "Nexoran class", so that reference shouldn't be compared as "apples", nor is the case with the Encyclopedia, as several of the removed classes based on the Encyclopedia existed simply as a conjectural designation, where no models ever existed. In terms of the Norway, as long as a model exists (or existed), as long as the production folks branded it with a name, as long as StarTrek.com recognizes the name, and as long as everyone else who knows anything about anything regarding this ship recognizes it as "Norway class", then I really don't see a need to change the order of things. --Alan 05:21, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- Oh and a possible 47 reference: Norway's international dialing code is 47 --mko 03:26, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
how many at 001? Edit
The Norway Class page says at least 4 were at sector 001, but the Battle of Sector 001 page says there was 1 named and 2 unnamed. Which is it? (Psydev 00:37, July 9, 2011 (UTC))