Okudagram dataEdit

Theta 116 VIII graphic

Theta VIII

  • Planetary data taken directly from bridge display (beginning of the episode)
  • Temperature (originally -291°C) interpreted as -291°F (= -179°C)
  • Planetary Classification: "Class K Transjovian" (conflicting with Star Charts listing)
  • data also includes: estimated age 7.2 x 10 E 10 Solar Years (?)
Cool info! I'll try to find that display :) -- Harry 10:54, 23 Dec 2003 (PST)
I recently found that display mentioned as showing "Class C" instead of "Class K". Can someone confirm either way? -- Cid Highwind 06:34, 27 Dec 2003 (PST)

Name Edit

I added a cap of the display. My question, when was it ever called Theta 116 VIII? The display clearly says "Theta VIII", the dialog says "the eighth planet of the Theta 116 system." --Alan del Beccio 03:18, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

It might not have been. In many cases in Trek, a planet is just the system name followed by a number. In this case, the system name is "Theta 116", and it is the eighth planet, therefore someone decided to follow that rule and named this "Theta 116 VIII". It would seem that this planet is, in fact, an exception to the rule, and should be "Theta VIII", as seen in the episode. --OuroborosCobra talk 03:27, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure without checking the episode again - the Final Draft script doesn't use "116" in any context, so this might have been a last-minute addition that didn't make its way through the whole script. Would be nice to know when and why this was added to the script.
However, inconsistent names are a big problem with early TNG. Just have a look at, for example, "Pen Pals" to see what I mean. There also is an episode where both a full and an abbreviated name are used interchangeably, although the name of that episode escapes me at the moment. So, if this is moved, at least a redirect should stay. ...and, just so that doesn't go unnoticed - the diagram says "THETA EIGHT", not "THETA VIII" ;) -- Cid Highwind 09:45, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
That would be "Survivors" with the confusion between Delta Rana IV and Rana IV, --Jörg 10:15, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Here are the four references to the planet, none of which were shortened like the example above:

Alan del Beccio 20:14, 18 December 2006 (UTC)