Talk:Spock (alternate reality)

Stable and Unaffectionate

Spock was not at all completely unaffectionate to Uhura; in fact, he kissed her back quite a bit during that transporter scene. From what I can infer, he appeared to be trying to keep his all emotions (likely prevalently grief) under control, from what I could see. However, that inference would be original research/ my opinion. Summary: I think that sentence should be revised.76.186.99.165 02:35, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

He also basically cried into her shoulder during the turbolift scene. --OuroborosCobra ^talk 03:09, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh dear, yes, that's what I meant, the turbolift. My apologies; I am only a recent participant in Star Trek fandom. I mostly grew up on Voyager episodes whilst under my older brother's wing. But as you see, the point is the same: I don't think there was as much lack of emotion in the embrace as is inferred in the current article.Mizumeru 03:16, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Although I wasn't the one that changed the line, I do note that it's been changed again back to the unaffectionate bit. Aside from the fact that 'unaffectionate' isn't a word, I'm wondering why it keeps getting changed. Mizumeru 18:02, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Alternate reality

I think that this page and other pages that refer to the alternate reality should be moved. I don't think that Spock (alternate reality) should not be its' own page. It should just be a subheading in the Spock article. Same with all of the other alternate reality articles. They don't belong in their own article because they are the same. Although this is Spock from an alternate timeline, he's still the same Spock, in other words, same man, same soul. It's different with Spock (mirror), because that's a totally different character. This is not a different character. He's the same Spock, he just grew up in an alternate timeline because of Nero. But he's not a different person. I think it's ridiculous to have a totally separate article for the "alternate reality" versions of the characters, because they are the same persons. Otherwise, why not make an alternate reality Picard, due to the events of "Yesterday's Enterprise." It doesn't make sense to me, and further more, it makes it seem like they are not the same person.

Kobyashi Maru

Too much information for the one page as it would increase the length of his article immensely - this has been discussed ad nauseum and this is really the best decision but you are welcome to take your issues there. — Morder 19:07, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

I agree Morder this a ridiculous request, least we forget not only is everything that happened in the movie an alternate timeline, its stated as one by the writers and producers. They also go on to state that nothing that happened in the movie has any bearing on star trek we know of from canon. In fact the only interactions between the alternate reality and the prime reality is with spock from the main reality. Its quite obvious that being from an alternate time line has changed many things. Such as spock having a relationship with Uahura or him programming the Kobyashi Maru. That never happened to spock in the prime reality and it had nothing to do with nero messing up the reality as Spocks timeline was only affected up to the point of his interactions with pike. so therefore they are not the same person. Salubri 03:10, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, you're partially right. The Spock flashback took place in the normal timeline which includes the destruction of Romulus via a supernova and the use of Red matter to stop the nova. — Morder 03:17, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Comparison

I'd like to see a section on this page, in which we can identify and specify ways in which the new Spock differs from Spock Prime. I believe that this Spock will not restrain his emotions as much as Spock Prime did. Spock Prime encouraged the new Spock to "do yourself a favor: put aside logic, do what feels right." Even Sarek leaned in this direction: I doubt Spock Prime ever heard his father say, "which path will you choose? This is something only you can decide." He certainly never heard his father admit that "I married her because I loved her." We know from the first handful of TOS episodes (and from the admittedly non-canon TAS that when Spock Prime was young he had difficultly with his emotions; I strongly believe that with these new influences, the new Spock will not be nearly as motivated to restrain them as Spock Prime had been. --Keeves 20:42, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

First off that wouldn't be in-universe POV and really isn't necessary. Second a lot of what is compared could just be speculation. — Morder 20:47, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Whore

Let's just get something straight. His mother was called a whore. Deleting it every time won't change that fact. In fact, Prostitution should be updated as well to reflect this fact. Every anon from day one will attempt to include it. Please stop removing it. There is nothing wrong with stating fact. Even if you don't like it...we don't pander to everyone's beliefs here otherwise Evolution might not exist. — Morder 21:18, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Looks like I missed the update to Prostitution. — Morder 21:22, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

This is almost as bad as when people complained that their god might be upset that we had a picture of T'pol's butt  :) --- Jaz 03:24, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, that's the one I was really thinking of. — Morder 03:27, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Hey, God created T'Pol's butt for all of us! --OuroborosCobra ^talk 03:36, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Hahahaha...Morder, you are comparing "whore" to "evolution"? Great. I gotta absorb that one. But naw, I was the one who removed it, I just found it tasteless and tacky, even though it was mentioned in the movie - not that I got anything against whores/prostitutes/sluts etc...but I'm over it. – Distantlycharmed 23:22, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Um...yeah, it was an example as to how just because people don't like something doesn't mean we don't post it here. — Morder 23:26, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Spohkh

Spohkh as an alternate spelling? why is this here? -- Captain MKB 12:46, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

That's how T'Pau pronounced it. (Or am I thinking of T'Lar?) In any case, given that his name is unpronounceable, I think an alternate spelling attempt is not out of place. --Keeves 20:46, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

T'Pol

The article mentions T'Pol's enlistment, but throughout most of the series(s) she is not enlisted, as indicated by her uniform. She presumably had a "field" enlistment, and never actually attended the academy. Thus Spock would be the first Vulcan to actually attend the Academy and join that way. --User:Ensignzixxieclux 18:58, 15 August 2009 (GMT)

...because in all the time from the founding of the Federation to Star Trek XI, no Vulcans would ever join Starfleet, despite being a founding member. T'Pol is irrelevant; the idea of Spock being the first one in either timeline is utterly ridiculous based on just the above. --Golden Monkey 18:56, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Star Trek XI is set within a few years(less than twenty) of the end of Enterprise (Indicated by suggestgion of Archer at launch, Potros/desendant etc) and the prime spock was first anyway, so this spock would logically be first. --User:Ensignzixxieclux 12:04, 16 August 2009 (GMT)

No.

• The main part of Star Trek is set in 2258. Enteprise ended in 2155 (main part) and 2161 (recreation in "These Are the Voyages...")
• Spock Prime was never said to be the first Vulcan in Starfleet.– Cleanse 11:42, 16 August 2009 (UTC)