Memory Alpha
Memory Alpha
Talk page help
Memory Alpha talk pages are for improving the article only.
For general discussion, please visit Memory Alpha's Discussions feature, or join the chat on Discord.

Trials and Tribble-ations[]

"The existence of Starfleet Regulation 157, Section 3, Paragraph 18 (quoted in DS9: "Trials and Tribble-ations"), further complicates matters."

Is it possible this rule became known as the "Temporal Prime Directive"? It does seem that what was once created as a basic rule (probably after all of Kirk's infractions) became more of a fundamental theology and guiding principle as more time-travel activities became noticed - especially to the degree that the Temporal Investigations Bureau being created.

What do others think? -- MiChaos 18:16, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC)

I would think that the Temporal would be a newly-formed aspect of General Order 1, only more subjective with such subjects as the Temporal Cold War coming into play. --ChrisK 13:46, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Doctor's mobile emittor thoughts[]

How does the Doctor's mobile emitter fit into this? Doesn't his use (and continued use) of this technology from the future violate the TPD? It certainly changed history. Is this ever addressed in Voyager? Carbonari 23:55, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Greetings, that is actually a very interesting observation. Proper protocol would've been the destruction of the emitter and information related to it. However, the writers probably forgot about this aspect and were focusing on giving the Doctor mobility. - Adm. Enzo Aquarius 23:57, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Scientific point-of-view[]

From a scientific point of view, the concept of a timeline is very questionable. If you travel back in time, you will inevitably change the course of history, whether or not you kill historically important people. Even if you altered the flight of a butterfly in the past, that might create a hurrican [sic] which will result in huge changes of the future.

I removed the above information from the background section, as "scientific point of view" here is another word for personal opinion and speculation. We will "inevitably" alter the course of history, regardless of whether we kill someone? Is this statement based on personal experience? If so, you've made a major scientific achievement, my friend. :D --From Andoria with Love 04:10, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

It's based on the reality of Chaotic Environmental Scenarios (here dubbed CES). Hurricanes are formed by VERY small things, in the beginning; no telling which little vibration of the air will start them. Other weather patterns form, as well, in similar circumstances. If you walk on dirt, you might've just killed a particular microbe a million years down the line...or even 100 years down the line. Talking to one person changes the second they arrived at a given place at a given time, ALWAYS...on most of those occasions, they may go about their business; on some, they might very well not: Gabriel Bell involved this exact scenario, in fact. What Temporal Investigations no doubt does is the subjective task of figuring out if the changes made to the timeline constitute a viable threat to history, which is in turn subjective: the history everyone in the Federation wants is the one in which they win; the Borg Collective has no problems with altering that to try to assimilate anything (which makes you wonder why they didn't just time-travel WAY before they got to Earth, but that screams mental plot-hole). Either way, the entire situation is simple: none of the time travel scenarios is accurate, since if any of this was possible, the wars would already be over...unless, of course, Temporal Investigations is smack-dab on Forever World, where nothing ever changes, and time apparently does not pass. *grins* --ChrisK 13:34, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
Also, be aware, scientific point of view is as opinionated as the opinion that Humans can see the visible light spectrum. They can. Period. --ChrisK 13:45, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
As for the "Forever world" quip. I seem to recall that the Guardian of Forever protected the area around it from temporal changes... so it's possible that Temporal Investigations is based there.
It's possible that there were limits to the borg time travel technology, though that the Enterprise was able to alter it's deflector dish (which was already jettisoned and destroyed in the same film, without the option of a replacement part coming around for another 300 years or so...) to replicate the tech does kinda torpedo that concept.
The only plausible theory I have on the subject was from a novel that suggested that the machine planet V'Ger made contact with was The Borg. It's possible that this somehow altered their history as a race, perhaps leading them to take to the stars in the first place, thus the Borg would be aware (from assimilating previous starfleet personnel) that assimilating earth before voyager probe launches would prevent them from going to the stars at all. With the post WWIII era being defined as the point in history when Humanity would be most vulnerable. (StarkeRealm 07:31, 21 July 2007 (UTC))

Star Trek IV[]

Isn't the time travel of the Enterprise crew in Star Trek IV also a violation of this directive? They're "stealing" two whales and taking Gillian Taylor with them, Chekov leaves his equipment behind when he is captured by the Navy aboard the aircraft carrier Enterprise, and although Scotty gives an "explanation" for his actions, he hands down the formula for transparent aluminum to Dr. Nichols. Besides, the landing and starting procedure of the Bounty (their captured Bird of Prey) is, despite being cloaked, witnessed by four people, and when the harpoon of the whaling ship hits the BoP, its cloak is disabled, thereby revealing their existence to the fisherman. Thus, it could be seen as a violation, could it not? And even if the directive was not yet in effect and their actions were later sanctioned by the president of the Federation, I think it should be noted, if this is a violation (which, in my opinion, it certainly is). --smintili 02:18, January 31, 2010 (UTC)

Technically, yes it would be, even if Kirk could argue that the changes to the timeline were not "significant" in effect.Capt Christopher Donovan 08:38, September 9, 2010 (UTC)

Temporal violations[]

It may be that the Directive is a blanket reference to all time-travel activity; during a conversation with Captain Sisko, agents of Temporal Investigations stated that Captain Kirk had the most Temporal Prime Directive violations on record to date with seventeen examples references (Although none were specifically identified) (DS9: "Trials and Tribble-ations").

This note is wrong, as it was stated that he had 17 temporal violations, with nothing said about the TPD. Of course, these could be TPD violations, but it was never stated. - Archduk3 18:50, March 21, 2010 (UTC)

Spock violated?[]

The following was removed by an anon and then readded:

It wasn't mentioned, and Spock did what he could to end Nero's rampage through the alternate reality.--31dot 01:30, September 9, 2010 (UTC)

It is suggested that following be removed
Ambassador Spock violated the directive when he did not act to restore the timeline after it had been altered by the actions of Nero that led to the formation of an alternate reality. (Star Trek)
Not wanting to start a 35kb debate on this, but the "old" spock was living in the main timeline and fully aware (see movies and episodes) of the temporal prime directive. By messing around with it in the newest stunt by Abrams, he was technically violating it. He did not restore the timeline and fiddled around to essentially save his friendship with Kirk, never mind the rest of the universe. – Distantlycharmed 01:36, September 9, 2010 (UTC)

Technically we're dealing with another reality, not another timeline. There is a difference. Even so, I'm wondering what Spock was supposed to have done to "restore" the original timeline, given the damage was done before he arrived(he could not go and bring George Kirk and the Kelvin back to life)--31dot 01:38, September 9, 2010 (UTC)

I dont know, the writers could have come up with something right :) They always do. In 45 minutes usually the worst scenarios are fixed. But, this is not a debate about what Spock could have done to restore timeline (so rewording of above might be needed), it is one about Spock fiddling around with it, thus changing events (kirk and spock friendship) that were a different reality altogether. He changed their reality by interfering. – Distantlycharmed 01:46, September 9, 2010 (UTC)
That's a very interesting perspective, but the fact remains that at no point is it mentioned on screen that his actions were in violation of anything. Therefore it does not belong in this article. -- 01:50, September 9, 2010 (UTC)
The TPD is not mentioned on screen, and so mentioning it here would be pure speculation. One could just as easily speculate that the TPD doesn't apply to forms of time travel that result in alternate realities rather than changing the original timeline, and so Spock was not in violation of it. We just don't know. -- 01:41, September 9, 2010 (UTC)

It seems to me that Nero did more fiddling than Spock did. What Spock did was try to limit the damage to the new reality, but he recognized it for what it was- a new reality, not just a different timeline. The TPD is not relevant.--31dot 01:54, September 9, 2010 (UTC)

The temporal prime directive has to do with changing history. How could Spock change history when he had no idea how history was supposed to go in this new reality? Was it even supposed to go in a certain way, or was Spock as much a part of it as any of the characters? Since it was a new reality, maybe there wasn't a set way it was supposed to go. I'm getting a headache...I don't think it would apply unless Spock new that history was supposed to turn out a different way, and he interfered anyway. -Angry Future Romulan 02:06, September 9, 2010 (UTC)
It doesnt matter that it wasnt mentioned per se. You dont need Spock to say "oh I totally violated the temporal prime directive, what a pisser" to see he did it. Yes Nero changed things around but Spock came back, trying to change history only in the sense that he wanted Kirk and his younger self to be friends again. I never understood the importance for Human kind to have kirk and spock be friends. As far as the script is concerned, these two (in the movie) shouldnt even have been friends that's how little they could stand each other until pretty much the last minute. But I do see Blair's point and I dont care enough about the issue to push it further. Spock came back to get his friendship with Kirk going, somehow believing they two alone made the ultimate difference in the universe and were the cause and end of it all, which seems to me like messing around with things. – Distantlycharmed 05:47, September 9, 2010 (UTC)
It isn't incumbent upon us to decide HOW Spock Prime should have tried to fix the timeline. Give me a few minutes and I can techno-temporalbabble up an explanation.
What IS important is the simple fact that the Prime timeline has a Temporal Prime Directive that clearly states that Starfleet officers aren't supposed to change the timeline and must act to preserve history as they know it before said change. Spock Prime didn't try to undo the damage in toto, by dealing with the root source of the damage (Nero destroying the Kelvin), he just tried to put the pieces back together again as they were. That's a TPD violation. 08:23, September 9, 2010 (UTC)
On top of all the other good reasons to remove this note, we can't even be sure that this directive applies to Old-Spock at all. I don't think it has been conclusively stated that that (a) directive is still in effect, and (b) that Old-Spock is still a member of Starfleet. -- Cid Highwind 09:36, September 9, 2010 (UTC)
There are no other good reasons to remove the note. There are no reasons to remove the note at all. Spock Prime did not act to restore history to it's "proper" course. He violated the TPD. And Prime Directives apply to NON-Starfleet personnel, per "Bread and Circuses, and "Homeward".Capt Christopher Donovan 09:40, September 9, 2010 (UTC)

I believe it was said in "Angel One" that Starfleet's rules only apply to Starfleet. If Spock wasn't in Starfleet then the TPD is irrelevant to him. The importance of them being friends is that they need each other's advice and counsel in order to save the Earth. I think there is confusion here between "alternate timeline" and "alternate reality". Spock did not go back in time and inadvertently change history and had to fix it. He arrived in a reality where the damage was done and too far gone to fix. The only thing he could do was limit the damage and move forward. As said above he didn't know what was "supposed" to happen since the future flowing from the changes was different.--31dot 09:55, September 9, 2010 (UTC)

In "Homeward", Worf's civilian brother was said to be in violation of the PD for helping the Boraallans. So there are at the very least circumstances where non-Starfleet personnel have been found to violate the Directive. Indeed, with Homeward being the most recent mention, it has the weight of currency of reference to support the case.
There is also the Rassmussen Precedent to show that non-Starfleet personnel are not to be allowed to tamper with the timeline as well. Capt Christopher Donovan 10:03, September 9, 2010 (UTC)

Worf's brother was a Federation observer, and not just some random civilian.(like the Angel One people were) Rasmussen was taken into custody for fraud and theft, not for violating the TPD.(Picard even said if little to nothing had been stolen, they would have let him go.) The fact remains is that this note does not deal in an alternate timeline, but an alternate reality.--31dot 10:08, September 9, 2010 (UTC)

1)Nevertheless, Worf's brother was NOT Starfleet.
2)If Picard had done that he would have been brought up on charges. If Capt Christopher could not be returned after just a glimpse of the inside of the Enterprise, then Rassmussen, who had extensively interviewed the crew about historical and technological trends with the intent of using that information to manipulate the past would have done far more damage than Christopher. TI and/or Braxton's people would have had to sort out the mess.
3)The logic of saying that non-Starfleet officers are to be permitted to change the timeline is entirely non-existant. No sane government is going to forbid it's military/law enforcement from doing such a thing but make it entirely legal and permissable for a civilian to do so. You forbid the Army from doing something that would literally mean you never existed, but Joe Blow down the street would be entirely within his rights to do the EXACT SAME THING? USE YOUR BRAINS, people.
4)he idea that Trek 09 is an "alternate reality" is a specious bit of sophistry at best. ALL time changes create an "alternate reality", as seen from "Parallels". The events of Trek 09 proceeded directly from the actions of a time-traveling native of Universe Prime (for want of a better title). Prime Spock had an absolute duty to protect the integrity of UP by not just picking up the pieces afterward, but by acting to UNDO the timeline changes. He didn't.Capt Christopher Donovan 10:48, September 9, 2010 (UTC)

1)But he was working for them and had to abide by their rules.
2)The fact remains that he did it and said as much. Rasmussen stole a time pod and traveled into the future, he was not brought onto the ship due to interference from the Enterprise. No violation.
3)It doesn't make sense that Starfleet rules only apply to their employees? Even if that's the case, what makes sense to us doesn't matter, as long as it makes sense to them.
4)I didn't say it, the writers did. --31dot 11:04, September 9, 2010 (UTC)

By that logic, Sisko should not have stopped Darvin from assassinating Kirk in "Trials and Tribbleations". That is to say, no logic whatsoever.
The chain is very simple:
1)Nero travelled in time. Spock followed him.
2)The time-travelling Nero changed the course of history.
3)In ALL other cases involving Universe Prime, it is stated that there is a duty to protect the integrity of the timeline.
4)Spock Prime, by failing to act to correct the damage caused by Nero, is guilty of violating the provisions of the TPD, no matter how you try to sophist your way around the point. What the writers said is a 1) not canon (aired material in toto is the controling factor) and 2)self-serving psuedo-justification for their Reboot.
Would it have been better just to do a clean reboot? Undoubtedly. They didn't though. They invoked Universe Prime, and therefore for MA purposes the TPD of Universe Prime is canon for the film and must be taken into account. The ONLY explanation for the events that is consistent with all canon data, and whose internal logic stands up to scrutiny, is that Spock Prime violated the TPD. Period. Full stop.Capt Christopher Donovan 11:13, September 9, 2010 (UTC)

It's not that simple at all. Spock did not "follow" Nero, he arrived much later when the changes to the reality were irrevocably made. You can dismiss the premise of the movie as "writer's sophistry", but is is also backed up by New Spock's and New Uhura's comments in the movie. --31dot 11:52, September 9, 2010 (UTC)

Spock did indeed follow Nero back in time. It was temporal fluxuations that separated their arrival points. And the temporal changes were NOT "irrevokable".
I'll give you an easy fix, entirely consistent with canon Trek Prime abilities and knowledge: Spock Prime could learn exactly when Nero arrived from historical records. He takes the "Jellyfish" (what an awful name for a ship) and slingshots back in time around that nearby star from the opener. He comes up on the far side of the Narada from the Kelvin and detonates a Red Matter bomb, destroying Narada and saving Kelvin, then warps away in the confusion.
The timeline is restored 99.99999% (Kirk's dad doesn't die, Kirk born on Earth, no drastic tech jumps, etc).
Spock doesn't even TRY to do that, or come up with any other plan. He just goes off to help the surviving 10,000 Vulcans build a new colony somewhere. He does not do his duty to CLOSE the time loop and restore the proper history.
He is guilty of violating the TPD.Capt Christopher Donovan 12:02, September 9, 2010 (UTC)

He didn't follow him if he arrived at a different point. Using your logic, Kirk is guilty of violating the TPD by not correcting the differences in the Mirror Universe while he was there.--31dot 12:46, September 9, 2010 (UTC)

That is just asinine. We know from "City on the Edge of Forever" that people travelling in time, even ones leaving short amounts of time apart, can emerge in the past at wildly differing times.
Your arguement about the MU is even worse. The MU was not caused by time travellers from Universe Prime. It was it's own independent timeline. You cling to the sophist argument of "alternate reality" because once you admit that the JJ-verse is causally related to Prime, then your case goes straight to the Hot Place. 16:14, September 9, 2010 (UTC)

I guess Uhura clings to that argument, too, because that's what she called it. The TPD argument might apply to Nero(if he wasn't Romulan), but not Spock, who arrived in the corrputed reality. I guess I'm being targeted due to my responses, but I am not the only one who thinks so- Cid also supported removal.--31dot 16:43, September 9, 2010 (UTC)

If anything is asinine in this discussion, it's the fact that people are completely ignoring that "Spock has violated the TPD" is nothing but unadulterated speculation. Of course, we can construe situations where Spock would need to adhere to the TPD - but we could also construe situations where he doesn't. We can construe time travel situations where the TPD applies in general, and we can construe time travel situations where it doesn't. We can speculate that the TPD still exists in whatever year Old-Spock came from, and we can speculate that it was abolished a year before. We just don't know - either way - and thus speculation that Spock did violate the directive shouldn't be in the article. -- Cid Highwind 17:18, September 9, 2010 (UTC)
Wait a minute, there is no reason for us (based on canon and that's what we go by here on MA, needless to say) to believe that the TPD was abolished a year before he came. Why would you even speculate that? As far as canon is concerned, the TPD was valid at the time Spock came from (2387), unless it said otherwise.
Also, really Spock is responsible for creating this timeline in the first place. Nero messed it up, but Spock created the incursion. I mean what did he think he was gonna do....create a black hole for shits and giggles? The red matter created a mess in the timeline. Hadnt it been for his careless use of the red matter (inadvertent or not) maybe this incursion wouldnt have happened. He then emerged 25 years later and instead of trying to fix that, he went after saving Vulcan and his friendship with Kirk. He kept saying to young Spock "you and he must/will be friends". I mean come on, the entire timeline and reality of the galaxy as he knew it was changed through him and all he can think about is his buddy Kirk and that for some reason they just need to become the bestest of friends?
The TPD is more than just a Starfleet policy. Remember Daniels from ENT who said they are monitoring people (not just Starfleet) to protect the timeline from temporal incursions, and monitor authorized time travel activities.... Also, it is rather common sense really. The dutiful, logical Spock we have known for the past 40 odd years wasnt going to have the entire fate of the galaxy go to blows for such sentimental reasons as his friendship to someone (unless at that point he was senile with age). Not to mention that if this incursion was the new reality, Spock had certainly no business messing around with it, forcing Kirk and Spock be friends. He shoulda stayed out. I mean there is no universal law stating they need to be friends everytime. It's like in The Voyager episode "Unforgettable": she fell in love with Chakotay the first time around, but not the second time; not a hint. Happens.
Finally, I pretty much agree with everything Capt. Donovan said and dont want to repeat it. Looks like this has become a 35kb debate :) – Distantlycharmed 21:24, September 9, 2010 (UTC)

I would hardly say that Spock was "careless" by using red matter to oh, I don't know, save the galaxy. I would also hardly say that his only motivation was to "force them to be friends"- he knew the Earth would be destroyed unless they got to know each other. None of that is really relevant, however, as the TPD was not mentioned. It is not up to me to prove that Spock didn't know about it (which is impossible)- it is up to the other side to show where it was mentioned without assumption and speculation.--31dot 22:14, September 9, 2010 (UTC)

Hahahaha...a supernova destroying the entire galaxy and Captain Spock to the rescue. Abrams' team sure didnt leave out any absurdity. They should have used real scientists as consultants for this one. But jokes aside, he deployed that stuff and created the incursion. He wasnt able to finish his task. He went back in time and restored the timeline selectively (Earth was the only home he had left, and Jim the only buddy) instead of working to reset the timeline. He and Jim didnt have to be friends to save his only home either. You think that is besides the point, maybe so, matter of opinion, but just the same: it doesnt have to be mentioned for us to put two and two together. There is a difference between speculating and using common sense. There is merit to mentioning the TPD with connection to Spock and his actions.– Distantlycharmed 23:00, September 9, 2010 (UTC)

We have rejected many articles on the grounds that they were not directly mentioned(numerous countries, Democratic Party, etc) This is no different.--31dot 23:33, September 9, 2010 (UTC)

I dont think that blanket statements like that are ever or were ever appropriate. Just recently we had issues with pages relating to Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton and even though no one ever mentioned who they were by name, we were asked to use common sense and still have entries for them. Moreover, making an inference based on common sense and just making up stuff ex nihilo are two different things. – Distantlycharmed 23:55, September 9, 2010 (UTC)
This note is complete speculation and should be removed. I agree 100% with Cid's last comment.– Cleanse ( talk | contribs ) 01:35, September 10, 2010 (UTC)
Remove this note, as it's just more subversive "I hate the new film" bull and pure speculation. - Archduk3 13:34, September 10, 2010 (UTC)
Indeed, I removed it. Nero did not change the prime reality, he entered another one in 2233 and became its divergence point. What was Spock to do? The Federation still scanned the Narada and began building bigger more advanced starships, his younger self and friends were living their own lives... – Alientraveller 14:45, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Exactly.--31dot 14:47, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Heey...Duke, I actually did like the new film... It's not Star Trek, but I still really liked it. :) – Distantlycharmed 16:09, September 10, 2010 (UTC)
Oh and Alientraveller, the alternate reality does not exclusively have its "own history" if part of its history is the old Spock coming from another reality, timeline, universe or whatever you wanna call it and influencing it. Truth of the matter is, new movie or not, Spock is still from another time and place and you cant just disregard that and press the reset button, pretending there is nothing special or extraordinary about his presence in this alternate reality. Like it or not, he brings a lot of himself and his past to this reality. – Distantlycharmed 16:16, September 10, 2010 (UTC)
Will someone explain to me where "maintain" became "repair" in your heads. If the timeline is already changed, the TPD doesn't apply, based on what the article says right now. Also DC, Star Trek is Star Trek. - Archduk3 05:18, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
Then the article needs still more revision, because Spock makes it clear all the way back in TOS ("City..") that they had to fix the problem in time caused by Dr McCoy's interferance to save Edith Keeler. They were also concerned about temporal effects in "Tomorrow is Yesterday" and "Assignment Earth". Plus we have the Timefleet (Braxton's org) and the authority that enforces the Temporal Accords (Daniels' org) even further in the future, all canon and all concerned with maintaining the integrity of the timeline against alteration either accidental or purposeful. We have the wording of appropriate related Starfleet Regs that Starfleet officers in temporal situations must act to minimize and avoid disrupting the timeline. Picard also mentions the necessity of doing so in FC.
Note also that in many of those instances above, by the time the Starfleet personnel arrived on scene, the timeline was ALREADY polluted and changed.Capt Christopher Donovan 19:27, September 24, 2010 (UTC)
So has the debate been concluded now? I think what this shows, at least for me, is that while they spent a lot of time finding a good recast, and did a good job with the CGI (and an annoying one with the MTV like fast cuts from one scene to another), they apparently spent zero time on character development and rationalizing or even trying to understand the science and incorporate it intelligently into the movie to create consistency - which is why we are even having this debate; we are trying to incorporate this mess into established canon which was based on more thought and science and less on looks and flashy cadets. And no Duke, it is not Star Trek if all Romulans look like Eric Bana or the creature from the lagoon or something :). So I assume the debate as to whether Spock violated the TPD is concluded now? It seemd kind of like up in the air based on the previous comment by Capt. Donovan and i wasnt sure where this is going. – Distantlycharmed 22:00, November 20, 2010 (UTC)

I wouldn't say it's "concluded", as few things are on a wiki, but clearly it's died down. While your comments are interesting from a discussion point of view, they are not relevant to what appeared in canon. --31dot 22:12, November 20, 2010 (UTC)

Well I wanted to see if we "agreed" on something or not. I was also trying to point out that there might never be a real satisfactory answer/conclusion or whatever to his debate because of the way this new movie represents things. – Distantlycharmed 22:39, November 20, 2010 (UTC)


I've protected this page due to the continued back and forth. Cid's comment above says it best- we don't know what Spock knew or if the Directive applied to him or if it was changed or any other infinite possibilites. Unless it was mentioned, putting the reference in the article is speculation.--31dot 13:02, September 12, 2010 (UTC)

No it's NOT "speculation". The TPD is canon for the Prime Universe, and is binding on Prime Universe characters. Period. We also have the "Temporal displacement policy" and a Starfleet regulation that when you put together with events like those of First Contact, The Gary 7 ep, Trials and Tribbleations, etc clearly and definitively establish that Federation time travellers MAY NOT ALTER THE PAST and MUST act to preserve the integrity of the timeline.
We also have the Temporal Accords, the Temporal Integrity Commission, etc all of which clearly and again UNEQUIVOCABLY establish the duty of Federation personel in the case of time travel.
All canon. All consistent. Spock Prime was under the jurisdiction of the TPD as a time travelling person from the Prime universe. He did not do what ALL AVAILABLE REFERENCES say he MUST do. He violated the TPD.
And I must say 31dot, that it is entirely inappropriate for you to revert the change and then lock the page. The material is canon and should remain until such time as there is clear policy saying remove it.Capt Christopher Donovan 11:44, September 15, 2010 (UTC)
The change was reverted and the page locked because, despite the ongoing conversation here, people kept making changes to the article and then reverting them. Until this conversation is settled, the page will stay locked with the text the way that it is. -- sulfur 11:48, September 15, 2010 (UTC)

Kirk's 17[]

My edit summary comment was cut off, so I'll put it here:

  • Lucsly and Dulmur mentioned that James Kirk had 17 separate "temporal violations" on record, but there was no mention of what the incidents were violations of, and it is likely the violations were determined retroactively based on Kirk's service record.

Removed, as "temporal violations" doesn't necessarily mean TPD violations, and we shouldn't state what we don't know.--31dot 19:15, March 24, 2011 (UTC)

Kirk acted?[]

We're saying here that Kirk acted to preserve the timeline in allowing Edith Keeler to die. Unless I'm misremembering, wasn't Kirk all set to save her, and it was McCoy who actually stepped in to stop him, thereby preserving the timeline? So, shouldn't we credit McCoy, not Kirk? -Randy 20:21, December 29, 2011 (UTC)

Content Error in History[]

Towards the end of the second paragraph under "History," I believe there is an issue with one of the sentences:

Julian Bashir referred to the similar "temporal displacement policy," something taught at Starfleet Academy in 2024, when he traveled back in time to that year from 2371.

Starfleet Academy didn't exist at the time of the Bell Riots, he was referencing when he was in the academy prior to his posting on DS9 in 2369. --Cygnis (talk) 01:37, January 22, 2015 (UTC)

I've clarified the sentence. 31dot (talk) 10:32, January 22, 2015 (UTC)

Poor wording in spots[]

Lots of "unclear", or "it seems"es. --LauraCC (talk) 20:47, February 16, 2017 (UTC)