Date for third comicEdit

I have added the date for the third comic to be released (I assume US), the reference is here:


By the way, does anyone know when they wil be released in the UK? DaveSubspace Message 20:04, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Usually the day after, depending on when your local comic shop gets their shipment from Diamond. -- Michael Warren | Talk 20:06, 11 January 2009 (UTC)


If wikipedia is correct and not speculative vandalism/vandalistic speculation, Data is back! Can anyone confirm this? And is it related to B-4? Xavius, Envoy of Fluidic Space 18:26, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Someone that looks like Data introduces himself at the end of issue #1. What the details really are are to be determined. The third issue is out in about 6 weeks, so I'm sure that we'll know somewhere between now and then. -- sulfur 18:30, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
Spoilers at TrekMovie. - SanityOrMadness talk page 23:52, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Yup. I wrote that. And Shran'll likely write up the story blurb on here tomorrow or Thursday. -- sulfur 00:30, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
I've read the trade paperback. Data's Neural Nets were imprinted on B4. He has since become captain of the Enterprise E.

Inclusion of Future/Next Gen Content in Articles?Edit

From what I understand, the events depicted in the comic are meant to be somewhat canon. Would it be appropriate to include the content about Data's return, the destruction of Romulus (sp), Worf's status within the Klingon Empire, and Geordie's retirement from Starfleet into the appropriate articles, or should we wait until the film comes out to see to what extent the events of the comic are referenced in the film (if at all)? --CountZeroOR 21:35, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

It wasn't seen or heard on screen and therefore it's not canon. No matter what Abrams says. — Morder 21:44, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, no comics are canon, including this one. Canon is only the live action series and movies, and probably the animated series. --Golden Monkey 23:07, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Although TAS wasn't considered canon by Paramount for many years it was recently entered into canon by Paramount. But we've always included it anyway as it was a tv show and fit the reasoning. — Morder 23:16, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
But lots of MA articles contain non-canonical information either in indented italics or in an "Apocrypha" section. Couldn't the information about Picard, Data, Worf, Geordi and Romulus be put into the appropriate articles that way, in places like Jean-Luc Picard#Apocrypha? —Josiah Rowe 18:07, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Of course. We just can't add the info to the "canon" part of the articles. :) --From Andoria with Love 23:38, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Judging from the use of Official on the back cover, I'd say the graphic novel is meant to be fully considered canon. It might be better to wait to see what detail they go into in the film before putting anything in the appropriate articles. They may only reveal Nero's motives in the film. The preceding unsigned comment was added by IndyK1ng (talk • contribs).
What it was meant to be is irrelevant, as things are canon only if Paramount considers them such, and they only consider what is on the screen canon. As the creators said that it is not necessary to read the comic to see the movie, I don't think they consider it canon.--31dot 23:18, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
Just because something is not necessary to see the movie, doesn't mean it isn't canon. It could just mean that everything which is immediately relevant to the film is explained in the movie and all other details are left out for time constraints. For example, one only needs to see Space Seed in order to understand Wrath of Khan, and even then watching any of TOS is not required to enjoy it. To say that it is not necessary to watch any other Star Trek episode or movie before Khan does not make those episodes and the Motion Picture non-canon. Therefore the argument that it is not necessary means it is not canon is not valid.--indyK1ng
Perhaps, but the fact remains that it is not considered canon because it was not on a TV or movie screen.--31dot 23:37, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps they are changing their policies. I find it difficult to believe they would ask directly for material other than novelizations. Keep in mind that most authors have to ask permission to write/publish something related to Star Trek officially; they are rarely ever asked to do it by Paramount. I merely ask that we don't disregard it as non-canon until there is a statement made which specifies its status.--indyK1ng
Roberto Orci says that the comic's not canon. Nunya 18:06, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
We don't have to wait, actually. Memory Alpha policies state that what's on the screen is canon, what's in the books are not canon. I, personally, accept Countdown as canon, but unless we change the policy to include Countdown (I don't know why we would), it is automatically disregarded as non-canon on Memory Alpha. --From Andoria with Love 23:51, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
I was only talking about passing judgment as a collective whole; policies should be followed until something comes from Paramount. I think I accidently deleted Shran's comments, sorry.--IndyK1ng 23:56, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
Ah, ok, I misunderstood. Sorry. You didn't delete my comments, though, they're still there, I think it's just the way the indents are it looked like it was deleted. :) --From Andoria with Love 00:18, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
I was editing this article and when I tried to save the changes it told me that someone had made changes while I was making changes. I thought it said that Shran had made the changes and I clicked back to the article, but I'm not sure if something got removed or not.--IndyK1ng 00:24, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
I've added some very brief material to "Apocrypha" sections in Jean-Luc Picard, Geordi La Forge, Worf, Data and Romulus, with {{Spoiler-section}} tags before any material that might directly relate to the film. Someone else can check to see that it's all formatted correctly.
This sounds like the best policy for now, as I was thinking that this could possibly be some crazy alt-timeline stuff in that even Countdown is from a universe nearly identical to canon, but, as we haven't seen any on-screen references, it is merely a sort of "possible future" of current canon. I think the best policy for now is to merely say call it non-canon until Paramount says "yep, Romulus is destroyed and Data's back." -Firba1 04:00, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
Roberto Orci says that the comic's not canon. Nunya 18:06, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
He implied. Generally in the English language, when someone uses a question mark it implies ambiguity.


Is Star Trek Countdown canon? I know that Star Trek comics are not and are usualy discussed at Memory Beta but since it is telling the events of directly before the newest movie it seems like Cannon. The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

No.Morder 05:31, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

BobOrci replied with "The comic is not canon?" which leaves it ambiguous. Cause it has a question mark. So that's more accurate. Anyone saying that he definitively said that the comic is not canon is a liar.

Context means everything. A question mark isn't always asking a question, and in this case he wasn't. He posed it as a near satirical "stating the obvious." --OuroborosCobra talk 18:14, September 10, 2009 (UTC)
He has officially stated with Anthony Pascale as witness, that all Star Trek projects he and the "supreme court" have overseen, which includes the comics, are canon. [2] 01:51, July 18, 2012 (UTC)
Since Orci is not the sole arbiter of what is canon or not (something which he himself has said), nothing will change here at this time. I invite you to review the canon policy and comment on the already-existing discussion there. 31dot (talk) 01:55, July 18, 2012 (UTC)