Talk yuh talk

File:Nichols old.jpg

Hi, thanks for uploading a DVD screencap for File:Nichols old.jpg, but you still need to say what DVD it is from in order to properly cite it. Thanks in advance, --OuroborosCobra talk 21:36, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Whoops! Forgot that. It is done, thank you.–- Watching... listening... 04:22, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Torres pic

It is standard practice to have two pictures of the main characters in their sidebar. One from the earliest appearances, which in Torres' case would be Season 1 (pic at the bottom of sidebar) and one of the last, most recent appearance, which would be Season 7, preferrably towards the end of the season. Your image is from mid-series, so it perfectly fits in the main body of the text but not in the sidebar. Hope that explains the situation. --Jörg 10:58, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Ah. That explains it then. Thanks. – Watching... listening... 11:14, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
  1. Hey, Eyes. Regarding the "Tomboyish" image, I never said it was a bad image, I just didn't think it was one that should represent Torres right off the bat. Maybe it's just me, though; if you disagree, by all means, return it to where it was (just remember to put the image you're replacing into the body of the article) and I'll bring up my concerns on the talk page. It's not really a big deal, I just didn't feel it was a fitting image to have at the top. I am only one person, though; this is a community project, so if the community wants the image there, so be it. It is a good image, though; sorry if I gave you the opposite impression. --From Andoria with Love 04:19, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
  2. Also, you don't have to use images from a character's EARLIEST and LATEST appearances; you use an image from ONE of their earlier/later appearances (like one from any episode in the first season and one from any episode in the last). It is probably best to add images with the characters looking how they are best remembered (i.e. in Starfleet uniform), at least for the very top image. --From Andoria with Love 04:19, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
  3. RE: T'Pol vandalism -- what vandalism do you speak of? The page is already protected from anonymous/new users tdue to recent vandalism, but I don't see any vandalism the page was protected. Also, protecting a page permanently isn't really an option... well, okay, it is an option, but it's one we generally prefer not to use. No reason to crush the flower bed because of a few bad seeds... or something like that. :-P --From Andoria with Love 04:19, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

um, in response to your rant...i mean response on my talk page to my use of the word superfluous to describe your torres image. that was not the right word to use, but it seems the reasons for the change have been explained by others above. you really shouldn't be offended by such things. and no, the naomi wildman image is very flattering. Deevolution 03:39, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

By the way, when uploading images, please make sure we have the proper permissions to use them. Just uploading someone else's images that we don't have permission to use is a copyright infringement. Please see copyrights for more. --From Andoria with Love 05:11, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Re:Using Images Without Permission

Sorry, I just noticed the comment you left on my talk page. Glad to hear you got permission beforehand; if you don't mind, though, could you post a copy of the e-mail response here? Also, in the future, please reply to a comment on the initial talk page where the comment was made (in this case, the talk page for Cirroc's image). It's always best and less confusing to keep related discussions (particularly replies to a comment) on one page. :) --From Andoria with Love 20:48, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Tomboy comment

I just realized "tomboyish" wasn't the term I meant to use for the Torries pic... that might be where som confusion came from. What I meant to say is that I thought it looked a bit too "girlie" (for lack of a better word) to be the top pic. Of course, this is just my personal opinion; if others have a problem with it, it can should be reverted. --From Andoria with Love 11:43, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Horse (a Trinidadian slang for 'friend', as 'Dog' is in America), I forgot about that long ago.:)
Watching... listening... 11:48, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

I did, too, until I was looking over the Star Trek page and saw the word "tomboy" and I realized, "Holy crap, I used that word wrong." I just thought I'd explain myself. Thanks for understanding, my, um... fellow horse. ;) --From Andoria with Love 12:18, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

orphaned images

hi. while i disagree with some of the changes you have made to the images of t'pol and seven of nine and so forth i have no changed them. regardless, you shouldn't orphan images just because you think they should be changed. i am referring to File:TPol2154.jpg which was perfectly acceptable as is. i don't think a wardrobe change is sufficient reason to change an image...regardless, please don't orphan images without cause. Deevolution 09:41, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Got it. – Watching... listening... 11:12, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Constant edits

Hi, Eyes Only. Just letting you know that, when editing, you should use the "Show Preview" button as often as possible to avoid making constant edits on a page. Constantly editing floods the recent changes and puts an unnecessary load on the database. You can find the "show preview" button located next to the "save page" button. Thanks, and welcome to Memory Alpha! :) -- Sulfur 01:11, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Re:File:Bob Picardo.jpg

So, what was wrong with the old version of File:Bob Picardo.jpg? It's not as if 20% less size and disk space would make any difference - especially since old image versions are archived, and images used in thumbnails scaled down anyway. -- Cid Highwind 10:34, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

(Hands raised) So-rry! I simply remembered, before I got a login, seeing an administrator tell somebody to watch the file and image size; keep it relatively small in dimensions and size. Please... don't shoot! :)
Watching... listening... 21:40, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Re:The Featured Article Template

Hey, Eyes. Protecting the FA page might be a good idea, but I don't think it's completely necessary. Archivists will notice when someone new changes it and revert it. We don't really like protecting a lot of pages as that goes against what MA is about, as a wiki. That said, this should be brought up at its talk page so others can chime in. --From Andoria with Love 03:12, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Edit summary

Hi. I've noticed that you updated the sidebars on both J.G. Hertzler and Walter Koenig. A good job, I can honestly say I could not done it better myself. But a little request, could you please edit a summary when you do edits on pages? It does not have to be big, somewhere on MA there is a page where you can find words that tells a lot of what has happened. Or, as you did on Hertzler's page, "Changing sidebar". But you forgot it on Walter's page. People will raise their eyebrow if they see a change of a few hundred letter, and no summary.
But, good job!-- Örlogskapten. Qapl'a! 09:21, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Kate's Image

It seems to me that her picture changes a lot. I liked the one they had awhile ago when she was rather young, but Kate Mulgrew is such a beautiful person, I love all of her pictures. -- SpiderQueen 16:21, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Vulcan images/Spock

A reminder, Spock was not a full blooded Vulcan. --OuroborosCobra talk 23:16, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

We aren't here to cater to what everyone "thinks", we are here to present factual information. Placing him above actual Vulcans does not make factual sense when he wasn't one. Even placing him in that article is somewhat questionable. --OuroborosCobra talk 23:31, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Shran moved it down, but kept it in the sidebar. Take it up with him.– Watching... listening... 23:37, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Why would I take up with him what he did that is essentially what I just said here needed to be done, not place him before actual Vulcans? I suggest you re-read my statement. Irregardless, You still are the initial adder of the photo, I'm not going to take it up with everyone that has done edits since then.

And I am telling you that I saw what he did long before you sent me a message about it and I agree. You seem to need to get in the last word. I am not going to play that game. End this discussion now.– Watching... listening... 23:42, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but you didn't tell me any such thing until just now. You told me to go take it up with Shran, and I explained why I wasn't going to. Your last message is the only one where you tell you agree. --OuroborosCobra talk 23:44, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Inline external links in articles

Before you spend too much time cleaning all of our articles of their external links... can you check out this forum discussion? Thanks. -- Sulfur 14:55, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

You know, I've been wondering about that. I remember seeing some administrator telling some user not to use external links in the body of an article. I wondered then, why have templates to do so. But I figured since he was an administrator, then that was policy. If that is not so, OK.– Watching... listening... 18:18, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Re:Star Trek: Nemesis

I liked Nemesis just fine as a science fiction flick. As a Star Trek flick, though, it was pretty disappointing, particularly since it will likely be the last to feature the TNG crew. There were far to many plot holes and it just didn't have the family feel it should have had being the last TNG movie. Stuart Baird didn't care for about the subject matter he was directing, and it showed, and they made some poor editing choices. The movie had a lot of potential which wasn't realized in the final product. For example, it would have been great to see those Scorpion class fighters in action rather than simply being used as a convenient plot device for escape. Regardless, I enjoyed the movie overall... as a movie. Having said all that, it would be best if we kept discussions like this off-site, like on the IRC chat. --From Andoria with Love 03:31, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: Timeless

No no no. By all means, keep writing the summaries. Someone can always come in and edit them later; that's what the wiki's there for. I had completely forgotten about the comments I made regarding "Timeless." I think I was in a pissy mood and saw that all the editing I did before had been undone. No biggie, though. I don't want to take away something you enjoy – that's the primary reason this wiki is here, is to have fun. I'm not saying you're doing a bad job with them, by any means; a lot of work has gone into them and we appreciate that. So if anyone, including myself, has a problem with the way you wrote a summary, it can just be edited. It is a wiki, after all. ;) --From Andoria with Love 15:52, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Re:PNA Use

The episodes do indeed have a specific act structure - this structure can be seen most clearly via the episode scripts; for example, this is the script from the DS9 episode "Sacrifice of Angels". Standard act structure for TNG, DS9 and VOY is teaser & five acts. Those I know for certain. For ENT, I'm 90% sure it's teaser & four acts (based solely on watching episodes and noting the structure). TOS, I'm not sure of (because of syndication cut issues) but I think that's teaser & four acts as well.

Because I don't have these episodes to hand, and therefore cannot check to see where the acts breaks should come in, I applied the {{pna-section}} template, and detailed the issue on the talk page, so someone who does, can. I did not see that the template says that the section is incomplete, for which I apologise, as I did not intend to suggest that - merely that the structure needed be looked at, as it does not conform with the norm. When I came across the template, I was looking more at the name "pna-section", which - since it wasn't an issue affecting the whole page - was what I was aiming for. I should have noted that sooner, but since I had about ten tabs open at any one time as I went through the VHS releases, I simply closed each one as it saved. I shall change the wording on that template now and apologise for suggesting your summary was incomplete. -- Michael Warren | Talk 22:30, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Tal Celes

Hey, don't worry about I don't get mad over stuff like this. And don't feel bad about misspelling my name. My name is hard to pronounce and write correctly even in my own language. But about the Celes article. I should say that I've never even heard of not being allowed to use contractions on MA. There are a multitude of articles that have them and even if it isn't really correct, I should point out that nobody really cares about minutiae like that. Totally unimportant, it's the content that matters most. But I should ask you to not to use those really weird titles and ranks for characters. Like saying 'Operations Manager Harry Kim'??? Nobody calls him that, not in the show, not in the script,, fans or anyone on MA. It's superfluous and not correct. It's just 'Ensign Kim'. Or mentioning really werid things like 'Voyager's master and commander'?? That's weird and not meant for MA. I realise now that yes, perhaps my Celes article read more like an episode summary but then just edit it to be more correct, will ya. And please in the future use the talk page to discuss undoing someone else's major edits like that. Even if you plan to rewrite a page, discuss it on the talk page first before doing such a thing. Others may not agree or feel it unnecessary or may offer advice on how to proceed. I used the talk page profusely to see if others agreed with me about your Celes rewrite before anyone did anything. I hope you understand what I mean and take this advice to heart. It will prevent problems like this in the future. Marjolijn 20.19, 9 December 2007 (CET)

Re: Season's Greetings

Well thank you very much, and Merry Christmas & Happy New Year to you and your's. I hope you enjoy your vacation! :) --From Andoria with Love 00:11, 10 December 2007 (UTC)


How do you get that yellow word "listening..." on your signature? --From TrekkyStar Peace and Long Life 15:14, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

The Gift

Actually...if you really want to get technical. The first record of humans assimilated actually occurred in 2063 with members of the Enterprise-E Crew being assimilated by the Borg before First Contact. Of course these are 24th century humans but it is still the first chronological assimilation of humans that is canon. — Morder 10:29, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Ship name formatting

Please pay attention to the style of how we format ship names here at Memory Alpha. It is not USS Voyager, but rather USS Voyager. Take advantage of the {{USS}} template to do automatic formatting. -- sulfur 17:27, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh. Sorry. – Watching... listening... 17:28, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Image filenames

Could you remove the -'s from your uploads? Thanks. — Morder 04:23, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

File:Kate Vernon.jpg

Hey, do you have permission for File:Kate Vernon.jpg? As a precaution, I've put it on copyvio notice, but if you have permission, I can remove that. --- Jaz 18:11, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-NC unless otherwise noted.