FA status Edit

FA nomination (24 Feb - 24 Mar 2006, Success) Edit

Renominating. Nomination previously failed due to lack of sufficient support. The article has been partially rewritten since, and in my opinion meets the standards for a Featured Article. Ottens 12:37, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

  • Comment - All the details are there and it's well written, but I think there are some easy fixes that would improve it quite a bit.
    • It buries the lead. The cat's out of the bag, and we know V'ger's Voyager VI origins. It's fundamental to V'Ger's nature, and I think the fact should be noted in the introduction.
    • Related to the above, the chronology's mixed up. If we're painting the picture of V'Ger's history and journey, it's more valuable as an encyclopedic article to describe events as they happened (launch/black hole/machine planet/questions of life/search for creator/events of TMP - followed by the physical details), rather than how the facts unfolded to Kirk & Co. in the movie.
    • The intro may be technically correct in calling V'Ger "one of the most extraordinary lifeforms", but my take on the film was it was an incredible self-aware artificial intelligence. The emphasis on an extraordinary new lifeform was what the Decker/Illia/V'Ger merge created in the end -- something other than V'Ger (but obviously covered by this article)
    • Second line of Initial Contact: "It was unlike anything that Starfleet had ever encountered." And yet, shockingly similiar to what Starfleet encountered only a few years before, Nomad. I don't thing we have to mention the recylcling outside of background, but "The Changeling" happened, and that line is not supportable.
    • I don't know any better, but I'm very suspicious of that Roddenberry quote, particularly the transwarp conduit bit, a tech that appeared in TNG (according to MA) over a year after he died. --Aurelius Kirk 14:03, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. I liked this nomination the last time around and I still do. While I agree with AureliusKirk's first and last points, I disagree entirely with points 2-4. First I think the chronology of the encounter is good as it is, there are plenty of other instances where ships, lifeforms, etc are written from the perspective of encounter chronology, not history per se so this seems minor and could go either way. Second, the extraordinary lifeform part makes sense to me. Third, though Nomad should definitely be mentioned in the background, V'Ger is sufficiently different in origin, size, power, desire, and the threat it presented to Earth to more than justify the use of "unlike anything...". --Logan 5 15:25, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. Weyoun 21:52, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. -- Dmsdbo 01:39, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Support (and counting Ottens thats five). Jaz talk | novels 19:45, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
  • I'm going to add my support for this article as well. Its been well thought out and the pictures compliment the article well. Zsingaya 08:45, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Discussion of possible removal of FA status Edit

The article is blatantly wrong on the size of the V'Ger spacecraft. A similar error would be identifying Jupiter as equal in size to one of the inner planets, and leaving that piece of information in place. The article therefore makes a joke of FA status. --ChrisK 21:49, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

This article is quite fine, the size issue is one small portion of the page and it contains a lot of valid information, plus the background section is quite extensive and provides a lot of background information. - Enzo Aquarius 21:54, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

When I attempted to correct the article, it was reverted back to incorrectness. V'Ger was 4,000 kilometers long, the size of Earth's moon, based on 0.5 km being identified by the Kirk/Sulu quote, the fact that they later moved back to 100 kilometers distance over it (1% past the supposed entire length of the object in question), and that they traveled for approximately 30 minutes to reach, if generous, 3/4 of the way into the object (neverminding how much deeper Spock went in the suit). Or in other words, I "was bold" in setting the record to be more accurate, and it gets reverted to what is blatantly wrong.

EDIT: And while I'm at it and thinking about it, another Kirk/Sulu quote was "...reduce magnification factor four, Mr. Sulu." "We're already two settings below that, sir." --ChrisK 17:05, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

ChrisK, if you are serious about removing the FA status, than hold this discussion in the location where people will see it and action will actually be taken. The proper location is at Memory Alpha:Featured article removal candidates. --OuroborosCobra talk 17:20, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
As the size was never stated in the movie, I have removed it. As for the calculations you made ChrisK, they are still speculation, and cannot be added as canon material in the article. I think the incorrect information is now gone, and therefore there is no reason to remove the FA status. I don't think there was really a reason before, as this seems to have been over ONE SENTENCE out of a large and very well done article. --OuroborosCobra talk 17:57, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

My experiences on numerous wikis have shown me that people often get angry at simply chopping out material that is well-written but just plain wrong; that said, your doing so here to get rid of the ludicrous number is greatly appreciated...and yes, I'll admit to getting extremely p*ssed off about this one single subject, because of viewing V'Ger, since about six years of age, as being the only Deus Ex Machina in Star Trek history. It is special. --ChrisK 10:38, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

FA removal (03 Aug - 19 Oct 2010, Success) Edit

The bg info section does not cite any of its sources, despite including numerous quotes from production personnel. Also, the in-universe info seems to be written slightly from the wrong perspective, seeming too much like the summary of an episode or film. IMO, it should be an historical account of V'Ger's experiences and travels, not from the "learning" point-of-view of the movie itself. --Defiant 11:18, August 3, 2010 (UTC)
  • Support - for the lack of citations.– Cleanse ( talk | contribs ) 00:07, September 27, 2010 (UTC)
  • Support removal due to lack of citations and wrong perspective.--31dot 01:19, September 27, 2010 (UTC)
  • Support. - Archduk3 07:09, September 27, 2010 (UTC)

Archived.– Cleanse ( talk | contribs ) 11:00, October 19, 2010 (UTC)

Roddenberry quoteEdit

should the quote from Gene Roddenberry not be altered slightly. He did say that Voyager may have met the Borg, however i doubt he would have mentioned a transwarp conduit as that concept hadn't been introduced until Star Trek Voyager. The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

Please sign your posts with 4 ~. I think it probably should be altered, not sure where that came from. Logan 5 01:16, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
I want to see some proof that Roddenberry actually said this. He was severely ill at around the time the Borg were conceived and he was dead by the time the Borg transwarp coil had been introduced. BobGoatse 00:00, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
There is no proof that he said it, because the comment was actually after post production to "Q Who", where he said that the machine planet encountered by Voyager might have been the Borg homeworld. As mentioned elsewhere on this page, details indicate, non-canon novels aside, that such a scenario is not very believable. -- ChrisK 10:48, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
there is no source that Roddenberry said this. i think a fan made it up and added it here. do other featured articles keep unsourced information for this long? The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).
If it's not going to be removed, shouldn't it at least be put as background? Borguselinux 01:38, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this quote impossible, since the concept of the Borg using transwarp conduits was created several years after his death? Or did I miss something? --Kevin W. Tlk 01:05, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
I believe that is the case, and thus the incite. if it ain't cited in a few days, the information can be cleared up a bit... -- Sulfur 01:11, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Also, the sentences in question did say JOKINGLY, so if anyone can cite it, we need to find out just how "jokingly" he was speaking, and judge whether it is worth having in the article. Borguselinux 01:38, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Except the quote itself is impossible. The first mention of a Borg transwarp conduit was made after he died. There's no way he could have known about it, especially since I don't think he's the one who wrote that episode more than a year in advance of its airing. --Kevin W. Tlk 18:24, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
I found this comment: [1]. Someone should check the novel "The Return" to see what exactly was stated there, and if it is enough to act as a reference for what we have here. -- Cid Highwind 18:45, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
"The Return" said it was a branch of the Collective that assimilated by converting everything into data patterns of information, rather than making drones out of the population and adapting useful technology. The Roddenberry quote is real, although he did not say anything about a transwarp conduit. According to the Wikipedia V'Ger article, the quote can be found in an early edition of The Star Trek Encyclopedia. --leandar 01:42, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
The above is right- it's mentioned in the 'pedia that he JOKINGLY said the planet V'Ger met might have been the Borg homeworld. There was no mention of transwarp conduits. --Species 8675309 05:26, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

From Talk:V'Ger amphitheaterEdit

Shouldn't this information already be posted at V'Ger? --From Andoria with Love 13:02, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

In a nutshell, yes. It's just like specifics on a starship section, like a Bridge, Sickbay, Ten Forward, etc. Even though we have articles for these, this section of V'Ger is a one shot item, that isn't even named and is minor enough to not to need it's own article. Besides, I don't even think the term 'amphitheater' is really accurate. - Enzo Aquarius 13:27, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. I think a merge is in order. I'll get on that ASAP. --From Andoria with Love 17:17, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

"...on the far side of the galaxy..."Edit

Be aware that Kirk's quote is in direct opposition to what Spock claimed to see inside the V'Ger orrifice, "whole galaxies, all stored here, recorded..." Kirk therefore had to have misspoke, since if V'Ger recorded entire galaxies while en route (hypothetically, for instance, it might've been required to go much slower through galaxies than it was capable of through the seemingly empty space between them), it would've had to have emmerged on the far side of the universe. The idea of living machines (as opposed to cybernetically inhanced) on a planet at the far side of the universe makes, frankly to this author, more sense than anything in one of the four quadrants, because there is no believable way, whatsoever, that the Borg, no matter how powerful they've ever been portrayed, could've created, for instance, the energy necessary for a twelfth-power energy field (which means, simply enough, one trillion times the energy-output of Kirk's Enterprise). All that said, I am inclined to trust the judgment of Spock rather than Kirk on the scope of V'Ger's knowledge, as he saw it with his own eyes. --ChrisK 13:29, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

You are forgetting Voyager's mission of 'learn all there is to learn, then report back'. It was never mentioned it took a direct path back, and its mission directive would seem to indicate it explored the entire universe before it did so (presumably out of regular space-time with all its power and technology, as 300 years would be precious little time otherwise). True, the Borg could not have initially constructed such a ship of fantastic power, however again, assuming its mission of exploring the entire universe, it was sure to have evolved tremendously during that time and considering its goal.... This (human exploration) mission was independent of any Borg/living machine planet and thus they did not reap the benefits. The idea that is it a living machine race at that point instead of the modern Borg is quite consistent with that timeline. 23rd century seems to be the earliest appearance of the Borg (the Borg in 21st century 'First Contact' are 24th century and isolated, same thing with the Star Trek :Enterprise episode) From that point on once the first 'carbon unit' Decker was 'assimilated', the evolution of 'the borg' could have started, along with a new found directive of assimilating all technology, and more importantly biological organisms to advance their race... -- 21:47, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
i agree about the fact that V'ger did not nessicarily take a direct route back, but V'ger did not create the borg.
we know the borg are a lot older than V'ger. the Vaadwuar in "Dragons Teeth" knew the borg as a race with only a few planets, and they were from the 1400's. Guinan said the Borg had been around for thousands of years in "Q, Who". also, if V'ger had already 'learned all that is learnable', and was searching for a way to higher levels of existance, why would it stick around and make a corporeal race that needed to assimilate further 'searching for perfection'? wouldn't it already know everything? or to paraphrase from captain kirk "What does god need with a cyborg?" Mithril 00:48, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
i agree to these points as well, as can be plausibly acknowledged, decker does describe it as "what was once called a blockhole" suggesting scientists of the time may have misinterpreted it as a blackhole when it could have very well been a wormhole, sending voyager 6 across space and time to an earlier point in the borg's civilization, repair it redubbed it v'ger and sent it on its way, also it seems you are all over looking a few key points of how borg's work, v'ger chose to learn all that is learnable, thru data collection, and as such was outfitted with aparatus to do so, perhaps the borg do not have the appropriate technology to acheive the 12th power output, but rather all the information v'ger had obtained gave it that much power cause i would assume assimilating whole galaxies would take up alot of space in v'gers 3d memory, also why the energy cloud around him is 2 AU. also it would help suggest that the borg initially were mainly machines with no need for organics,as they were seen to be not credible lifeforms, merely an infestation (similar to many beliefs that humanity is a virus not a living creature given teh similarities) UNTIL (dun dun dun) v'ger assimilated decker to ascend from it logical thought patterns and to be able to "think outside the logical box" and thus realized to acheive its inherant need to evolve found that "biological infestation" had been overlooked as a means to acheive such personal growth. also to be noted is that borg's communicate through sub space channels, and as such v'ger obtained more than enough power to keep in contact with the collective, could have passed this knowledge onto them citing that thru assimilation of organic carbon units, they may acheive a higher plain of existance than what they have already acheived, albeit v'gers was much more substantial given how much information it possesed.(which also we dont know what kind of information v'ger possesed, possibly technological information that helped it personally evolve more technology than the borg themselves had)so as v'ger found assimilating the creator as a growth experience that it could use to further benefit itself to acheive "more knowledge" the borg may interpret that, again, quite literally that they need to incorporate organic tissue to add to their own distinctiveness and diversity. thus making them seek the cybernetic existance they choose today, and also the need for more technology and information as they were probably aware of v'ger's vast superior intellect and knowledge from assimilating whole galaxies and planets. also a side note, in star trek first contact, during the sequences inside the enterprise, in the sections that the borgs has assimilated, the same ominous background music played during the v'ger sequences was also used during the borg sequences on the enterprise (go ahead and watch both TMP and first contact back to back, you'll notice it) albeit not as booming as in TMP but the same music was used, more subtly, but still effective, should this be taken as a hint that in a cannon feature the link between these subjects has now been officially establised, or was it mere coincidence given the similarites between v'ger and the borg, i for one think this is the official nod to this whole subject.also the existance of the borg queen would support this because shes has said she brings "order out of chaos" suggesting that one individual with teh ability to see beyond the logical bounds of non biological life would further suppor this theroy that v'ger itself came to know. they just simply interpreted it in the literal sense they interpreted voyager 6's original programming, seeing as they cannot fully understand the complexity of organic life. -- 10:42, September 15, 2009 (UTC)

V'Ger's power Edit

V'Ger's power is definitely extraordinary, and we know not its limits.

It would lap the planet of organic matter to find its creator, but who knows what it would do to take out a whole world.

To that effect, we know that V'Ger's weapons act as data storage. Spock said, "Whole galaxies stored here, recorded." Does that mean V'Ger can decimate entire galaxies? Perhaps V'Ger had other means to collect information?

V'Ger is so advanced as to utilize a matter energy conversion system to build a bridge for the Enterprise away team to its most sacred artifact. I imagine the holographic imaging system was that corridor originally planned but seen in the Director's Cut.

Lastly, and I figure a number of you know this, V'Ger is NOT Borg. There are similarities (Living machines of fantastic power collecting data) but that's about it. The Borg existed in the 21st century (First Contact), so if V'Ger were Borg, it would have assimilated all it came across. And if the Borg had such advanced technology, they would be unstoppable--Resistance WOULD be futile at that point!

What saddens me is that V'Ger has never returned in later Star Trek releases. The preceding unsigned comment was added by V'Ger (talk • contribs).

"Other dimensions, higher levels of being."
- Decker (Star Trek: The Motion Picture)
It would seem to indicate that interacting inside something minor, such as our universe, would no longer be on its list of priorities, and hence won't return at all. -- ChrisK 10:57, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
same comment as above, to say V'Ger is not Borg based on your Borg timeline is just plain wrong....
The idea that is it a living machine race at that point instead of the modern Borg is quite consistent with that timeline. 23rd century seems to be the earliest appearance of the Borg. The Borg in 21st century 'First Contact' are from the 24th century and isolated, same thing with the Star Trek: Enterprise episode.
From that point on, once the first 'carbon unit' Decker was 'assimilated', the evolution of 'the borg' could have started, with V'ger giving the new found directive of assimilating all technology, and more importantly biological organisms to advance their race... The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).
A very nice argument for speculation in fanon, but that is it. the FACT, plain and simple, is that the Borg were NEVER said to be related to V'Ger in canon. Never. Didn't happen. You can speculate and explain all you want, but it isn't canon. --OuroborosCobra talk 01:52, 5 February 2007 (UTC)


The very start of the article shouldn't read "[...] threatened the destruction of Earth [...]", but rather "[...] threatened Earth with destruction [...]". Someone has their sentences skewed. The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

V'Ger's sizeEdit

I find it hard to believe that V'Ger was "merely" 20 kilometers long, when the Whale Probe is claimed at 70. V'Ger frankly looks larger than the Probe, as insane as it might sound, and 1/3 the size of the latter would not only be too small, but nowhere near the size it seemed to exhibit in the background while it drew the Enterprise into the apperture for study. Kirk had them fly at first 1/2 a kilometer off the surface of the vessel (and got bug-eyed looks at going in so close), then told him them to go out to "100 kilometers distance, adjusting parallel course." 20 is therefore totally impossible, and miniscule compared to the scale that was shown. -- ChrisK 12:37, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Given how far they traveled to reach the center of the ship itself, versus how large the Earth actually is, I'm going to soon change the description of V'Ger's solid matter diameter, "bow" to "stern" from 20 to roughly 4,000 km long. If anyone thinks I'm wrong, feel free to say so; I will debate you until doomsday or until we agree that V'Ger was one hundred times larger than the article claims, however. -- ChrisK 02:45, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Here is my one question: Is the size of V'Ger ever stated in TMP? If it is, then sadly, no matter how crazy the numer is, we'd have to go with it. --OuroborosCobra talk 03:10, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
And if it wasn't stated, we couldn't add it in except as background information since any personal calculations would be considered speculation. --From Andoria with Love 08:42, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

V'Ger's size is never directly given in TMP, due to the authors apparently being aware that to peg it down would've been to unleash a can of worms from the precisionists (those such as, for instance, myself). The only reference given to size is the orders by Kirk to Sulu on distance. V'Ger's size cannot be accurately known, is the final for backgrond that it actually works out, the final scenes of it launching the super-plasma bolts at the D-Cut's finale being inaccurate, at a little larger than the moon. --ChrisK 00:17, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

It has now been two months, with no major objections to the material presented. As such, I will now change the reference "about the size of...Eros," which has no in-movie material to support it, to "slightly larger than...Earth's moon...", since it is at least half-supportable that that's how slow Enterprise was going when it passed over the main structure of the ship inside the cloud; some may protest that the evidence is iffy at best, but with all due respect, it's a h/ll of a lot more believable than the true V'Ger ship being the size of Manhattan island. --ChrisK 19:34, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

V'Ger's size, from Reference DeskEdit

On a role with topics of late, apparently... Anyway:

In the feature article on V'Ger, I've noticed one predominant, glaring least, if my own mathematical calculations and/or chronological ("stopwatch") records in the movie are accurate.
In the article, it states that V'Ger was estimated to be about the size of the solar asteroid Eros, or about the dimensions of the Terran island of Manhattan. I have no idea where this reference comes from, but that would be literally impossible for V'Ger to be anywhere near that small, for several reasons.
First, and foremost, Kirk at one point tells Sulu that he wants him to guide the ship down to 500 meters off the V'Ger spacecraft surface, and gets a bug-eyed look back, obviously at how close that would be. Yet 500 meters is 0.5 kilometers; visual comparison on screen to V'Ger at this time makes clear the Enterprise being approximately the size of a pea, versus a small building. He then tells Sulu to take them out "to 100 kilometers distance, adjusting parallel course." Sulu does so...and such things as the V'Ger orifice, shortly thereafter, literally tower over the Enterprise...especially when the ship is drawn through the orifice immediately after Ilia is taken, and the rest of V'Ger stretches on to the proverbial horizon to left and right. If 100 kilometers distance is flown over a craft 20 kilometers long, the distance above it would've been five times the length of V'Ger...and yet V'Ger is easily large enough to hold well over 100 Enterprises in its "amphitheater" holding chamber alone.
The second point that makes 20 kilometers an impossibility is the traveling speed of NASA's space shuttle, of all things. In orbit around the Earth, the shuttle travels at a pace of roughly 18,000 miles per hour. Insanely fast, if it were in the atmosphere, but it's of course not. In orbit, it might well be said to gently, or lazily, float around Earth. It is also composed of rocket technology of our own day and age. Are they actually willing to claim that our rockets would be pushing the space shuttle orbiter faster than Enterprise would be going at impulse, or even half-impulse? When they left Earth orbit, Earth became much smaller, VERY quickly, in their reverse angle. To say V'Ger is 20 kilometers long is to say that that during the pass over the ship, 23rd century Enterprise was going MUCH slower than the space shuttle...and somehow I doubt that. At a speed comparable to shuttle cruising pace, 18,000 mph, Kirk and crew would've covered a distance of 28,968 km/h. Even if you half that time to thirty minutes (and it was a little more than that), between first sighting the V'Ger ship after passing through the cloud to reaching the amphitheater, that pace would have them cover just over 14,000 km.
14,000-20,000 km, vs. 20 km.
V'Ger was roughly 100 teams larger than the article claims. Being that as it is, I bring it all up here, rather than its talk page, because it'd be a major change to what is otherwise rightly a featured article. -- ChrisK 10:03, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

It's huge Majorthomme 05:06, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
Hah! --OuroborosCobra talk 05:14, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
Im still uncomfortable with 14,000-20,000 km. Those numbers assume RCS speed, which is far less than impulse. I can watch the movie again and see if they make mention of exactly what speed they were going, but to think that they were going on thrusters for all that time is troubleing. Calculate the size based on Half (12.5% c) and Full-Impulse (25% c according to DITL). I get 67 million km at full impulse, 33 million km at half, and we can even say quarter impulse at 16 million km, give or take a million, assumeing that the opening is on the exact opposite side of V'Ger as the spacecraft surface. --Sdamon 13:54, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

moved from Talk:V'Ger cloudEdit

This entry should be merged with the V'Ger article. There's no need for a seperate page for the V'ger cloud when that is covered in the V'Ger article. Either merging them or deleting this one would seem logical to me. Andrew 07:00, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

I've been a great fan of "The Motion Picture" since it first came out. What I'm going to suggest is that the "Cloud" is an advanced warp field that also has defensive abalities. Question. If you were going to move that much mass at high warp wouldn't you need one hell of an energy field? The energy field could also be entropic in nature at high warp but would also require a great amount of control. Just idle musings here. The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bsryan (talk • contribs).
Article has been merged. --From Andoria with Love 20:11, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Black hole/wormholeEdit

I noticed there is some discussion about where the probe emerged from the blackhole. The other side of the galaxy? The other side of the universe? Who cares? While we're at it, I may as well point out that by definition the probe fell into a wormhole, not a black hole. And what was that bit about the Enterprise being caught in a wormhole near the beginning of this film all about anyways???? Federation 02:32, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Um, as to answer the "who cares" part, we do. If we are going to say "other side of the universe", or "other side of the galaxy", then we need to say that one that was stated in canon. Also, Voyager 6 was lost in a black hole, not a wormhole. Again, that was established in canon. As for the wormhole Enterprise was in, did you watch the movie? It is impossible to miss. --OuroborosCobra talk 03:58, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I didn't miss the scene about the wormhole, just had a hard time understanding what caused it to appear or what about it was a "wormhole" as opposed to an abnormal warp field. Why did destroying an asteroid free the ship? Also, Voyager 6 was not caught in a black hole. Things do not come out of black holes, at least not intact. If the anomaly that Voyager 6 encountered transported it through space, by definition it is a wormhole. Don't know why Decker called it a black hole, but he must had been mistaken. He also could not had known where the probe emerged, so the debate is really about what a character said in error! Federation 01:40, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Maybe it could just be chalked up to not knowing as much about black hole physics as we do today because you are right in saying that it could not have been a black hole in any form. The probe wouldn't have even made it past the event horizon intact, much less getting through it and past the singularity. It had to be a wormhole. --leandar 23:08, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh come on! In 1979 everyone knew as much about the difference between wormholes and black holes as they do today. The fact that wormholes were mentioned by name in the script indicates an understanding of them, so why not are we talking black holes? I think that a lot of people on MA need to realize that its one thing to ask what characters on the show say, and what actually happens on the shows. They are not always the same. Federation 01:03, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

If they understood so much about wormholes, how did the Enterprise keep from getting tossed to who knows where in the galaxy, much less the universe? Sure it could have been a local phenomenon, but they still would have noticed that they had moved a significant distance through the galaxy. All I'm saying is that scientists may have thought it to be a black hole when Voyager VI disappeared, but for it to have survived getting through it, much less even reaching the event horizon, it had to be a wormhole. --leandar 01:54, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
I think there may be some validity to this as in the movie they actually say that Voyager 6 was lost to "what was then called a black hole", which implies that it wasn't really a black hole. Unfortunately they didn't elaborate so we'll likely never have a canon resolution either way. --Maestro4k 14:21, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Possible issue about the Machine PlanetEdit

I know it is only an assumption, yet I would like to strike this point and know your ideas about this. According to the movie, V'Ger was discovered by a machine planet after falling into a black hole. Since it's is evident hat it must have been rather a wormhole, is it possible that it passed the Barzan wormhole into the Delta Quadrant and got discovered by the Borg. Since the Borg are machine beings, isn't it possible that they found the probe to be a distant relative and thus supported it? Or is it rather impossible since it was "lesser technology"? I do personaly doubt that, since the probe had gathered an enormous amount of knowledge which surely impressed the Borg as such. Another support of this theory is Spocks response as Decker requests to shot a phaser against the tractor beam: "Every resistance is futile." -Aresius, Freelance-writer; 15.06.20,08; 14:48

yes all of this is "possible" infact, William Shatner wrote a series of books that says exactly how you describe it, however MA does not consider books Canon resources. Thus we can only just wonder about where it went... at least in the official articles.Jlandeen 09:51, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

V'ger's SizeEdit

If I remember correctly, V-Ger was way, way larger than a planet. The movie actually mentioned it being several AU's in diameter. An AU (Astronomical Unit) is the distance between Earth and Sol (the Sun). So that's a big damn cloud. The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jhawk (talk • contribs).

Check the article. It was even bigger originally. :)
Anyhow, to your point... "far larger than a planet" seems pretty good to me. Especially as that's definitely the case. It was far larger than a planet. -- Sulfur 10:29, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Is there an official size to the cloud at this point?
The difference between 2 AUs and 82 AUs is vaste, and to add further confusion to this, currently has the cloud listes as 22 AUs in size (V'ger)
I feel that the updated 2 AUs is far more acceptable, but of course not official unless stated as such.--Red00knight 13:06, November 11, 2009 (UTC)-- 15:34, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
I notice that the article gives the diameter of the cloud as 2 AU. In fact, it's over 82 AU in the theatrical version and over 2 AU in the Director's Edition. Is the DE considered more canonical than the theatrical cut? Captrek 17:24, August 18, 2010 (UTC)
“Far larger than a planet" is one hell of an understatement. The cloud is large enough to contain 15 trillion (13,000,000,000,000) Earth-sized planets, or about a million Sun-sized stars. Captrek 17:24, August 18, 2010 (UTC)

The 'Black Hole'Edit

I like the way that i the new ST film, a black hole is used to send the Narada and Jellyfish back in time. Plus, Voyager 6 WAS thrown through a black hole, as it is stated in the movie itself. I guess they probably got the Black hole idea from TMP -Ooiue 16:43 6th March 2010 (UTC)

New Details Concerning Vejur's Size Edit

After reading the size controversy section, I've noticed an important point on the subject that no one else seems to have mentioned: Both the unabridged shooting draft of the screenplay and Gene Roddenberry's novelization specify Vejur's length as 78 kilometers.

Here's the excerpt from the screenplay, which can be read in full here:

  -                                                             -
197                                                           197
      The Object continues to GROW RAPIDLY IN SIZE as the
      Enterprise continues moving toward it. Everyone is
      awed; even Spock, from whom we discern an involuntary,
      impressed reaction. Decker is with Spock at the
      science console.
                  Incredible dimensions, Sir!
                  ... I make it as seventy-eight
                  kilometers in length...

And from the novel:

         "I make its dimensions as... seventy-eight kilometers
      in length," Decker was saying.
         Almost eighty kilometers–the vessel out there was double
      the length of old Manhattan Island!

Given that this figure was written by people directly involved with the film, I would regard it as an accurate and reliable measurement worth mentioning in the article.


Removed textEdit

This was added today to the article:

  • When V'Ger transmits a message toward its creator, three non-zero binary digits appear on an Enterprise computer screen: 10111100, 0110110 and 0110101000. Converted into decimal, the sum of these three numbers (188, 54 and 424 respectively) is 666.

That really has no big relevance to anything, and unless there's some actual relevance or production source to back things up, then I don't believe that it is something worth keeping. -- sulfur 02:34, November 11, 2010 (UTC)

Captain Decker Edit

The article said that Commander Willard Decker merged with V'Ger. I don't think that was correct.

When Kirk took command of the Enterprise for this mission, Decker was given a temporary grade reduction, not a demotion. As far as shipboard business goes, he is addressed as Commander, but he's still a Captain. When Kirk prepares the casualty report at the end of the mission, he reports Captain Decker as MIA, and I believe that's the appropriate way to refer to him in this context as well.

The same paragraph that referred to Commander Decker also refers to Admiral Kirk, which is inconsistent. It's either Commander Decker and Captain Kirk, or Captain Decker and Admiral Kirk.

Accordingly, I have edited the article to say Captain Decker instead of Commander. Captrek 19:55, January 28, 2011 (UTC)

The only issue is, only the "captain" of the ship is addressed as Captain, thus Kirk being addressed that way. It should be "Commander Decker" and "Captain Kirk" in the context, since Kirk was the "Captain" of the ship. -- sulfur 20:03, January 28, 2011 (UTC)

Possibility of adopting Vejur as CANON spelling for what has been called "V'Ger" in the past? Edit

After seeing the original Gene Roddenberry-authored novel of my absolute favorite Star Trek movie...yes, the VERY FIRST one...isn't it about time for Gene's spelling of the name of the "intruder" in the novelization of STMP to be accepted as the canon spelling?

The novel WAS first published (in very early 1980) very shortly after the movie's initial release, and I'm quite surprised that what seems like a clear error on Paramount's part hasn't been corrected long before now.

Where Star Trek's creator HIMSELF spells it Vejur, it SHOULD be canon for everyone concerned...I've always accepted that to be true, but what's the opinion of our fellow Trekkers?

Data's Calabash (talk) 16:18, September 23, 2012 (UTC)

We do note "Vejur" as an alternate spelling.
What Roddenberry thought is interesting to note, but shouldn't be the basis for how we do things here; Roddenberry apparently did not consider Star Trek V: The Final Frontier canon, in whole or part, for example, but we still consider it canon here. 31dot (talk) 16:33, September 23, 2012 (UTC)

Roddenberry only used "Vejur" because the novel (and LP soundtrack) came out a few days before the film's premiere and, for people reading the book first, the spelling avoided telegraphing the Big Reveal ending, with a few letters rusted away on Voyager 6's name plaque. Therin of Andor (talk) 03:00, August 5, 2017 (UTC)


Considering at the end of the Movie, Willard merges with the Illia Probe and that V'Ger had the ability to create probes out of digitalized people and things [So meaning it could create a Probe out of the Galaxies seen there] wouldn't that mean that V'Ger would have contained the knowledge and possibly sentience of everyone and everything digitalized, so in a technical sense, everyone who died by V'Ger [E.g crew of Epsilon IX] would still survive?

I got the impression from the movie that V'ger considered all lifeforms infestations, and simply disintigrated them, and Ilia was the first one it scanned in any detail for making a duplicate android probe. --Pseudohuman (talk) 18:57, February 12, 2013 (UTC)

If that's so, how come when Spock is performing the Space Walk, he sees a replica of the station. So if he merely disintergrated them, why did they still appear in V'Ger?-- 18:35, March 4, 2013 (UTC)

As an aside, general plot questions like this should go on the Reference Desk in the future; article talk pages are meant to discuss article changes only. This doesn't need to be moved; just so you know for the future. 31dot (talk) 02:38, March 5, 2013 (UTC)
I have the impression that the station itself, since it was not a biological lifeform and V'Ger was on a mission to collect all relevant data of the universe and considered technology as life and relevant information, took a holophoto scan of the station before disintegrating it. But this unnecessary speculative discussion does not belong here, since we cant know, and anything we cant know is possible. --Pseudohuman (talk) 19:46, March 5, 2013 (UTC)

V'ger vs V'Ger?Edit

Should this article be named V'Ger, and not V'ger? According to, which is canon, it should be V'Ger. --Igor871 (talk) 18:35, August 11, 2014 (UTC) isn't canon. According to the page move, the script spells it as "V'ger". -- sulfur (talk) 19:14, August 11, 2014 (UTC)
Here is the shooting script: [2]Throwback (talk) 19:52, August 11, 2014 (UTC)

Removed Edit

I've removed te following uncertainty: "Where no certainty has yet been shown as to where the "Voyager 6 island" structure was exactly located within V'ger's immense interior length, such speculation might be likely to continue for some time to come. At present, V'ger's exact dimensions remain uncertain." --Defiant (talk) 07:44, June 15, 2017 (UTC)

I've removed this statement. What V'ger evolved into remains a mystery to this day.. --LauraCC (talk) 18:11, August 10, 2018 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-NC unless otherwise noted.