Given name given?Edit

Did it ever say that his first name was Pavel because Admiral Maxwell Forrest's counterpart had a different first name so if this is an assumption you really can't be sure about it.--UESPA 03:03, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Interesting point. For how many mirror universe counterparts do we actually know their first name is the same? eg. what about Montgomery Scott (mirror)?
I would suggest, however, that given the nature of the mirror universe we should assume they have the same name unless otherwise stated/shown.– Cleanse 03:09, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Parallels Edit

We agreed to remove this from "Mirror, Mirror" (see Talk:Mirror, Mirror):

(In regard to the sash error):

  • While simply a production error, the events portrayed in TNG: "Parallels" have led some fans to speculate that Kirk might have shifted between another mirror universe (where Chekov was enlisted), and then back to the "regular" mirror universe due to a quantum flux effect caused by the transporter accident.

"Some fans" does not a citation make. – Cleanse 00:05, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Uh...we agreed NOT to remove it. Only to rewrite it so it referenced "Parallels" and not a vauge fan reference. -FC 00:46, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

The note has been gone from "Mirror, Mirror" for several months. I also see 4 or 5 people on the talk page for the episode agreeing that we should leave out such explanations.– Cleanse 00:51, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

How does referencing "Parallels" make it any less of simple fan speculation? We still didn't see Chekov in "Parallels", did we? I say it goes. --OuroborosCobra talk 20:17, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
FC, in order to support the "suggestion" of another mirror universe, you have to reject the continuity error in favor of a deliberate production decision. You can't have both. It's great that you re-added it without saying "some fans", but, you're still "one fan" speculating about something that isn't even a remote continuity or in-universe possibility. --TribbleFurSuit 01:48, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Cleanse and I discussed this between the two of us months and and there was no problem when we came to an agreement. I find it a little distasteful that months later, it is decided to reverse this decision. Oh well, its not worth fighting about it. As far as T-F-S's comment, I'm not even going to dignify that statement with an answer except to say that this user seems to keep appearing in conversations and discussions that I am having with other people for the purpose of either lecturing me or disagreeing with me. I guess if thats what makes some people happy. It is after all a free website...also not worth fighting about. -FC 02:20, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, we did have a discussion, but you and I aren't the whole community. Only a day later Cid and Shran joined the discussion and both cast doubt on the necessity of such a note (and Renegade54 asked for some kind of citation). Agreeing with these arguments, I folded. About four months later the note was removed by Alan when cleaning up the article because it was (and is) speculation based on a nitpick.

I only removed it here because it seemed like majority opinion was in favour of leaving the note out of the episode page. I can assure you it wasn't a personal matter or anything like that; I just stumbled upon this article and thought we should have some consistency.

While decisions can always be reviewed, I think it's clear from both this discussion and previous ones that quite a few users do not want this note present. I hope there aren't any hard feelings; we all get our ideas shot down every now and then. – Cleanse 03:04, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

No hard feelings at all, not with you or Tribble. This is such a minor point better left out anyway. Best. -FC 03:06, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Just a small point, but Mirror Kira was fully aware of Mirror Kirk in their universes history, and the chain of events that had transpired between "Mirror, Mirror" and "Crossover". Seems to be an open and shut case that there was only one "mirror universe", as we define it. --Alan 21:58, 9 June 2008 (UTC)