Ships Edit

i highly recomend this game it is extremely fun but you should have put the types of ships used in the game. The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bleep196 (talk • contribs).

Xindi-Aquatic Cruiser/Valdore Type/D7 Edit

I don't know about you people, but the cruiser looks more like the Xindi Primate ship than the Xindi Aquatic cruiser. Also, I distinctly remember that the Romulan cruiser looks nothing like the Valdore type. It in fact looks like the type of a D'Deridex. The Klingon cruiser doesn't look like a D7 either. Asgard forever 21:01, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

You are correct. The Xindi cruiser is a Primate ship, not an Aquatic. Also, the Romulan cruiser is actually a Romulan scout ship class. The actual scout ship in the game is referred to as a "Defender". Finally, the Klingon cruiser is a Vor'cha class (called Ravenous in the game), as seen in the TNG era.--Endresr1 06:01, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

How game characters are noted (inconsistent) Edit

While adding notes about the playable commanders in this game, I noticed that some of them already had this listed in their background, as though it really happened. Is my way the correct one (as a bg info note) or theirs (as part of their bio, etc.)?--LauraCC (talk) 17:54, May 7, 2015 (UTC)

All apocryphal notes should be added from a production point of view. There should be no info from video games or books etc in the main in-universe section of an article. Where have you seen it written from an in-universe perspective? --| TrekFan Open a channel 18:11, May 7, 2015 (UTC)

I don't know that it was in-universe. It was just listed as a background note, or in a section someone created called "video games". --LauraCC (talk) 16:33, May 9, 2015 (UTC)

Can you give an example of what you mean? --| TrekFan Open a channel 17:44, May 9, 2015 (UTC)

Like here, where someone listed a reference to his name. I added the Conquest reference because it seemed appropriate. Now I wonder if even the note they included belonged their, in light of the rules. --LauraCC (talk) 17:48, May 9, 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I still don't understand what you're trying to say. If you're referring to the Star Trek: Armada note on Damar, I don't see anything wrong with it? --| TrekFan Open a channel 18:44, May 9, 2015 (UTC)
She's not getting the difference between a note saying "X is a playable character in Y game" vs. a note saying "W is named after X in Y game" in regards to the "simple name-dropped references should not be mentioned" part of the resource policy. The "playable character" part of the first note is irrelevant to the character's article, though relevant to the game's article, since it doesn't "expanded upon" what we know about the character, so the note really just says "X is in Y game", which is just name-dropping. The second note actually expands upon what we know about the character, so it is relevant to their article. Some of these notes are written so the reference is cited like we do in the in-universe sections of the article, EX: "W is named after X. (Y)", which should be fixed per the letter of the policy, but isn't really a problem since they are clearly in a real world section. Notes like that using the {{bginfo}} template have to be fixed though, since the formatting difference doesn't show in mobile. - Archduk3 23:47, May 9, 2015 (UTC)