What about the other future officers, such as the Enterprise-D's tactical officer in 'All Good Things..."?

He doesn't really qualify as unnamed.. that is, because he had a name -- Gaines. -- Captain M.K.B. 15:59, 11 August 2006 (UTC)


Logically, this should be named "Unnamed Starfleet personnel (25th century)", since they're all 25th century ones... -- sulfur 18:37, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. :-) – Cleanse 05:28, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
I wasn't aware "All Good Things..." anti-time future took place in the 25th century... --Alan 05:32, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
We can move the Ent-D ensign to Unnamed USS Enterprise (NCC-1701-D) personnel (or if that doesn't suit, Unnamed Starfleet personnel (24th century)).– Cleanse 05:59, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
Ultimately, this is also a POV problem for MA. As I understand, MA is supposed to be written in the "distant future." So unless these guys are from the 50th century, or something, "future" is a bad title. --OuroborosCobra talk 06:25, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

The Ensign may not be in the 25th century, but his description at the moment certainly suggests that he is. -- sulfur 13:04, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

The only thing we know is that periods take place in 2364, 2370, 2395, and some unknown time later than 2395. 25th Century? Could be, who knows. --TribbleFurSuit 14:17, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

My point was simply that his description is incorrect and he should be moved elsewhere I think. While the rest of this should be at 25th century. Not future. The time period discussion belongs on the episode talk page for the episode. -- sulfur 15:21, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Barri Whittaker Edit

25th century cadet 14

Unknown actress

I've removed the information about Barri Whittaker. It was added by an anon to the image on the right. This link shows Barri Whittaker and she does definitly not look like the actress we're searching. So any source would be great. – Tom 00:45, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

  1. The pic in her listing is recent, a different hairstyle and angle
  2. I've seen the costume & tags
  3. In consideration of purchasing same, I emailed the actress who confirmed her appearance and costume, suggesting "that ugly thing should be burned"
Cheers - anon doesnt mean incorrect... ;-) The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).
Of course isn't anon = incorrect, but sorry for you, the image at the NowCasting profile is not the woman who is pictured here. If you've e-mailed her please let me know how you've contacted her, would love to confirm that. You can reach me by personal e-mail via my profile. Again, a source would be great. – Tom 06:32, 23 March 2009 (UTC)


Like the crews of the Relativity and the Rhode Island, the Pasteur crew are only present in their alternate timeline, so could they (unnamed), and Crusher and Chilton (named crew) be on a separate personnel page for the ship? --LauraCC (talk) 20:23, March 16, 2018 (UTC)

Thinking about it and looking at the sections in question, I'm actually leaning towards the opposite of what you are proposing. The Relativity and Rhode Island pages are tiny in comparison and could probably just do with being listed on this page with appropriate redirects. --| TrekFan Open a channel 20:01, March 31, 2018 (UTC)