User Report Edit
Anon user Edit
After making several additions on an "edit" page I could not find a SAVE/PRINT/or publish button anywhere so I clicked "need help editing?" and all my additions to the STAR TREK notes about me on the TOS COURTMARTIAL episode #15 went up in smoke. Winston de Lugo (Timothy in COURTMARTIAL) I hope U have ways of finding it, I can't. - – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 220.127.116.11 (talk).
- If you went to a different screen from the edit screen without saving, anything you did is gone. The Save button should be located to the right of the posting area (if you are using the default skin). 31dot (talk) 01:26, January 2, 2014 (UTC)
Voth Ship STO Edit
I don't know why you undid the edit in the Voth city ship ship article as there are many articles of ships where in the Apocrypha section there has mention of their appearances in other non canon sources such as video games, books, comics etc. --BorgKnight (talk) 11:03, January 6, 2014 (UTC)
Also just to say that mention of their appearance in the game, as well as the appearance of their City Ship is already in the Apocrypha section of the Voth article anyway. --BorgKnight (talk) 11:08, January 6, 2014 (UTC)
- STO is not an ordinary non-canon source; it purports to be a recreation of the entire Star Trek universe. We generally only have Apocrypha information from it when something significant is revealed in STO (such as the death of a character, major change in occupation, destruction of a known ship, etc.) If we did not do this, virtually every article here would have a "This was in STO" in it. We aren't the STO wiki(which we have a link to on the main page). Please see Forum:STO References for more information. In all truthfulness that should be the case with any non-canon source(only revealing major information), though one-time appearances in a non-canon product are OK depending on how it is written. 31dot (talk) 11:15, January 6, 2014 (UTC)
- In the case of the Voth page, more than their appearance is mentioned, such as their attempts to obtain Omega particles. A larger ship than their ship seen in Voyager is just game-specific information and reveals nothing about it. 31dot (talk) 11:17, January 6, 2014 (UTC)
formal complaint against you Edit
By removing my comment from a talk page, you violated the rules of this wiki. I will be finding a senior admin and filing a complaint against you. 18.104.22.168 11:41, January 28, 2014 (UTC)
- If you will look carefully, I did not remove it, but moved it out of an old discussion into a new one at the bottom of the page. 31dot (talk) 11:42, January 28, 2014 (UTC)
Removal of Bajoran and Regalian phaser rifles from type 3 phaserEdit
This should be put back on the page. The page is about phaser rifles (Bajoran, Regalian and Federation.) This has been on the page for years. Should this be put back or not?.--TyphussJediVader (talk) 13:38, February 20, 2014 (UTC)
The Kelvin's Blue BoltsEdit
Further discussion on that topic would be pointless: they want the pulses to be torpedoes. I have already canon-referenced my claims otherwise, and my statements have been flatly ignored. (and an attempt was made to say that I was using the "sophistication" of the effect as evidence, when I was using the function.) The weapons on the Kelvin act like exactly disruptor fire. What is the idea with calling this 23rd century weapon a photon torpedo? I can't find any logic in it at all. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Idazmi (talk • contribs).
- All I know is that there was no consensus or agreement to the change; you shouldn't make a disputed change just because you think you are right, as that just causes edit wars. 31dot (talk) 22:25, March 7, 2014 (UTC)
Why did you remove content I placed on that page? I did the research and found what I had edited to correspond with another source. (Roddy229 (talk) 02:39, March 28, 2014 (UTC)Roddy229Roddy229 (talk) 02:39, March 28, 2014 (UTC))
- The USS Magellan needs to be protected now. Can you do that, thanks.--TyphussJediVader (talk) 02:54, March 28, 2014 (UTC)
Archduk3, the sources on said page, and several online including three pages cited from Google confirmed accuracy of what I put. I'd appreciate it being corrected (Roddy229 (talk) 03:29, March 28, 2014 (UTC)Roddy229Roddy229 (talk) 03:29, March 28, 2014 (UTC))
- Ex astris scientia, and published manuals that were authorized by paramount for starters, were two of the sources I used to ensure accuracy. (Roddy229 (talk) 03:32, March 28, 2014 (UTC)Roddy229Roddy229 (talk) 03:32, March 28, 2014 (UTC))
Is that so? Then why would such content be ddisplayed on the page? Seems like this wiki has evolved into a one sided discussion where the average person has no right to put their two cents into it. I'll be speaking with people above you about this matter (Roddy229 (talk) 03:39, March 28, 2014 (UTC)Roddy229Roddy229 (talk) 03:39, March 28, 2014 (UTC))
- Good luck with that. Why do you sign your name twice? If you feel there are similar materials, please suggest their removal.
--31dot (talk) 03:44, March 28, 2014 (UTC)
I'll admit, I'm not the best at using some of the HTML stuff here. But just like you, and everyone else within this group, I have a right to defend my position. DS9 episode sacrifice of angels. Sisko orders the Magellan and Venture to protect the Defiant, both ships engaged a Galor class to clear the way for the Defiant's run past the dominion line. The Venture is the only one seen docked at DS9 after the fight is over. Roddy229 (talk) 04:02, March 28, 2014 (UTC)Roddy229Roddy229 (talk) 04:02, March 28, 2014 (UTC)
- Signing posts should be done by typing ~~~~ at the end or by clicking the Signature button located above where you type your post. You don't need to type your name or have more than four tildes(~).
- I'm not sure who isn't being civil to you. Where was the ship identified as the Venture? I realize it was reused stock footage of the Venture from "The Way of the Warrior" but the ship was not labeled in either episode(it was named in dialog in TWOTW}. A lot happened in Sacrifice of Angels between where the Venture was mentioned and the end where the stock footage was used, and many Galaxy-class ships were seen in that episode without specific identification.
- Regardless, we need direct, specific evidence of your position stated in the episode or even by Trek staff who worked on the episode, not fan website analysis. Information from a novel could be put as Apocrypha information, but not in-universe information. I urge you to review the above-linked policies as Archduk suggested. And please stop complaining about your "rights" being violated. You have no more "rights" than anyone else; all edits here are determined by consensus of the community, not just by the person who made them. 31dot (talk) 11:45, March 28, 2014 (UTC)
help requested Edit
fine got it only administrators can do it thanks.--22.214.171.124 20:18, April 7, 2014 (UTC)
Tora Ziyal Edit
- That is absolutely correct; apologies, and thanks. 31dot (talk) 12:19, May 18, 2014 (UTC)
I just wanted to say thank you. This is a cool site with a lot of great information. I am using this as a helpful resource for my writing.
Keep up the great work!
Star Trek episodesEdit
Hi, I want to watch all Star Trek episodes and movies. However, when I wanted to start, I found out some of the movie and stuff are set before the first season. Could you please tell me where to start? --Finn Tracy (talk) 07:57, June 3, 2014 (UTC) PS: I changed the name link, because I forgot to log in :P
- If you are saying that you want to watch the episodes in chronological order(within the Star Trek universe) you will want to watch Star Trek: Enterprise first. 31dot (talk) 09:07, June 3, 2014 (UTC)
Writing ability Edit
I received this message from one of the members of this board.
- What makes you think, a maximum degree of fragmentation is what any wiki-article should aim for? Go look at any random featured article in Wikipedia (e.g., ::Virginia, Mauna Loa, Istanbul), and understand that a string of a dozen 5-8 word mini-sentences is much less comfortable to read than 3-4 sentences with ~20 words each. Anyhow, by now it would be a mammoth-undertaking to reverse/improve those 1000s of edits you've done so far... I've been an active member of the MA-community for 10 years or so, and I certainly do not feel up for the task. I cannot be the first one addressing this. Can I? --36ophiuchi (talk) 12:08, July 12, 2014 (UTC)
I would like your opinion on this matter. Am I causing damage to the wiki? I will be frank - I know my communication skills are not say at the level of other writers. I have been diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome, with high levels of anxiety/depression and agoraphobia. I have been rated as having a Global Assessment of Functioning of 45. () A range between 40 and 50 is, Serious symptoms (e.g., suicidal ideation, severe obsessional rituals, frequent shoplifting) or any serious impairment in social, occupational, or school functioning (e.g., no friends, unable to keep a job, cannot work). I have never shoplifted; however, my severe obsessional ritual could be considered what I do on this wiki. I have trouble concentrating, so for me, I write like I think or say in dialog. I use short sentences. For instance, I was working on material from "Whispers". For this paragraph, the area in bold is what I wrote.
- The ITA Elmira was a starship that was registered for Federation travel in the late 24th century. In 2370, the captain of this ship was G. Gulliver. The starship's point of departure was Carinae Delta V. The starship arrived at Deep Space 9 on stardate 47552.9. The ITA Elmira was listed on the space station's arrival roster. (DS9: "Whispers", production art)
- I am willing to comment, but I am unable to do so at this time due to time issues; I will try to comment within the next 24 hours. 31dot (talk) 16:51, July 12, 2014 (UTC)
- The comment seems a bit harsh to me, even if the general point being made has some truth to it. Even if it is a legitimate issue, I don't see it as a major problem or somehow "damaging" the wiki. There are very few perfect editors here, or perfect articles. I certainly don't write everything perfectly. I don't know if I have much specific advice for you; possibly if you undertake a major edit to an article you might want to request that it be reviewed by others, or even beforehand draft the changes you want to make and request comment or advice. Clearly you are acting in good faith to add information to articles; style can always be changed as this is a group effort.
- Most importantly I want everyone to feel welcome editing here. I don't think it was 36's intention to be unwelcome, but just an expression of what to them is frustration. 31dot (talk) 03:19, July 13, 2014 (UTC)
Voyager Flight Path Edit
We have a map that was seen in Season 7 of Voyager. It's a map of the galaxy. Look here. 
On the bottom of the map, there is Voyager's flight path marked out by stardates. Now, look to the map. There is a red rectangle. One of the stardates is marked in red - 48315.8. These two, the rectangle and the stardate are the beginning of the journey. There are eight rectangles in all. It can be confusing, as they overlap. Each rectangle matches up to a stardate. The last stardate, in yellow, has a corresponding yellow rectangle. There is a white line that goes through the rectangles and the galaxy; this is the flight path of Voyager.
For the worlds visited by Voyager, I would check the stardate for the episode, then I would do a cross check on where Voyager would be. Where would this place Voyager, according to the map? I would then write in the article where the location was situated in the galaxy and provide a short explanation in the talk page on how I came to my conclusion.
- Yes, I would say analyzing such a map would be original research for our purposes. I'm sure it was created without regard for the actual position of Voyager and I'm not even sure the stardates on it all come from episodes(if they didn't, that would be even more original research). I don't recall what episode it appeared in, either. 31dot (talk) 10:06, July 13, 2014 (UTC)
Photo correction credit request Edit
My name is Kimberle Andrews. I would like to request proper photo correction credit for the images provided by Paul Olsen on the page:
Please see his website where the images are hosted to note the colour corrections performed by my here:
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org
126.96.36.199 07:12, July 31, 2014 (UTC)
Kimberle Andrews email@example.com
- I'm not really sure what you are getting at; the images are here under Fair Use and not credited to a particular person. Are you saying they should be? 31dot (talk) 10:43, July 31, 2014 (UTC)
Problematic article Edit
I stumbled upon this new article which is a few days old but apparently no one has touched yet : Pharmacy - I'm not sure if that strictly counts as vandalism, or if tagging it for quick deletion or just with a pna is the right way to go - so not knowing how to deal with it myself, I figured I'd bring it to the attention of an admin instead :P -- Capricorn (talk) 16:26, August 5, 2014 (UTC)
I need advice Edit
- I'm not sure what sort of advice you are looking for- if you are interested in watching it, then you should. 31dot (talk) 22:20, August 8, 2014 (UTC)
Moving pages Edit
I'm going to have to insist you follow the guideline for moving pages from now on, in that you suggest the page be moved before actually doing it. A number of the "(Starfleet)" disambiguations you have changed to ranks were like that because their rank was never explicitly stated. Commanding officer is not always synonymous with the rank of Captain for instance. - Archduk3 17:17, August 9, 2014 (UTC)
This is the message I left on his talk page.
''I interpret what you wrote on my talk page as that I was abusing the moving of pages function. Am I right in my interpretation?
If so, I meant no abuse of the function. I acted in what I thought were good intentions. I recognize that on some articles that I used "fan interpretation-speculation" (a phrase that I credit Pseudohuman for) when changing the title. I should have left the title alone. For that, I apologize.
I would like to apologize for not asking about what were my limitations were in moving pages. I interpretated the comments left on my talk page as a permission for me to move pages and to fix links.
My communication skills are probably not as developed as yours. I have Asperger's Syndrome and I have been rated as having a Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) of 45. 41 - 50 Serious symptoms (e.g., suicidal ideation, severe obsessional rituals, frequent shoplifting) or any serious impairment in social, occupational, or school functioning (e.g., no friends, unable to keep a job, cannot work). My interpretation skills are at a most basic level. This has created conflict at home and now here on the wiki.
New category request Edit
As I have been able to fill in the Columbia dedication plaque, I think that it is time for a new category. I don't know the process for this, so I am asking for help. I am thinking that the new category be named: Columbia dedication plaque personnel and that it will have the names of personnel named on the plaque.Throwback (talk) 14:12, August 10, 2014 (UTC)
- Post this on the Category Suggestion page, though it should largely be a formality as we have other similar categories, I think. 31dot (talk) 22:20, August 10, 2014 (UTC)
How do I work with this? Edit
I was thinking about working on the Columbia dedication plaque personnel and I see that the majority of names are on the Fleet Operations Center personnel page. However, I see multiple instances of the same name working in different positions and having different offices. For example, there are three M. Rushes. I find it improbable that this is the same person. Do I follow the example of Brain Vogt Raymond on the Clare Raymond family tree, where the name is followed by a Roman numeral (I, II, III, etc.) or do I treat as the author of the original page did, as they are the same person? (And, I notice that someone has changed the name of one character from P. Lauritson to Peter Lauritston. I know the character might be named after the real world person; however, I feel this is speculation, as this P. Lauritson might have a different first name.) Any advice you can give would be helpful.Throwback (talk) 01:16, August 11, 2014 (UTC)
- In such a case my first inkling would be to put all the instances on one page and include a bg note that each instance might represent a different individual. If the community later decides to they can always be split off from that page. 31dot (talk) 01:43, August 11, 2014 (UTC)
I need advice. Edit
I have been working on the Federation starship pages. I have been writing that the ships are Federation starships and that they are in the custody of Starfleet. I picked this up from the US Navy's usage of the word custody, "The Naval Vessel Register (NVR), official inventory of ships and service craft in custody or titled by the US Navy, traces its origin back to the 1880s."  From an article about the USS America, "Delivery marks the offical turnover of custody of the ship from the shipbuilder to the US Navy."  The United States owns these ships, while the US Navy is responsible for the care and use of these ships. A situation analogous to what is known about the Starfleet ships, in that the Federation is the owner and Starfleet is the operator. Well, Pseudohuman became frustrated with this and thought I said the ships were being confiscated by Starfleet. I thought I was using proper language when describing the situation that existed.
Then, I have an issue with the Columbia plaque. One of the characters is named T. Tagliomia. I think the writer dropped the J. from the name. There is a character named J.T. Tagliomia, who is a homage to a real world person. Should I creat a new page for this T. Tagliomia, or put the information into the J.T. Tagliomia page as there is clearly an error in the plaque?
- ""J.T." is different than "T.", so I would guess (in the Trek universe) they would be different people and need separate pages; it could still note the person it is named for. 31dot (talk) 20:48, August 11, 2014 (UTC)
- As far as the "custody" wording goes, I would lean towards leaving the ship articles as they were, and avoid the whole issue of ownership versus custody. We don't really know if the US Navy analogy holds in that respect for Starfleet in the future; since Starfleet is an international (and interplanetary) organization, who knows who actually owns the assets? -- Renegade54 (talk) 21:33, August 11, 2014 (UTC)
- For years, this site has been identifying the owner of these ships as the Federation and the operator as Starfleet. Before that, there was a sidebar that identified the affiliation and the agency. I don't know when this sidebar was first introduced; however, it read that the Federation "owns the assets" and that Starfleet "operated these assets". Then, comes the movie Star Trek: Into Darkness, where there is a graphic that mirrors what has been said in the sidebar.  So, the relationship is there in the Star Trek universe.Throwback (talk) 01:45, August 12, 2014 (UTC)
- Removed comment. I am nitpicking Pseudohuman, which is not what I want to do. Throwback (talk) 02:00, August 12, 2014 (UTC)Throwback (talk) 03:45, August 12, 2014 (UTC)
- I have been going through the transcripts. No episode ever says that a ship was in service to an organization, like Starfleet. So, what was written before isn't true to canon either.Throwback (talk) 07:47, August 12, 2014 (UTC)
- Throwback, please leave the articles as they have been for the last few years. The way it was before sounded natural, the "custody" bit doesn't. A change like that needs community consensus and I think nobody complained about the way the relation between the Federation, Starfleet and its ships was worded before. Instead, please continue with the other excellent work you do: creating new articles for things and people referenced in LCARS displays and other graphics. I'm glad somebody finally tackles these things ad your work in that field is much appreciated! --Jörg (talk) 09:31, August 12, 2014 (UTC)
- The only issue is how we do make the articles sound like something from Star Trek. This is the issue that Pseudohuman raised. If I understand what he was getting at, the articles have to sound like they are using the words from the "historical records". Saying that, I feel like a Thermian from Galaxy Quest. I think that some of us forget that we are role playing on this wiki. Each of us is taking on the role of an archivist at the Memory Alpha planet centuries after the events depicted. In none of the canon is it said that Starfleet ships serve the Federation. And, in none of the canon, is it said that that Federation ships are in Starfleet custody. So, how do I as an archivist write the article, so that it matches the "historical records"? I think I might have an answer, based on how Pseudohuman rewrote the article for Mariposa.Throwback (talk) 10:15, August 12, 2014 (UTC)
- You're absolutely right, and I had never thought about it in that context before... we're all, as contributors to MA in any form, role-playing. In our roles as "Archivists", we necessarily walk a fine line between what we know, what we extrapolate and/or interpolate, and what we assume (hopefully, not too much). There are occasions in editing articles where "less is more"; in other words, we should leave the wording intentionally vague rather than assuming something (or fabricating something out of whole cloth). That's where some of these disagreements and discussions arise. -- Renegade54 (talk) 14:22, August 12, 2014 (UTC)
Regarding the dry spell thing Edit
Hi. This isn't really about the merit of the article, but I hope your putting up dry spell for deletion wasn't in part influenced by my flippant edit comment I made when I created it. It felt very funny when I wrote it, but I immediately regretted it after posting. It was very mean spirited. I suppose its hard to apologize to an ip adress, but its been bothering me and I wanted at least for you to know that I regret it. Again, this is not to say anything of the validity of your article, or an attempt to influence you. Just something I needed to get off my chest. -- Capricorn (talk) 21:36, August 20, 2014 (UTC)
- I assure you that your comment did not play any part in making my suggestion. While I saw it, I didn't really think anything of it at the time. 31dot (talk) 23:38, August 20, 2014 (UTC)
I am a professional broadcaster and Star Trek fan, and used your page at http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Star_Trek_parodies_and_pop_culture_references_(music) to source a segment I recently produced for use on-air. I'd like to send it to you for inclusion on the page, if you deem it appropriate... it runs 2:38 and I can provide it to you in the format of your preference. I don't see a way to upload audio files... how can I get this to you?
Jeff "Curtis" Williams firstname.lastname@example.org 509-432-1220 Hit Radio 104.3 FM, KHTR, Pullman (WA)
- I have copied this to its own discussion page at this location for a wider discussion. 31dot (talk) 09:06, September 12, 2014 (UTC)
- Maybe check the Bob Orrison article. It tells you right at the start. -- sulfur (talk) 16:09, October 24, 2014 (UTC)
move request Edit
Hi, could you maybe move Great Britain to Old Britain, please? With your last comment there there's now two vs one in favor of that move, but with the namespace already taken up by the redirect it's got to be done by an admin (and I figured as a participant in the discussion I'd ask you). Don't worry about cleaning up after, I'll gladly take that job on me once it's moved. -- Capricorn (talk) 13:50, October 31, 2014 (UTC)
Star Trek maps project Edit
Hi 31dot. I'm Brandon, Senior Community Manager at Wikia. We're working on a new Star Trek project as part of the Wikia Fan Studio. To give a bit of context, Fan Studio is a program where fans on Wikia can be connected with brands from the entertainment and video gaming industries. Fans get to interact with brands and share opinions that could impact final products and releases, or whatever it may be that a partner brand is working on. This project doesn't have a partner brand involved, but it will let you be part of Fan Studio and other future projects.
This Star Trek project is based around Wikia Maps, and participants will be mapping different parts of the Star Trek universe. Participants will get to help decide what we should map as well. It could be the layout of the Enterprise, or Voyager's journey through the Delta Quadrant, or even more light-hearted subjects like Captain Kirk's romantic liaisons throughout the galaxy. Whatever the participants end up deciding. The maps that the project participants create will live on Trek Initiative, plus any other community that wants to can embed them.
As an active Memory Alpha contributor and admin, we think you'd be great for this project. Would you like to join? Let me know on my talk page. Thanks! - Brandon Rhea(talk) 07:20, November 16, 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for the welcome, I'm glad you like my edit for "Broken Link" It's a little something I noticed watching it on netflix. I put that little fact up in case no one else noticed it.
Thank you for the warm welcome Edit
Thank you for the welcome message. I'm glad you like my edit of "Broken Link" I also did the edit of "Ben" regarding his appearance in the Star Trek Generations comic book adaptation. --Marvelfan11001001 (talk) 05:55, December 21, 2014 (UTC)Marvelfan11001001
As this map is seen in "The Cage", what is the acceptable use of this map? For instance, there is a debate about what to use: Old Britain, United Kingdom, or Great Britain. This map has the region identified as United Kingdom. Do I have the authority to change the name? There are cities in the region not mentioned in the canon: Belfast and Leeds. Can I create articles for these cities? These are the questions that come to my mind. There might be others. What is your opinion?Lakenheath72 (talk) 18:19, January 29, 2015 (UTC)
- Please remember to properly sign your posts so we know who wrote what.
- Please review Memory Alpha:Administrators for the process. As noted there, you cannot nominate yourself. Frankly, you would likely not be made an admin as your edit history is virtually nonexistent.31dot (talk) 11:51, February 8, 2015 (UTC)
Someone edited my page, placing a blurb on my profile page!
It reads as follows: Revision as of 14:10, April 11, 2013 by Wikia (Talk | contribs) (diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) | 2 User talk:TheProsperousOne This brief blurb was placed here to eliminate TheProsperousOne's user page from clogging up Wanted Pages. If you are the user, please feel free to let the public know a little more about you and your contributions.
I must admit that I resent this and am just now discovering it. Can you remove this edit for me? I have not found a way to remove this edit and return the page to its original state.
- That is an automated message designed, as it says, to prevent your userpage from being seen by the operating software as a Wanted Page(a page to be created) There is no need to resent it; it was not put there by a human. If you want to remove it, simply edit the page to remove the text and put what you want, or simply leave it blank. 31dot (talk) 03:36, February 16, 2015 (UTC)
While I still don't understand what is meant by that, may I say I apologize for my tone. I have Chronic Anxiety Disorder and was on full tilt when I wrote that. So sorry.
Most of my contributions thus far have been of the grammatical/spelling sort. I hope perhaps to contribute on a wider range in the near future...
BtW, did I "sign" my name right? (LOL)
- Your signature is added by typing four tildes like this: ~~~~ or by clicking the Signature button on the screen, located above the area where you type your post. 31dot (talk) 12:47, February 22, 2015 (UTC)
Qwizards: Star TrekEdit
Hey, 31dot! We're starting to get things ready for the Trek 50th Anniversary, and we're looking for fans of the franchise that might be interested in participating in a Star Trek-themed Qwizards, Wikia's original quiz show! As an active admin on this community, I was wondering if you had any interest in participating in Qwizards: Star Trek? If you're not sure what Qwizards is, this landing page will give you a bit more information. This would probably happen around August, so let me know what you think! Grace (profile)•(talk) 21:26, March 4, 2015 (UTC)
- Hello! Just checking in to make sure you saw this :) Grace (profile)•(talk) 16:11, March 13, 2015 (UTC)
I saw this but I don't think I'm interested at this time. 31dot (talk) 01:18, March 14, 2015 (UTC)
Transporter Pad Edit
I have learned from reading the scripts and the transcripts that transporter pads referred specifically to the roundels on the transporter platform, which was contained within the transporter chamber. (These are terms used in the canon.) However, the transporter pad page is a redirect page, so that is why I am asking for permission.Lakenheath72 (talk) 23:04, March 10, 2015 (UTC)
- You don't need anyone's permission to create a page; simply edit the redirect page to remove the redirect and put your text. --31dot (talk) 23:56, March 10, 2015 (UTC)
The class of VengeanceEdit
- You're going to have to clarify what you mean by "false". - Archduk3 20:00, March 30, 2015 (UTC)
- From the Shatner comment I assume that 'false' Kirk refers to the one in the alternate reality played by Chris Pine. This is because information about Prime Kirk was revealed in the films featuring Pine's Kirk (Spock told alt-Kirk that original Kirk talked about his dad, for example). You can certainly believe whatever you wish regarding the Star Trek timeline or which films count and which don't, but here we present all information from all official Star Trek productions. 31dot (talk) 23:02, March 30, 2015 (UTC)
Undoing pages Edit
I have undone some of the pages I have worked on. If there are other pages that need to be undone, I leave those to you.
I think I have overstayed my welcome here. I feel animosity from the admins and at least one of the users. I have successfully alienated myself from the community.
Continuation of the above Edit
I have done what I can to correct the remainding planet pages.
I know that you don't like to read my posts. If I have to endure reading your posts, which are painful for me to read, out of courtesy to me, I request that you extend that courtesy to me.
I am like Charles Evans on the good ship Enterprise. Well, I am like him and not like him. I am like him as I am isolated and haven't learned how to live in the world of people. I am not like him in that I don't have his powers and that I have placed a value on life. A high value. I have reached the point where he and I are saying, Everything I do or say is wrong. I'm in the way, I don't know the rules, and when I learn something and try to do it, suddenly I'm wrong! I felt rage - the rage that is common to Autistics yesterday night. I have learned how to control that rage to my benefit and when not to use it.
Communication is a struggle for everyone. I have come to learn that people live in "bubbles". Communication is so easy when the people you are communicating with are in the same "bubble" as you are. When a person speaks to you, who is not in your "bubble", you don't understand them. In so many ways, they are alien to you. I have read over and over again how a failure to understand the other has led to misunderstanding and to conflict. You are the Roman, I am the barbarian. Or is it the other way around? What does it matter? My world is as alien to you as your world is alien to me.
When I do attempt to communicate why I do an edit, I am constantly told many negative things about how I write. I have read that I don't communicate clearly, that I am incoherent and rambling, that the pathways of my thinking are poorly laid out. One person has even stated that my posts are unreadable and refuses to read them. People can identify me in the way I write. I believe this has created a bias - a bias that they might not be aware of. I might not be attuned to the nuances of neurotypical behavior; however, I can feel when someone is negative to me. Any creature of sufficient awareness can detect negativity from another creature. It's in the way that you write. It's in the way that you phrase sentences.
I have to read your words for us to communicate. The experience is excruciating. It's like walking through a dense forest at night with only the light of the Moon as my only companion.
Although I would like to continue to be an editor, the truth of the matter is that there will always be misunderstanding and conflict. I can adapt to a small degree; however, for me to able to communicate like you and the other neurotypicals, well, that's impossible. We are biochemical computers (genes) with programmed software (epigenetics). For me to communicate in a way that is not alien to you, that would require a reprogramming. This is a skill far beyond our current science and technology.Lakenheath72 (talk) 12:33, April 2, 2015 (UTC)
- I have no problem reading your posts and did not say that I would refuse to read them, but sometimes they are very long. I have nothing but sympathy for you and I personally know people in situations like yours. If there was some way to do all of this without text I would suggest it. 31dot (talk) 20:53, April 2, 2015 (UTC)
- Please post any issues you have with an article on its talk page; that said, please offer evidence of what you claim. 31dot (talk) 08:59, April 21, 2015 (UTC)
Blue Bolts on the Kelvin Edit
There has been no reply to my final comments on this discussion since last year. I believe it's safe to say that my conclusions are valid.
- The only thing that's safe to say is you suck at linking, signing, maintaining your indent, and providing a citable source for your "conclusions" that takes precedent over the script info. If you have something other than copyright violations on youtube, a year ago would have been the time to present it. - Archduk3 03:03, May 13, 2015 (UTC)
Moving to User talk:Pharuan Undearth
What is going on? Edit
Since Duke is on holidays I direct my question to you. It appears I've been thrown out MA for reasons I'm not aware of...as far as I can ascertain I've done nothing untoward, but I cannot longer sign in, though I've stated to be permanently signed in; my password isn't recognized; requesting a new password is met with the message that an email is sent, which is not...I'm frankly at a loss...Regards...sennim...
- I had the same difficulty; it has to do with the change in domain name as described here. Instructions have been given on that page to correct the issue. 31dot (talk) 01:10, May 25, 2015 (UTC)
Hey 31dot, thanks for the heads-up, you're da man, it has appeared to have done the trick...Nevertheless it does bring me to another item; why is the standard skin as featured returned to the "old" (small) desktop format instead of the later and currently normal XL (widescreen)desktop format...I've spent countless hours of rearranging pics on pic-heavy pages to "fit" the new widescreen format, only to have it thrown into disarray yet again (though admittedly less so as earlier from "small" to "wide")--Sennim (talk) 21:54, May 25, 2015 (UTC)
- I don't really use the newer 'standard' skin; I have stuck with Monobook- so I'm not entirely sure what you are getting at. If it's what I think you are talking about, I believe the pages are now scaleable depending on what/where they are viewed, whereas they weren't before. Not sure though 31dot (talk) 22:05, May 25, 2015 (UTC)
Gary Kerr Edit
Hi again. Let me preface this by stating that I have no idea if I'm replying to you the correct way or not. This morning I edited an entry about myself, and you wanted to verify if I'm the real Gary Kerr & asked if I'm a member of any other websites. Well, on Hobby Talk I'm "Gary K". I also logged into wikia with my Facebook and created an account with the name Gary Kerr (I wasn't feeling very imaginative). Is there anything else you need me to do? --Gary Kerr (talk) 01:41, May 27, 2015 (UTC)
- That works for me. Thanks for your efforts and your information. 31dot (talk) 10:07, May 27, 2015 (UTC)
Moved to User talk:EoGuy
I saw that Keenser had Star Trek Beyond listed under his appearances and decided to add it to the James T. Kirk (alternate reality) article, but I have since edited it back as I am unsure if it is too soon to add and figured I'd ask, first. When do appearances get added? I believe that it is to be done after the film's release, but seeing Keenser's article updated, I decided to edit and have edited it back to check with you, first. Thank you. Roger Murtaugh (talk) 02:39, July 25, 2015 (UTC)
- From what I know, it would be OK to list the actor of a character as going to appear in the film, but it is a bit early to list characters themselves as appearing, as they could end up on the cutting room floor(i.e. Quark was in a scene for Star Trek: Insurrection that was cut). A possible exception might be the major characters, so Kirk might be OK. That makes sense to me, at least. 31dot (talk) 08:30, July 25, 2015 (UTC)
I added an appearance to Hendorff (alternate reality)'s page, as he was listed on the film and actor's pages. I wanted to make sure that it was a good edit and can be listed under his appearances, as he is seen in the trailer. Roger Murtaugh (talk) 18:15, December 14, 2015 (UTC)
- There's still the possibility that he might be cut from the film. To be frank, I'm not a fan of having _any_ of the character pages list upcoming productions in their appearances. Actors? OK. List on the film page of people "known" to be in it? OK. Character pages? Not so much. It's not out. And a trailer doesn't count. -- sulfur (talk) 18:27, December 14, 2015 (UTC)
Law & Order Wiki Edit
Hey there... I could use a little (maybe a lot) of admin help over at the Law & Order Wiki if you can spare some time. Take a look at recent changes to see what I mean. Thanks! -- Renegade54 (talk) 21:59, July 29, 2015 (UTC)
More specifically, the primary problem users are Hito7187199, UnSub-Zero, and TrainLubber. I just blocked TrainLubber for 3 days for removing stuff from his talk page. -- Renegade54 (talk) 22:06, July 29, 2015 (UTC)
- OK. 31dot (talk) 00:12, July 30, 2015 (UTC)
Wolf 91 (talk) 02:05, February 24, 2016 (UTC)Can we talk about my block please?Wolf 91 (talk) 02:05, February 24, 2016 (UTC) 31dot please listen to me. I know that UnSub-Zero described me as "a total nuisance who is forcing his belief on others and trying to make his word the law of this Wikia" but I swear on my life all I ever wanted to do was be productive on that wiki. I never did commit vandalism but if I did then it was an accident and I'm very sorry. Also I don't mean to speak badly about anyone in anyway but if anyone is trying to make his word law on that wiki it's UnSub-Zero, I like to contribute to the wiki by creating pages for characters on the show but half of the pages I made were marked for deleting by him and TrainLubber. From what they said to me a character is relevant as long as the character was a member of the police, a criminal, or a victim and the pages I made were characters who were one of thou's 3 things in the law and Order show. Also the edits I made to pages I was only trying to help make them accurate. I swear that I only want to be helpful and productive on that wiki. Also if I did do something bad then why duo's my block have to be for a whole month? why not two or less weeks? I don't know if talking to you on this wiki about what happened on another wiki bother's you or anything but I needed to talk about the block, so can we at least talk please.
- You should still be able to post on your talk page on that wiki; please do so and the discussion can take place there. 31dot (talk) 09:26, February 24, 2016 (UTC)
- I will post a reply there, please post any further comments there. 31dot (talk) 09:30, February 24, 2016 (UTC)
Page deleted Edit
- It's not deleted. Sometimes the info on pages doesn't appear, even though it's there. It's a flukey thing, happens a lot. --LauraCC (talk) 18:50, September 3, 2015 (UTC)
- Indeed; it does happen occasionally. I'm not sure if it depends on the browser or not. 31dot (talk) 21:07, September 3, 2015 (UTC)
Barbara Minster Edit
HI to whom this may concern.
For years you have had the wrong picture of Barbara Minster as a crew member on star trek the motion picture.. I would love it if you would fix it .. I am her daughter Nina K Minster and she has passed on in 2009 and it would be nice to fix this. I have no idea who the blonde is but my mother was a brunette. you can call me or email me for future question thank you. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 188.8.131.52 (talk).
- I have removed your personal contact information for your protection; it is not advisable to post such information in public forums like this. Also, Memory Alpha business should be conducted here, for openness and transparency. If you have any concerns about an article, please post them on that article's talk page, in this case Talk:Barbara Minster. I would also suggest that you post to User talk:ThomasHL as that user has more experience in these matters than I do. 31dot (talk) 11:21, October 25, 2015 (UTC)
Boothby article Edit
Hello, I was just reading the page on Boothby and it looks accurate and is very well written. However, there is one item that I think is an error. In the section where it talks about Wesley getting the same tour of the grounds as Picard had forty years before, I believe that you have Picard's age wrong. He was only about fifty at the time of red squads accident. So he would have been about twelve if he had received the tour forty years prior. Could that section be changed from forty years to a more realistic thirty? – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 184.108.40.206 (talk).
- I don't immediately recall all the details of the episode, but Picard could have toured the Academy grounds as a child without being in Starfleet at the time. 31dot (talk) 21:57, December 20, 2015 (UTC)
You should adopt bureaucrat powers. Edit
Image for Susan Sackett Edit
Hello. We have received several messages from Susan Sackett requesting that her main photo be updated; after reviewing them I concluded it would be kinder to simply make the change for her. Please let me know if there are any problems with the update I made to this image or if you have any further questions about it! -- Wendy (talk) 02:10, July 10, 2016 (UTC)
- Merrystar: The licensing is ALL wrong here, and needs to be sorted out properly. I'm assuming that it's copyright Ms. Sackett, but we would need that confirmed. See the slack discussion for more details. -- sulfur (talk) 03:25, July 10, 2016 (UTC)
Multiple edits Edit
(I am responding to you here, incase you don't see my response on my own talk page. Feel free to delete this if you don't want it here)
- I'm not sure what the problem is. I'm simply getting the data from the Alpha and Beta Quadrant species article and adding each appropriate one to the Homeworlds article. And I'm well aware of how to use Wiki software, I've been an editor on English Wikipedia for over 10 years. What do you want me to do differently though? Do you want me to make multiple changes within the same edit? (that can be a bit dangerous though, as if I take a long time and do many additions and then someone else edits the page in the mean-time, that can cause an edit-conflict, which can be a nightmare). I'm interested that you talk about load on the database though, what do you mean? Is the Memory Alpha database not able to handle as many edits as the Wikipedia equivalent>? (I have seen multiple times where it said the database was locked for maintenance both today and last night). --HibernianPDM (talk) 21:16, October 7, 2016 (UTC)
Deck 29 Edit
Could you clarify why the note about 29 decks being the result of a pre-Nemesis refit deserves an administrative "do not remove" exception from the simple rule that what is onscreen is canon? On the one hand you're extremely picky about my interpretation of O'Brien's quote (public knowledge, relevant to the E), but only minutes later, you summarily revert a wild conclusion about what Deck 29 means in Nemesis?
I thought it was obvious -- what is canon is what we know from onscreen. Picard said that it had 24 decks in FC, but we also heard about Deck 26 in FC and Deck 29 in Nemesis. Who knows if Deck 29 was added before Nemesis, before Insurrection, or if it was there at the same time as Deck 26 in FC? It's not for us to speculate in the canon section.
I would be tolerant of this if we had behind-the-scenes confirmation of such an increase, but John Eaves is clear that the number of decks never changed (in fact he sticks with Rick Sternbach's 23), and the MSD was never revised either. I mean, if we're going to be picky about what is canon, let's be consistent. --PreviouslyOn24 (talk) 13:02, October 20, 2016 (UTC)
- It is specifically said in canon; we go with what the last known reference states. No claim is made of when the change occurred, simply that it was stated in that film. Regardless, I restored it because the hidden note ("Do NOT remove this reference.") was not respected. 31dot (talk) 13:10, October 20, 2016 (UTC)
The issue is that the claim is in fact made of when the change occurred -- between First Contact and Nemesis, because the "original configuration" of 24 decks comes from FC:
By 2379, the Enterprise-E had undergone at least one refit, including four additional phaser arrays and five additional torpedo tubes. The number of decks was also increased by five to a minimum of 29. (Star Trek Nemesis)
However, nowhere does the text mention Deck 26 from FC, so if Deck 26 was there in FC already, then first of all, it's not five more decks, and second, how do we know that Deck 29 wasn't there in FC, before these several refits? And if there is an inconsistency between Picard's 24 decks and Deck 26 in FC, does that necessarily mean that he was wrong and there were 26+? Maybe Decks 25+ are special areas not necessarily corresponding to levels? We don't know, so I just wanted to stick to the facts and note that the ship was said to have 24 decks, although Deck 26 was mentioned in FC and Deck 29 in Nemesis, without making any assumptions about what any of that means. --PreviouslyOn24 (talk) 13:26, October 20, 2016 (UTC)
- I would suggest that you make this argument at Talk:Sovereign class but before you do you should review its content, as this has been discussed before. 31dot (talk) 13:35, October 20, 2016 (UTC)
- All the article states is that Picard specifically said that there was 24 decks, and that a deck 29 was mentioned later. That's all I see, and that's all there should be. 31dot (talk) 13:36, October 20, 2016 (UTC)
I quoted it for you above. Here it is in bold:
By 2379, the Enterprise-E had undergone at least one refit, including four additional phaser arrays and five additional torpedo tubes. The number of decks was also increased by five to a minimum of 29. (Star Trek Nemesis)
The article claims that five decks were added to 24 as part of refits, not just that Deck 29 was mentioned in Nemesis, so the original writer was certain that 29 wasn't there in FC, and that construction work was done to add more levels. Those are assumptions. I think the original writer didn't know about Deck 26, so I just added it for him; at least this way, some readers will ask the right question ("If Deck 26 was there in FC, how do we know that Deck 29 was a result of later refits?")
Anyway, why should I waste time discussing the obvious? Better to work around that sentence, so that the mistaken assumptions in the forbidden part become more glaring; hopefully, they will then get sorted out without me wasting more time on basic logic. --PreviouslyOn24 (talk) 13:45, October 20, 2016 (UTC)