"Synth" capitalized or not?

I noticed that over at Kima and Lil you changed "synth" to "Synth." I know that we capitalize species names like Human and Vulcan, but I was thinking that "synth" was more of a descriptor, like "android", "robot" or "hologram". We'll probably learn more in a few weeks, but until then, I don't think we have enough evidence to know whether it should be "synth" or "Synth"... or am I missing something? —Josiah Rowe (talk) 19:01, January 10, 2020 (UTC)

I don't know, since no one knows what a synth is, apparently, but if they are describing a scenario where "rogue synths attack", it would certainly describe a group, and a group would typically be capitalized, since it wasn't called something generic like a "mob" or "angry civilians". --Alan (talk) 19:08, January 10, 2020 (UTC)

Not necessarily. I can think of plenty of cases in which an attacking group would not be capitalized. "Rogue militias attack embassy," "rogue privateers attack shipping lanes," "rogue workers attack factory," and so forth. But you're right that we don't know what a synth (or a Synth) is yet. Time will tell, I suppose. —Josiah Rowe (talk) 19:24, January 10, 2020 (UTC)

I think "rogue privateer" is kind of one in the same. --Alan (talk) 19:36, January 10, 2020 (UTC)

Possibly... though if I recall my maritime history, one of the reasons privateers were used was for official deniability, so they might or might not be acting under naval orders. Besides, just because a phrase is redundant doesn't mean people don't use it (keep your "PIN number" secret at the "ATM machine"). —Josiah Rowe (talk) 19:45, January 10, 2020 (UTC)

Cardassian ranks

Hi Alan, You recently edited my edit on the Cardassian rank glinn. I don't understand the edit? i'm new to this page so perhaps I don't understand all the rules, but from what I understand, this page is devoted to cultivating information. Your re-edit was accurate but reduced the information to a depthless lack of accuracy. can you explain? Sincerely, Richie

The page use to be a catch all (legate, gul and glinn all redirected there), but was split in individual articles (because it should have been in the first place), and what remained was a generalized page listing all the ranks and any information that may be included across the board on the subject or that directly compare one to the other (like discussing prefect, or the background info about gil). Otherwise, specific information (your 'depth and accuracy') about the individual ranks go to those individual pages, to cut down on redundancy and to build the web. --Alan (talk) 13:37, January 15, 2020 (UTC)

Starfleet archives

Why did you revert my edit? The name "Starfleet archives" is also used on screen at least as a caption. The museum might be part of the archives, not necessarily the whole thing. I went to that page because of the on-screen caption, many other users probably will too. JagoAndLitefoot (talk) 20:42, January 24, 2020 (UTC)

Because there was already an article about it. With the exact same picture. Otherwise, the names are quite different on paper, not to mention, they were two completely different types of article. --Alan (talk) 20:50, January 24, 2020 (UTC)
Or do you mean Starfleet Archives? --Alan (talk) 20:56, January 24, 2020 (UTC)

Disambigs with comic + episode

I think that there is a case to simply have these redirect to the episode, and have a disambiguation pointing to the comic on these ones -- simpler, gets people to where they are almost certainly wanting to be fast, etc, and removes the need for additional, extra disambiguation pages. Thoughts? -- sulfur (talk) 12:44, January 25, 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, that works too, I was just trying to make everything consistent, because some were doing that, and others were not, then some were doing a third thing... --Alan (talk) 15:04, January 25, 2020 (UTC)

I'm happy with doing it consistently for episode pages in this way. Two links with one being the episode? RD to episode, disambig over to the other one. More than two? Disambig page at the base. -- sulfur (talk) 21:13, January 25, 2020 (UTC)

Answering your Komack edit comment

Yes, that's all it was about, but I guess I wasn't clear enough in my first comment on Talk:James Komack, so that's probably my fault. I was clearer, I believe, earlier, on Talk:Westervliet, but still not sure if that would have gotten my point across.

In any case, the only reason I posted on the talk pages at all instead of just making the relatively minor edit myself (and keeping the facts), is because in the past, on more than one occasion, when I've removed speculation from an article here, or rephrased it to that it's presented as a possibility, not a fact, it's either resulted in an edit war, or an admin just reverting. So, I've taken to trying to gather opinions and support (or dissent) when it comes to something like this. That's why it was worth the thousand words. --TimPendragon (talk) 04:33, February 6, 2020 (UTC)

Just saying hello

Hi. there. just a note to say hello. I have been here for a while, but have not visited for some time. I appreciate and admire all your work and efforts. thanks for keeping this wiki in such great shape! very cool place. thanks!! Sm8900 (talk) 15:09, February 7, 2020 (UTC)

Screenshot advice

How can I take better quality screen shots from Picard and Discovery? A couple of the ones I have taken are a bit dark any tips? Mseay222 (talk) 23:54, February 9, 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure. You'll probably want to ask one of the other regular PIC image uploaders. I haven't even seen those episodes yet. --Alan (talk) 23:58, February 9, 2020 (UTC)


I re-checked the episode. It is Wallenberg-class transport.--Memphis77 (talk) 14:55, February 13, 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. Just wanted to make sure the qualifiers were correct, since there are essentially two transports with the same name. --Alan (talk) 14:57, February 13, 2020 (UTC)


Just letting you know I reduced their block to a day, as a week seemed a little much for a first offense. That image is everywhere online, so I could see how an they would think it's OK to use. I think the message has been sent either way. - Archduk3 01:44, February 15, 2020 (UTC)

yeah, i figured as much, but regardless he's not a completely new user and it was acknowledged to be from the up coming episode. So there's that. --Alan (talk) 02:06, February 15, 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation question

Why shouldn't the production staffer be at Dinah? -- Capricorn (talk) 13:10, February 19, 2020 (UTC)

Because it is not a natural title conflicting for the same name space. I'm trying to clean up 15 years of abuse, and trust me, I'm being really fair with a lot of those pages, and there is no reason she needs to be listed on that page. Besides, if you type "dinah" in the search bar, you'll still find her, easy peasy. --Alan (talk) 13:21, February 19, 2020 (UTC)

Okay. Guess I learned from that abuse... I always took a "more can't hurt" approach when it came to disambiguation pages. -- Capricorn (talk) 13:47, February 19, 2020 (UTC)


Thanks for fixing the categories on those redirects. I forgot we were categorizing all the redirects separately now. -- Renegade54 (talk) 17:25, February 19, 2020 (UTC)

Well, as a practice, I've been dedicating one to the real category (like whatever matches the spelling used in the article) and all alternate stuff to the redirect categories. --Alan (talk) 17:29, February 19, 2020 (UTC)

Corsair (type)

I created the link. The corsair is a type of starship used by the Fenris Rangers. What should the page be named, Corsair (type) or something else?--Memphis77 (talk) 19:49, February 20, 2020 (UTC)

I retooled everything to support that idea. Assuming it was just a generic "starship classification" term, and "Fenris Ranger(s) corsair" cannot be justified. --Alan (talk) 19:52, February 20, 2020 (UTC)
FYI that wikipedia link you've added to the page doesn't work. -- Capricorn (talk) 18:03, February 21, 2020 (UTC)

There wouldn't be a link to corsair. In the real world, the corsair was, according to the definitions I have read, a small fast pirate ship, sometimes operating with official sanction. Wikipedia has no page for pirate ships. I am thinking that a writer thought corsair sounded cool, without knowing what it was, and had the Rangers, who do not seem to be pirates, use corsairs.--Memphis77 (talk) 18:19, February 21, 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, I added it to check, then got distracted and forgot to remove it. --Alan (talk) 18:21, February 21, 2020 (UTC)
I can relate to that. -- Capricorn (talk) 18:46, February 21, 2020 (UTC)

The Moinger thing

That page shouldn't have been merged, at least not yet. If you put it up for a merge, ignore contrary views but instead simply wait seven days and then merge, then that seven day discussion period is just a fig leaf for doing whatever you want. You can think the page is stupid, but you still still need to defend that view, otherwise you're just misusing your admin privileges to force things to be your way. -- Capricorn (talk) 05:51, March 4, 2020 (UTC)

We eliminate stupid from MA on a daily basis. Just because you think you are somehow special, you are immune to that fact, you are wrong. We have dozens in not hundreds of various misspellings, far less obvious that your bone-headed example, that go where they were meant to go with zero afterthought. The very simple fact that you wave the Occam's razor flag to everyone else's but your own contributions is a huge pile of horse shit, just to top it off with the "sore butt" act like you didn't know any better when it happens to you. "Gee, there are three names mentioned in the episode, and three names on their patch, but one letter is missing, so there are really four people..." How is that explanation come anywhere remotely close to be a straightforward is better-type answer, but no, you are arguably and constantly incapable of being anything but a pissant about the minutiae on this site, and creating problems where none should exist in the first, to the point where this had to happen. --Alan (talk) 04:16, March 13, 2020 (UTC)

There were not in fact three names mentioned in the episode, and there were more then three people on the team (I count at least five). That's where a full discussion would have come in handy.

I don't think I'm special, but I do very strongly believe in the consensus-based decisionmaking model. It might be alien to a cynic but I genuinely see it as the social contract that makes all this cooperation possible. And I absolutely get where you are coming from: you're the grizzled veteran, you're just doing what needs to be done to keep the place from descending into bedlam, besieged by people who don't know as much as you. But the fact remains that that you regularly act well beyond what site policy prescribes for an administrator, use intimidation and force in lieu of discussion, and sorry but this admittedly minor issue broke the camel's back from me, I'm simply done living by your whim. "This had to happen", seriously? You're not Jack Bauer and there's no nuke about to go off in the database. You have "the Borg are everywhere" Riker as an avatar and maybe it reflects your mood, but by your actions "let's steal the Defiant" Riker would be a better fit. (point in case, you didn't even fix links after the "eliminating stupid" at Moinger)

Anyway, I hope you won't bother with another long and angry ten days in the making rebuttal like that, because to my very real regret I'm beyond it; I'm taking a break, and the word "break" is pretty much an euphemism because I don't expect I'll be back. The last, probably futile, thing I'll say here is that you should look at your attitude as an administrator, because it's authoritarian and it's bullying, and it's putting people off and that's bad for the project. Maybe you should consider voluntarily giving up your admin powers, even if just for six months or so, so you'll be forced to learn to work together with others again without the looming threat of a veto to back up your "you're an idiot for posting that, that's fact" style of discussion. The site would survive having one admin less, and the community would be better for it in the long run. Newbies might even start to stick around more often again. But whatever you do from here on out, good luck. -- Capricorn (talk) 15:28, March 17, 2020 (UTC)

ibn Majid class

On his Instagram account, in the questions for the latest episode, Michael Chabon identified the ibn Majid as a Curiosity-class cruiser. Is this enough to began a discussion on changing the name of the Ibn Majid type to Curiosity-class?--Memphis77 (talk) 03:52, March 13, 2020 (UTC)

I do not know how to do a cite to an Instagram, when it is a question in what Chabon calls a "story". The citation is from the latest round of questions, from 3/12.--Memphis77 (talk) 04:04, March 13, 2020 (UTC)

He's a production source, so I'd say so. As for Instagram, someone used {{el|}} for a reference on the Thaddeus Troi-Riker page, if that helps. --Alan (talk) 04:16, March 13, 2020 (UTC)

I have a question

How did you create the DelBeccio-bot?

--Ten of Thirteen 15:57, March 16, 2020 (UTC)


I have a question about this one. According to Memory Beta, when I was researching what a ka'athyra is, I discovered that it is the Vulcan term for the Vulcan lute. How should we approach this?--Memphis77 (talk) 03:37, March 20, 2020 (UTC)

What is it on Picard? --Alan (talk) 04:08, March 20, 2020 (UTC)

In the episode, A.I. Soong says that Sutra plays the ka'athyra beautifully. She is not shown playing the instrument.--Memphis77 (talk) 04:17, March 20, 2020 (UTC)

I'd like to say mix the terms, but probably think the community minded option would be to make them separate things linked by that background reference.--Alan (talk) 15:08, March 20, 2020 (UTC)


This user is a threat to the site. He or she begin removing content from pages and putting in "graffiti" about how Star Trek sucks and Dr. Who rules. I sent a friendly warning to them about their behavior, that it invite the attention of the admins and bureacrats and that they might get banned. I and others are working to undo their damage. I received this message from Dalekdino: LISTEN HERE YOU CAN BAN ME BUT I WILL COME BACK IN OTHER FORMS --Memphis77 (talk) 04:02, March 20, 2020 (UTC)

thank you admin (MA user )

Important info

Dalekdino are spamming articles with removing all content. Excample: At 04:58, 20 March 2020, he replaced all of the content of Borg with "They are a derict copy form the cybermen of Doctor Who. Star Trek sucks". Please revert these edits.

Important links: [1] [2] --Ten of Thirteen 19:41, March 20, 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, that was taken care of over 12 hours ago. --Alan (talk) 19:48, March 20, 2020 (UTC)

Recent vandalism

Hi Gvsualan, I am an admin at the Doctor Who wiki. I want to assure you that the posts made by User:Dalekdino on this wiki do not represent the admins or the vast majority of editors at the Doctor Who wiki. The user in question has been banned from our wiki (as has another who endorsed his actions). Feel free to contact me at the Doctor Who wiki if something like this ever happens again. Thanks Shambala108 (talk) 02:21, March 21, 2020 (UTC)

Response to post at Zheng He type

I left a response for you at this page's talk page.--Memphis77 (talk) 03:53, March 27, 2020 (UTC)


Question, is this person actually the same person as the redirect target? MechQueste 02:23, April 13, 2020 (UTC)

Was. --Alan (talk) 04:48, April 13, 2020 (UTC)

From left field

You Riker pic kills me every time. Damn good. -- Compvox (talk) 05:47, May 4, 2020 (UTC)


Why do you remove disambig templates I add? --Soulkeeper (Talk·contribs) 11:22, May 6, 2020 (UTC)

Because either they're not relevant or the search box will handle them better. -- sulfur (talk) 11:23, May 6, 2020 (UTC)

Alternate future

When the timeships encountered in for excample VOY: "Relativity" and ENT: "Future Tense" are surely from the real future, why is these futures called alternate or possible (even in in-universe perspective)? --Soulkeeper (Talk·contribs) 12:23, May 11, 2020 (UTC)

That is too specific of a question to just throw on someone's user talk page. I assume it is because the future is constantly changing and there are too many factors to say for sure what is "real" and what is "possibly real". --Alan (talk) 12:33, May 11, 2020 (UTC)

ACLU $47 proposal

See Portal talk:Main -- sulfur (talk) 03:03, June 3, 2020 (UTC)

Pages with script errors

This mediawiki tag needs to be changed. I'll put in a request to Wikia. -- sulfur (talk) 14:25, June 3, 2020 (UTC)

Don't forget your bowl of fruit for Vaal... --Alan (talk) 14:35, June 3, 2020 (UTC)

This is done now, and the category properly populated. -- sulfur (talk) 15:42, June 3, 2020 (UTC)


Deletion reason for User:14bauhr/box should in my opinion be: "Author request". --Soulkeeper (Talk | contribs) 13:05, June 8, 2020 (UTC)

No, the deletion page was listed as "no valuable context" for the exact reason I stated. I've been doing this for 15 years, I don't need to be lectured by you. --Alan (talk) 13:08, June 8, 2020 (UTC)

I think you mean the deletion discussion. --Soulkeeper (Talk | contribs) 13:13, June 8, 2020 (UTC)

Yes, the deletion page. There was no discussion. No need for discussion, again for the reasons previously stated. "Speedy deletes" show up on the recent changes page automatically for Admins to see. --Alan (talk) 13:21, June 8, 2020 (UTC)

National Socialist Party

I just don't know someone who called the faction like that. I heard Nazis, Nazi Party, Nazism an other things. If it was vandalism, I am sorry --GodGamer GodConsole 12:39, June 14, 2020 (UTC)

Supplementary info category

Thought -- what about a template that can be tagged on articles that would automatically put them into that category? -- sulfur (talk) 19:03, June 16, 2020 (UTC)

Ok, what did you have in mind? --Alan (talk) 19:05, June 16, 2020 (UTC)
Also, couldn't/shouldn't the recon stuff be done the same way then? --Alan (talk) 19:06, June 16, 2020 (UTC)

I haven't figured out quite what, but maybe something along the lines of the {{omid}} template... maybe have it simply spit out "This article was named based on supplementary resources" or something to that effect.

In the case of retcons, the retcon header could (in theory) push the article into the retcon category if it doesn't already. -- sulfur (talk) 19:08, June 16, 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, you know, I didn't think to check that. --Alan (talk) 19:09, June 16, 2020 (UTC)
But I think {{resource}} would be easy enough to remember. --Alan (talk) 19:21, June 16, 2020 (UTC)
Ah, that's it Category:Retconned material in background appear to still be manual adds as well. --Alan (talk) 19:26, June 16, 2020 (UTC)

I'll poke at them both tomorrow and see what I can spring up. -- sulfur (talk) 00:28, June 17, 2020 (UTC)

The reason the background retcon cat isn't templated is because I never found a sentence structure I liked for explaining the retcon that would work for "all" instances. This would be pretty easy though, since the suggested sentence would work and we can pipe in other info at the end. - Archduk3 04:14, June 17, 2020 (UTC)

Ravis - "Himanoid"?

Hi, can you explain the meaning of the change you made to the page for Ravis? You changed his species to say "Himanoid" which still redirects to the "Axum's Species" page. What do you mean by "Himanoid" and why did you list it as Ravis' species? --Yoviality (talk) 04:05, June 18, 2020 (UTC)

Ba'ku picture book

It looks like you were the original uploader of File:Baku bookpage.jpg; do you know off hand if it's from a Magazine, bonus features, or maybe The Secrets of Star Trek: Insurrection, to address the pna-cite? - AJ Halliwell (talk) 15:17, June 20, 2020 (UTC)

You got me. My initial assumption would have been the DVD special features. I can check my Secrets of Insurrection but i can't find it at the moment. --Alan (talk) 19:14, June 20, 2020 (UTC)

Look at the archive page next time

Your bizarre obsession over my talk page needs to stop; I have archived it in direct compliance with this site's policy. You have vandalized it repeatedly through what I must assume is some sort of agitation brought on by causes beyond my control. Log off and take a break until you can cool your jets, kid. NokiaTouchscreen (talk) 17:54, June 29, 2020 (UTC)

Actually it's your childish comments that are the problem....--Alan (talk) 18:08, June 29, 2020 (UTC)

Tessa Omond

Hello, since you added this information to Tessa Omond, I wanted to check with you about a potential typo. The bginfo contains the quote, "A striking woman in her late twenties is manning the shop – Tessa Omond." I'm guessing this is meant to say "ship", but I can't find the script online to check if it needs a sic tag instead. Thanks, ~Bobogoobo (talk) 14:15, July 6, 2020 (UTC)

Yes. And yes, even though Marayna‎'s species is a self link to Marayna‎ (which should be consistent MA, now, as of sometime here in the recent past), but there is a reason for doing that, and I have to find the explanation why (it's placed elsewhere), because I'm sure you're going to ask... --Alan (talk) 14:47, July 6, 2020 (UTC)

I wasn't going to ask, because "it's the way we do things" is sufficient in some cases on a site active since 2003, (don't get me started on the category naming scheme) but I would appreciate the enlightenment. ~Bobogoobo (talk) 15:06, July 6, 2020 (UTC)

I'm open to hearing your thoughts on cats, im not entirely thrilled on several aspects of where they went either. --Alan (talk) 15:30, July 6, 2020 (UTC)

It's redundant to include "Memory Alpha" in the name of a category because there's nothing for the name to conflict with, and makes their container categories harder to navigate (unless using sortkeys, although the names are still long). The most important part of a category's title certainly should not be in parentheses (every image category). Well, I guess I actually didn't have much to say, it's just that I keep bumping into those two that bug me. Most others seem good at a glance. I thought there was some overlapping categorization, but I just found that "Starfleet personnel" is not actually a descendant of "Individuals". I'm sure you and others have a different take on this, especially due to being more familiar with the wiki. ~Bobogoobo (talk) 16:13, July 6, 2020 (UTC)

All of the categories that start with "Memory Alpha" are meta or real-world categories, as opposed to in-universe. The "Memory Alpha" is really qualifier to signify that the cats aren't within the POV used for canon or in-universe information. -- Renegade54 (talk) 18:08, July 6, 2020 (UTC)

Yosemite redirect

Question: what was the reason for moving this to have the disambiguation tag and redirecting the base level over? Is there something I missed? -- sulfur (talk) 18:37, July 12, 2020 (UTC)

Well i had hoped "spoiler stuff" was satisfactorily cryptic, but the new LD preview video released today shows the name of one of the shuttles as the Yosemite...which would be the first natural title for that name.... otherwise it's just predoomsday prepper placeholder stuff.--Alan (talk) 20:26, July 12, 2020 (UTC)
Because you know the fly by night contributors who only show up when new stuff is released are going to screw something up when it happens. --Alan (talk) 20:30, July 12, 2020 (UTC)

Perfect -- I did miss something. I didn't realize that there was a new clip out. Heh. -- sulfur (talk) 22:22, July 12, 2020 (UTC)

Crossfield-class warp speed

If there is a refernce in DIS: "New Eden" regarding the top warp speed of the Discovery, please tell me where. As far as I can tell, there is not a single reference to that in the episode, and if you look in the edit history, the 'cited reference' was done by an IP with the comment "from dialog between Michael and Captain Pike at 5 minutes into S02E02 New Eden" - and in exactly this scene there only is a reference to maximum warp. As far as I can tell, the IP thought TOS-era maximum warp had to be Warp 7. Kind regards, 11:37, July 13, 2020 (UTC)

Badda-Bing, Badda-Bang Talk Page

Hey! I can't seem to be able to edit the episode's talk page. I ended up deleting everything by mistake and then I couldn't even revert it, but I wanted to ask: What kind of citation were we expected to have for a comment such as the one you deleted. | Pedronog (talk) 16:36, July 21, 2020 (UTC)

I guess intent vs. coincidence. --Alan (talk) 18:19, July 22, 2020 (UTC)


Why are you reverting my edits to the Organian page? In your edit summary you said they used pronouns. I don’t recall anyone ever using pronouns in either episode. And they are also glowing orbs, not humanoids. I even read the script of Errand of Mercy and they are never referred to as he by any character or by themselves. My edits were left alone for months and now you revert them so it seems there was a silent consensus which you disrupted. But I want to ask where these pronouns are supposedly used when I don’t recall them being used at all. And I don’t see how glowing magenta orbs would have the humanoid genders male and or female. Also don’t automatically revert every edit I made because you didn’t like one of them. I don’t like having all contributions erased with the press of a link “undo”. Also i put pure thought into quotes because it’s obviously a metaphor. Please revert your revert or at least explain in more detail. --Anonymous 1029384756 (talk) 18:04, July 22, 2020 (UTC)

Just because your recall is faulty doesn't mean you were thorough. The very simple fact that you cannot step outside of the lines and look at both perspectives is the problem here. Having the ability to take a form while still being a glowing orb doesn't mean something is still not 100% non-corporeal or that the form it took is corporeal, negating its otherwise non-corporeality. These are aliens, they have "powers", these powers allow them to do fantastic things you are obviously having difficulty grasping. In their humanoid form one referred to the other as "he". Otherwise, my reverts are based on facts, episode used terminology, not your metaphors. --Alan (talk) 18:15, July 22, 2020 (UTC)

I’m not referring to non corporeality, I’m referring to the fact that they aren’t humanoid. Also the Organians in TOS never referred to each other as he so you should remove the pronouns for the TOS Organians. EDIT: I read the script again and Treyfane was referred to as he. However, Ayelborne and Claymare were not referred to as he in the episode. Also, Trefayne was referred to as he when they had taken on the disguises of human males, so Ayelborne called Treyfane he because they didn’t want to give away their disguises as humanoid males. --Anonymous 1029384756 (talk) 18:29, July 22, 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I drifted off after the part where you said I was right, because everything else you said is pretty irrelevant, because we are not here to play the "what if" game, he simply could have changed his choice in words altogether, or even as "aliens" in general they didn't have to assume any gender whatsoever. And on, and on, and on, and on.... --Alan (talk) 19:09, July 22, 2020 (UTC)

Only Trefayne was called he, so the pronouns should be neutral for Ayelborne and Claymare. --Anonymous 1029384756 (talk) 16:04, July 24, 2020 (UTC)

Unless you can visually confirm the other two did not have penises, you should be treating the "he" as a blanket statement. --Alan (talk) 16:58, July 24, 2020 (UTC)


I only heard the Klingon language referred to as Klingonese was on TOS "Trouble with Tribbles". Worf never referred ro it as thatm The preceding unsigned comment was added by Scottp4185 (talk • contribs).

point being, that's the "official" article title for the language and "klingon", the term you linked, is the name of the species (click it and see). Alternatively "Klingon language" = "klingonese" but neither = a species itself. --Alan (talk) 14:29, July 26, 2020 (UTC)



PS this means that all our tabview stuff (mostly on movies?) is going to have to change out, since they're removing that "feature" -- sulfur (talk) 21:17, August 5, 2020 (UTC)

Image fixes

Thanks for fixing those images after me. It's too early in the morning to get 'em all straight sometimes. Heh. -- sulfur (talk) 12:36, August 6, 2020 (UTC)

NP. Should we be having that image of the Cerritos from "Envoys" up, if the episode hasn't aired yet? --Alan (talk) 12:42, August 6, 2020 (UTC)

I don't think so -- it was in the preview at the end of the episode, so I wanted to make sure it was tagged properly so that we could figure it out for sure.

P.S. Template talk:Pictured‎. -- sulfur (talk) 12:55, August 6, 2020 (UTC)

Janus + Enterprise crewman

You just made an edit to Janus VI colony personnel‎ mentioning that #5 had played an Enterprise crewman in another episode. Which crewman? It might be worth linking over to the specific one... -- sulfur (talk) 02:59, August 9, 2020 (UTC)

I couldn't find him in our stuff. I was just watching the episode on tv and caught the person in a scene and wanted to 'bookmark' the observation.--Alan (talk) 03:23, August 9, 2020 (UTC)

Hrm. Interesting. Looking at the actors we have in those other ones, might it be this guy? -- sulfur (talk) 03:26, August 9, 2020 (UTC)

Negative. He was in a green jumpsuit w/ black undershirt in the corridor during the GQ3 red alert scene at timestamp 33:54 on Netflix. You can see his forehead here over the right shoulder of the center guy that's turning to his left. (I've been computerless for 4 months so I can't do sceencaps atm.) --Alan (talk) 03:40, August 9, 2020 (UTC)
Found a poor but visible image here of him here (center/#3 of 5 seen), but he walks right past the camera, so that's how much better it could be. --Alan (talk) 04:13, August 9, 2020 (UTC)


Is the plan to move 'suspect (law)' to 'suspect'? -- sulfur (talk) 02:52, August 10, 2020 (UTC)

yes mom, just moving slowly fixing a bunch of other stuff along the way.--Alan (talk) 02:55, August 10, 2020 (UTC)

All sorted then. Just figured I'd bash some of the changes through to help it along :) -- sulfur (talk) 02:55, August 10, 2020 (UTC)

Removed talk page message

Hi. I see that the posting i made on the talk page for The Hunted was removed. ( I did not see any reason given as to why ... just that the removal was a "minor edit". Can you help me figure out why this was done / what I did wrong?

See MA:NOT. -- Sulfur (talk) 14:37, August 13, 2020 (UTC)

I read the ma:not prior to posting my above message and I still do not understand what the issue is. The preceding unsigned comment was added by Herb987 (talk • contribs).

Cross reference with MA:NIT --Alan (talk) 14:48, August 13, 2020 (UTC)

Ok so you're saying it was a nit-pick. That's fine. It would have been nice if that was indicated right off the bat "This is considered a nit-pick MA:NIT. Removing post." rather than just highlighting with the mouse, hitting the delete key and clicking save. That might have saved all this back and forth and some hurt feelings since I put a decent amount of work into that post only to have it disappear in a heartbeat.--Herb987 (talk) 14:56, August 13, 2020 (UTC)

I cannot assume to know what you may or may not know, but in a fraction of the time you spent building the case for your nitpicking, you could have also found that pretty much every episode talk page on MA is glory hole of removed nitpicks, including the talk page your contribution was added to. --Alan (talk) 15:41, August 13, 2020 (UTC)

New disambig page...

{{Main character non-appearances}}. I'm not a big fan of this one -- I think that it was better with the list to see other ones, because all of the disambig pages link back to it, and unless we want to add a disambig RD, then it gets a bit messy on the maintenance lists.

If we do want to keep it as a disambig, then it might be best to template the top text on these or something instead. Thoughts? -- Sulfur (talk) 03:51, August 14, 2020 (UTC)

Basically, what it was, was outdated as a list page, and what it is, put what it was into practical application because apparently it needs to exist, but otherwise serves no useful purpose other than a crutch for talk pages to link to.
Otherwise, the entire topic could be treated like the studio models by series pages, delete this page in question and use the template for navigation. [Specifically, there is a TNG studio models page, and no 'studio models' page, just an article on the general topic (studio model), which we obviously don't need an article defining and describing a non-appearance.--Alan (talk) 04:07, August 14, 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, I think that I much prefer the idea of a navigation template for these. Much cleaner. Best part is... the headers of each page can now be edited with {{non-appearances}}. -- Sulfur (talk) 04:12, August 14, 2020 (UTC)


Hi how are you do you. Like Tim hortons The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

Don't mind if I do. --Alan (talk) 12:04, August 19, 2020 (UTC)


I saw your comment when you renamed my image file of Cerritos and Merced. There is no need to get offensive about the way I name my files. I did not do it on purpose. I am doing my best, and I'm sorry if my best is not good enough. I name my files based on what comes to my mind and close to how you guys name them.

I'm not complaining, just to letting you know that whatever I do wrong is not on purpose. I am trying to follow your standards, and I know how to name image files. I make sure users on Disney Wiki give their image files clear headings before uploading them.--AlexJarrett242 (talk) 21:07, August 28, 2020 (UTC)

I will keep that in mind, but it seems different admins have different ways of doing things. Regardless, I apologize for being inconsiderate. - VaderFan01 (talk) 17:01, August 31, 2020 (UTC)

Mass Editing

Are you familiar with mass editing tools which you can add to your account and carry out simultaneous edits?--AlexJarrett242 (talk) 14:16, September 3, 2020 (UTC)

Not for non-bot accounts; but for my "bot", yes. I just don't carry my bot to work in in my pocket and don't use the automated stuff with my "user" account.--Alan (talk) 14:19, September 3, 2020 (UTC)

Dealing with the vandal

Thanks for that. I just wanted to read the article on the latest episode of Lower Decks, but it was vandalized to hell and back. Glad the vandal's gone now; didn't wanna end up in an ongoing edit war. Mainblaggery (talk) 22:52, September 3, 2020 (UTC)

...though I don't see the particular reason for deleting the episode page...? Mainblaggery (talk) 22:53, September 3, 2020 (UTC)

Extracting his vandalism--Alan (talk) 22:55, September 3, 2020 (UTC)
Ah, I see. Thanks for that. Mainblaggery (talk) 22:56, September 3, 2020 (UTC)


See how confusing that was? :P Thanks for fixing it. -- Renegade54 (talk) 15:43, September 10, 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, Rom was jealous and he kept trying to overstep (or assert) his authority over the newbie. --Alan (talk) 15:45, September 10, 2020 (UTC)

um how do i join the commintity

One or the other

On the page for Khwopa, I noticed that you removed the category: Planets. I checked other pages, ex. Earth and Vulcan and some others, where a planet was a homeworld and they have two categories: Planets and Homeworlds. Is there a change in the way we are categorizing locations which are both planets and homeworlds, and, if so, should these other pages be edited to reflect the new practice?--Memphis77 (talk) 04:55, September 27, 2020 (UTC)

Well, Homeworlds is already in Planets, so it is redundant to categorize a planet with both (as in we don't categorize the Enterprise-D in Federation Starships and Starships). The only exception to this is with Performers and (Series) Performers category. Nothing on the talk pages relating to the category suggest that's the intention. --Alan (talk) 12:23, September 27, 2020 (UTC)
Category:Homeworlds actually shouldn't be in planets though, or at least shouldn't only be in planets, as not all homeworlds are planets. I'm not a fan of this category for that reason, since it can't replace its parent category, and should actually probably be categorized in culture instead. - Archduk3 21:35, September 27, 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, it wasn't the best thought out decosion.--Alan (talk) 01:34, September 28, 2020 (UTC)

Defiant edit question

Hi! I was looking at the USS_Defiant_(2370) page, and saw this text you added on Jun 16 2020: 'xbv'

What does xbv mean? Is it just a typo?

Cheers, --Opkoad (talk) 20:16, September 27, 2020 (UTC)

Probably --Alan (talk) 01:34, September 28, 2020 (UTC)

Memory Alpha makeover

Have you and the administrators of this community ever considered giving Memory Alpha a major makeover? As far as I can remember, the look of this site has remained the same long before before I joined Fandom. If you were to upgrade the look of this site on a CSS coded scale I would personally go with the look of a TNG era computer display. That would be pretty cool. The idea occurred to me and thought one of you guys might be interested. I know one or two Wiki Managers who have some experience in CSS coding if you are interested in giving Memory Alpha a makeover. One of them is a good friend of mine. We used to be partners in creating different themes to celebrate movie releases on Disney Wiki before she retired from there.--AlexJarrett242 (talk) 18:21, October 3, 2020 (UTC)

Point of Light

I wanted you to also know I made a post on the talk page for the Point of Light article as we need to find and list the other unnamed Klingons and add them to the Unnamed Klingons article. --Anonymous 1029384756 (talk) 17:50, October 8, 2020 (UTC)

Just make the direct link, ie. Unnamed Klingons (23rd century)#House of Mogh representative, for now, they can be converted later, since that is the confusing part. --Alan (talk) 17:55, October 8, 2020 (UTC)

I meant the other Klingons in the high council who aren’t even in the unnamed Klingons article or this episodes article. --Anonymous 1029384756 (talk) 20:19, October 8, 2020 (UTC)


Are you or anyone else aware that the caption sections in the sidebars do not show up visible? Check the Bradward Boimler page for example. --AlexJarrett242 (talk) 18:37, October 8, 2020 (UTC)

I don't think they are supposed to on the character sidebars or starship sidebars, they are just mouse hover captions. --Alan (talk) 18:41, October 8, 2020 (UTC)

Other Unnamed Klingons From Point of Light

There are several unnamed Klingons from Point of light who are absent from the article “Unnamed Klingons (23rd century) and the article for the episode itself. Can this be fixed? --Anonymous 1029384756 (talk) 17:47, October 9, 2020 (UTC)


Regarding the recent question of mine what this "internal reference document" was listed as a source for the name "Pelians", your answer was simply "you should be one to talk about "mysterious" sources...."? It would be nice to know what for a problem you have with me. I know that it is not everyone's ability to accept others and their contributions but I am feeling attacked by your comments. Thanks for reading this. -- Tom (talk) 17:37, October 20, 2020 (UTC)

I could say the exact same thing. You make all sorts of contributions that come from various production sources that only you know, peppered throughout MA, that no one can verify, and people have somewhat blindly accepted that. Therefore, I have for a long time had the ability to trust and accept those contributions, hell, I've even gone out of my way a couple times to point certain pieces of information your way because they are things more in your wheelhouse than mine, in various forms of little peace offerings here and there. But still, you often come across quite rude to me, so be it, that's how I'll play.
So for one, you are certainly off the mark when you indicate I have an inability to accepts others and their contributions. I'm sorry I have expectations and standards for things from people when the information on how to do things is readily available for them to find. So yes, irritability comes with what has essentially become a job I'm not being paid for, a job based on a common goal where so much time is wasted going back fixing those things contributions of others that no one should be expected to accept. (That isn't directed at you, but it is the general vibe of why I come across the way I do.) And because you are not here as much, and when you are, you are working on your own things, I don't expect you understand the daily whatnot that go on in the upkeep around here.
Anyway, back to the point, you can understandably see why I might feel attacked by you leaving your own little comment about me (because you know I added it, or certainly have the ability to know who added) to verify my source that came from a production documentation that's just as mysterious and unaccessible to you as yours is to us, all I can do is wonder why you suddenly cannot accept others contributions when the positions are reversed... --Alan (talk) 11:57, October 21, 2020 (UTC)

You feel attacked by me? That was never my intention and you should know that. I was simply asking because I am curious what this document is? I don't wanna see it because I trust your contributions when you'll add such information. Again, I am just curious to hear about such a document fur further web searches etc. I know that some admins do the main work to keep this wiki running and I am not able to do such contributions. And yes, I've spent hundreds of euros/dollars over the last years to have hundreds of call sheets and other production sources here at my home what helps me to share these information here on MA where I create articles about the performers. This is my hobby, too. So no need to be rude in any comments, let us just share what we have in common, our hobby here on Memory Alpha. -- Tom (talk) 12:03, October 23, 2020 (UTC)

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