2 notes removed
I removed a couple of notes:
- The concept of the ready room was originally found in British naval ships, which had a small room adjacent to the bridge. It served as a rest and sleeping facility for the Captain, separate from his regular private quarters. Occupation of the ready room was required by regulation when the ship was underway in times of war, when the Captain had to be immediately available to the bridge at any hour in case of an emergency.
This has no direct link to Star Trek. It is interesting, and but I feel it is the level of non-Star Trek info found on wikipedia, and not MA.
- On the USS Enterprise-D, Jean-Luc Picard's ready room featured a fish tank as well as a small head, or bathroom that was accessed through a narrow corridor that also housed a personal food replicator.
The info on the fish tank was already said in the paragraph following this one. The bathroom has no canon evidence, to my knowledge. While it makes sense that there was one, it certainly was never referenced on screen during the series. --OuroborosCobra 08:37, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
Here's a paragraph from the current version of the article:
- The windows aboard the USS Voyager were a reuse of the windows seen in Ten Forward aboard the USS Enterprise-D, simply flipped upside down. The same was true of Voyager's Observation Lounge.
Taken literally, it says the Observation Lounge itself is a reuse of the windows seen in Ten Forward. I think the writer was trying to say that the windows in the observation lounge are reused, but it's possible they were trying to say that the Observation Lounge set was a reuse of the Ten Forward set, and I'm not 100% positive which.
Moreover, I think the first sentence should say that the ready room windows aboard Voyager were reused; I doubt all of the windows on the whole ship came from Ten Forward.
Could someone else take a look at this? -- Heath 22.214.171.124 21:01, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
- It is meant to be about the physical prop windows, not the windows from Enterprise-D. THat is why it is a background note and not in the paragraph before it. Nothing wrong here that I can see. --OuroborosCobra 21:17, 30 June 2006 (UTC)