Memory Alpha
Memory Alpha



Log buoy

Looks like someone's messing around with MA. This article is meaningless. zsingaya 22:15, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure I can in this case. The following all link to the

So it either needs to be rewritten or redirect, perhaps condense the Log buoy, Data recorder and recorder marker into one? --Gvsualan 22:25, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)


GVSU wouldn't happen to be a reference to Grand Valley State University, would it? That's about a half-hour south of where I live. --Short Circuit 05:48, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yep, that's where I went to school. --Gvsualan 05:50, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)


Hi, if you want to control a bot, just drop me an email or read the pages linked from Bots -- Kobi - (Talk) 16:56, 27 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Resizing images

I'm grateful that you've resized the images I've uploaded. I'm pretty much a novice when it comes to editing pictures. Any tips for doing so, to avoid you having to clean up after me? Tough Little Ship 21:25, 27 Jul 2005 (UTC)

  • No big deal. The size of the files (space used) you have been uploading have been just fine, its just the size of the (viewable) image that seems a bit oversized. Basically I just do it with the standard MS Paint program that comes with my Win XP. Typically, I reduce the images to 80% their original size, but sometimes down to 60%, all depending on the degree of detail required to keep the images value. --Alan del Beccio 21:31, 27 Jul 2005 (UTC)
    • Thanks, I'll (hopefully) remember that in the future. Tough Little Ship 21:32, 27 Jul 2005 (UTC)

deep space nine

why did you remove the ds9 show info? the current page is a stub with a list. - 03:51, 28 Jul 2005 (UTC)

  • If you are referring to the removal of your Wikipedia import, it constituted a copyright violation, which was clearly discussed on the talk page and clearly stated in the summary field when the page was reverted. --Alan del Beccio 08:47, 28 Jul 2005 (UTC)
  • how is it a copyvio if wikipedia is free information? you are illogical sir.



Sorry about the violations,

I was not aware that Star and Paramount would have A problem with A fan-based website and information posted on these, though i should have known.

One thing I would like to know. Am I allowed to create an article in my own words based on findings on other websites? Since I don't have the DVD's (nor the money to buy them) in order to watch episodes and thus take notes. Yet, I would still like to contribute to this website.

Kind Regards,


  • As long as it is canon, and you don't copy the work of others, I suppose that wouldn't hurt. We don't need anyone coming after us accusing us of "stealing" their work. --Alan del Beccio 08:51, 28 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Irina Karlovassi

I apologize, thanks for fixing it. I don't know why that happened; I intended to add the pic I uploaded and a note about her being from the 20th century, I don't know why it blanked. - AJHalliwell 00:13, 29 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Production numbers

Quick question: when adding production numbers to the tables of episode articles, should it be posted numerically (i.e. 027, 028, 029 and so on) or the way the producers/studio labels them (i.e. 201, 202, 203 and so on)? --Shran 05:42, 29 Jul 2005 (UTC)

  • I'm not really sure, I suppose since it is "production number", it should be given the production numbers "(i.e. 201, 202, 203 and so on)". But I'm not sure if that would get confusing since the production number does not always correspond with the order of airing numbers "(i.e. 027, 028, 029 and so on)", that the articles are otherwise organized by. --Alan del Beccio 05:45, 29 Jul 2005 (UTC)
    • Ah, I see. I think if we wanted to be official, we should label the production numbers the way the studios labeled them (201, etc.), but for the sake of simplicity and clarity, I think we should update them to proper numerical form (027, 028, etc.). Thanks! --Shran 21:41, 2 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Thanks For The Welcome

Thanks For The Welcome To The Website... I look forward to making future contributions. Memory Alpha is a wonderful tech resource and I enjoy spending time studying the information on it. You have made wonderful contributions to the site as I can see. Very excellent work if I may say so... Keep up the good work. I'll see you around.


Yeah, I got it about the instant I hit the save page button to revert it. I was like, "I really don't believe his name is Harry John--- wait a minute!!!" :P --Shran 08:07, 3 Aug 2005 (UTC) I just did a boo-boo... now the dirty name is on the recent changes list... sorry! :( --Shran 08:09, 3 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Again, sorry about the whole name on the recent changes page thing. It's early morning and I'm not thinking straight :( --Shran 08:22, 3 Aug 2005 (UTC)

  • No prob, I got it straightened out, as I'm sure you've seen. --Alan del Beccio 08:33, 3 Aug 2005 (UTC)
    • Yeah, I know, that's why I felt I had to apologize again, since you had to delete the page then re-add it. --Shran 08:37, 3 Aug 2005 (UTC)


Hmmm... It said I had new messages, but they were about vandalism and blocking. Then I realized I wasn't even logged in! There have to be other cases of multiple people on the same IP - is it possible to prevent an address from anonymous editing? I'd support that since if I ask the "vandal" to stop you'll get ten times more in response... You know how it is. --Schrei 08:51, 3 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Re: hey...

(Re- hey harry) 
Harry, eh? You're not gonna let me forget that, are you? :þ Anyways, sorry about the humans article, all I did was changed an "a" to "an" (i.e. "an African-American", rather than "a African-American"). I'll go ahead and re-do it. --Shran, a.k.a. Harry 05:20, 4 Aug 2005 (UTC)



I couldn't type fast enough and then you already had disconnected. I only have the Concordance as reference. There it is stated under music - Welsh ballad: "Scotty dreamily sings in Welsh when he is supposed to be commanding the ship (The Lorelei Signal). Scotty hums the same tune when under the influence of Mudd's love potion (Mudd's passion)". --Jörg 22:17, 27 March 2006 (UTC)


Hope you're coming back soon, man. Catch ya later.

Oh, and put up an e-mail address, will ya? :P --From Andoria with Love 00:33, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

  • You got it, you had it and you emailed me at it. I'm leaving a link to my Wikipedia talk page (since I am on there almost daily) if people still want to get ahold of me.--Alan del Beccio 22:21, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Yeah, I realized I had it about a week after I posted the above. I wanted to wait a while to e-mail you, though, in case you had seen this. Didn't wanna come off as a pest, ya know? :-P --From Andoria with Love 12:09, 3 June 2006 (UTC)


Hey Alan! Cool to see you're back! :-) --Jörg 10:11, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

  • Sorta, but not really. Just thought I'd drop in to rattle a few cages. --Alan del Beccio 13:36, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Comic Covers

And he says this as I finish another batch of 5-6. heh. :)

There are 22 images left to shift into that subcategory. My next vague plan was to create the Biography cover one and shift the various bio books into that category. I think that there's one cover image that needs to stay where it is (the Klingon Hamlet one), and the rest are split between bios, magazines, and comics. Of course, we don't currently have a magazine subcategory, but that might be worth adding down the road. Go ahead and bot it though. That'll make life a bit easier. -- Sulfur 03:11, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

And as a further followup, it looks like the magazines are all considered "reference books". So I guess that we can shift those into that relevant category. -- Sulfur 03:14, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok, further update here, the images in Category:Memory Alpha images (covers) are all to go into the Category:Memory Alpha images (comic book covers) section now. There are (by my count right now) 20 images in there right now. -- Sulfur 02:44, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Image Categories

I've been (as you've noticed) playing with image category stuff over the last few days, and noticed something odd this morning. If you check Category:Memory Alpha images (insignia), you'll note that it is in the category of Category:Memory Alpha images, but in that super category, that particular subcategory isn't shown. The same holds for starships, planets, and individuals. I've checked all of the category pages, and they all seem to be correct to me to show up. I've also fixed it so that the Bolians and Ferengi categories are properly underneath the individuals category, but just can't figure out how to get things to show up properly in the main images catgory. Any clues as to what might be going on there? -- Sulfur 13:02, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

  • I can't tell. From what I see it should be there but its not. As I recall we had this difficulty before and it seemed to work itself out. --Alan del Beccio 13:25, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Found them. Not sure if this link'll work perfectly or not, but the 4 image subcategories that don't show up on the first page of Category:Memory Alpha images show up on the last page <removed> instead. Strange that. -- Sulfur 14:54, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

DelBeccio-bot strange behavior

DelBeccio-bot added an extra [[Category:Memory Alpha images]] to several images this morning.

  • around 90-100 others.

--Bp 20:39, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm guessing it didn't recognize the format of the existing Category tag: [[Category: Memory Alpha images]], with a space after the colon. -- Renegade54 21:17, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
Evidently. Either way its not really an issue.--Alan del Beccio 23:29, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Well you can just send the bot around to fix it again. I was just bringing it to your attention. --Bp 01:38, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

There really isnt anything to fix that would really be necessary. Having duplicate category insertions doesnt affect anything, nor should it be anything anyone has to go out of their way to fix. --Alan del Beccio 01:41, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm in a hostile mood tonight, could you tell? ;) In any case, his additions are obviously bogus and, even if they weren't, completely unnecessary. It's an obvious case of "Bermaga"-bashing. --From Andoria with Love 06:08, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Interwiki sorting

I noticed the sorting of interwikis is broken with your bot, see [1], [2] -- does your bot use the most recent (version 1.7, 2006-05-23)? -- Ⓚⓞⓑⓘ 10:33, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

No, Im using an older version. I was, however, not aware that my bot was doing interwiki. --Alan del Beccio 14:34, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Battle cruiser images

I uploaded some images of the interior of Kohlar's ship and of the D7 firing to User:Gvsualan/images saved for future projects, I also put a pic of the K't'inga from "Unification II" there, might be useful for the relevant article as well. Let me know if you need anything else. --Jörg 16:41, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I was able to place the Unification cruiser, in Unnamed K't'inga class starships. Any chance you could line up (cap) all the other ships from the "grave yard" so that they could be placed in their respective homes -- I'm attempting to do with unnamed starships like what was done with unnamed Romulans etc. --Alan del Beccio 20:58, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi Alan! I've assembled screenshots of the Qualor Depot scenes from Unification I+II. If you want, I can send them to you via e-mail and you can have a go.--Jörg 20:47, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I couldn't seem to get the file to download for some reason. But then again, I'm not using my own computer at the moment. If I get a chance Monday I will give it a try again. --Alan del Beccio 14:26, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

I can send it to you again, as a rar-file if you want, or you can come over to IRC and we can find another way ;-)--Jörg 14:30, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Its more than likely this computer. I'm fairly handicapped with it at the moment, hence why I am doing simple tasks at the moment. --Alan del Beccio 14:34, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Hey Alan! Did you manage to get the pics? --Jörg 22:32, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Yessir, I did. I do have one question: there are two Miranda's shown from different angles. Were they the same two ships in both shots, or four total ships, or it can't be determined? --Alan del Beccio 22:59, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Mhh, tough one, it could be the same two ships. The Enterprise is flying from the previous location of the T'pau to the location of the Tripoli between those shots, but then it tales position somewhere in the depot and plays dead. It would say that because in both shots a Batris-like ship is seen in close proximity of the two Mirandas, there's only two of them. --Jörg 23:15, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Image Sorting

The question I have then is... since a lot of these do require looking at the image to figure out what it is, how would the bot sort them? Would you want a list of images that would be, say "TOS novel covers", "insignia", etc? I'd be more than happy to continue going through the images and making notes of their names and categories for something like that. Just let me know what you need. -- Sulfur 14:10, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

I actually do it "manually" with the bot, that is I have to confirm each move, by selecting which subcategory it goes to. For example, I did the "Memory Alpha images (individuals)" to Humans, Romulans, Cardassians, etc. sub-categories all at once by having my screen open to Category:Memory Alpha images (individuals) page, and visually looked at the gallery, while I manipulated the bot from its' DOS-based program. The biggest advantage being that what the bot does doesnt appear on the recent changes screen unless you choose to see all bots. --Alan del Beccio 14:15, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Interesting (the way that it works that is). So, if I do give you a list of images to sort (so to speak), you'd have to walk through them all manually and do that? The reason I ask, is because I already have something of a list that I was working from, and I could just simply pass that along. After all, the Category:Memory Alpha images section does need a pretty hefty cleanup. There are lots of individuals, covers (well, very few of them now), insignia (ditto), and starships (amongst others) still in there that should be sorted into the subcategories for better use and all. -- Sulfur 14:20, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I've got a gallery of images that need sorting into categories. I've created a gallery of them at "User:Sulfur/Images to Sort". Probably not complete by any stretch, but should get a bunch more things sorted properly, and make the root category a bit easier to deal with as the individuals slowly get sorted properly too. If you could (when you've got time) hit these up with your bot so that it doesn't fill up the recent changes as I was doing before, that'd be fab. -- Sulfur 16:53, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Hello Gvsualan

Thank you for welcoming me to MA. I would like to say that All my life I wished for someone somewhere to put all things startrek on the net. MA did that. I would like to say thank you to everyone that had anything to do with its creation. Where else can you go after you just watched startrek to research what you just saw. How many times have I looked up something just cause for years i thought I was right but then I read only to prove I was wrong. I can now call myself a real trekie or trecker if you will. If you get the chance could you pop by my userpage and let me know what you think... It's Fan fiction but I like it. Thankx

Captain Wall::: 11:35, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Starfleet enlisted personnel

Thanks for categorizing them, I was going to ask you, but I didn't know if you were up to it or not. Unfortunately, it seems you categorized (at this moment) 37 under Category:Category:Starfleet enlisted personnel, but it should be easy to fix. Although you probably realized it by now, I just thought I'd give you the heads up in case.--Tim Thomason 21:54, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

image copyrights

You know, i got kind of an oddresponse last time i talked to User:Aholland a few weeks ago. he, in all his infinite wisdom, now believes that images from publications can be included in our database, based on his comic strip article. He had previously overridden my decision to include pages of the ST:TM that were featured onscreen, as he didnt feel the pages (and likely other behind-the-scenes sourced) pictures were "canon" enough. just to let you know, if we need to regroup after youve called the non-screenshot pictures into qustion at IFD -- Captain M.K.B. 23:22, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

  • I'm in agreement with you in regards of the ST:TM images, seeing that I took part in uploading (if not at one point scanning) those pictures myself. So far only the one scan has been found and posted (last I checked) for IFD. Other than that, I noticed Cid mention something of the sorts about using the 'Ships of the Line' calendar image of the 'Enterprise-J @ warp' because it came from "a product that people are supposed to pay money for" and that that is not "fair use".[3] Following that line of reasoning, I posted those other images scanned from similar sources for IFD due to similar (or potential) fair use issues. With that said, I would rather not see them go because many of those images are better than any screenshot we will ever see (i.e. Norway and Sabre classes). But since the hand has been dealt I figured we might as well put all the cards (questionable image sources) on the table and get this behind us. --Alan del Beccio 11:37, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Adding reviews to episode pages

I thought that it may be nice to write episode reviews, a little bit like on .

I would be happy to write reviews for all the episodes I own on DVD (TNG S4).

Would adding such reviews violate any existing rules or laws here?

Evangelis 21:48, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

  • In a way, yes. We are an encyclopedia, not a chat or forum website. Like wikipedia our articles should remain neutral. That is why we dont include nitpicks in our episode summaries. --Alan del Beccio 04:35, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

bot work

Would you be able to have your bot add template:real world to everone in the performers, writers, and production categories? -- Jaz talk 23:01, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Jaz and I were working on that. Eventually the bot Morn (I don't know who that belongs to) did it. Was done a few days ago ;-) --OuroborosCobra 03:17, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
that's Kobi's bot. --Alan del Beccio 03:23, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Re:deleting images

Hmmm... I thought that had already been taken care of, but you're right, I should have checked on it myself before deleting. I don't think this is the first time I've made this mistake... anyways, I don't the "what links here" link in the toolbox to the left works the same way for images, which list the linked pages on the bottom, so how can I find whether a deleted image page links to an article? --From Andoria with Love 04:07, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

  • I think you're speaking in tongues. --Alan del Beccio 04:14, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
With images... the list of pages which use particular image... is located at the bottom of an image's page. "What links here" doesn't work with images, at least not with me. So how can I find out what articles still have a deleted image on them? --From Andoria with Love 04:18, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
Um, click on the dead image link and it should say if anything is still linked to it. If it only gives you the option of editing the image page remove the &action=edit from the address bar and that should work. Then again, it is completely possible that is the only page that was not unlinked. --Alan del Beccio 04:26, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
"What links here" only works if you have a link to the image, rather than an inclusion -- go to - to see... User talk:Gvsualan will be in the "what links here" but Starfleet ranks will be in the "used by" column on the page part.. -- Captain M.K.B. 04:30, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
... or maybe not. is this a disabled feature? -- Captain M.K.B. 04:31, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
I think it only works on article pages showing images link to it. Otherwise the pages linked to images appear at the bottom of the image page under the


The following pages link to this file:


This is just what I was looking for! -- Captain M.K.B. 22:33, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Hot off the press too. --Alan del Beccio 22:34, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Maybe Stupid question?

Thanks for the welcome message.

I have a question. I cannot start or edit a page when i use the "edit this page" link at the top of each page. Every time i click this link, my browser asks me to save a file called index.php. the only way i can edit is if the article has an edit link attached to a subheading or if the "+" button is on top of the page like this one. As a result, i can't even make a user page. Can you help? --Captain MAJ 01:12, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

MA has been a bit buggy tonight, Captain MAJ's problem might be related. Bp and I have been having problems sporadically throughout the night. --OuroborosCobra 01:57, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
I have been having this problem on two different computers w/ different IPs for about two weeks. I can't post it in Ten forward for the same reasons listed above, as I would have to start a new thread. --Captain MAJ 11:39, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
well, starting a new thread is what one would normally do anyway...either way I'm not sure I understand your problem, since I have had no problem natigating this site on either Mozilla or IE. --Alan del Beccio 11:44, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
When I try to start a new thread or begin an article or do anything using the "edit this page" button at the top of the screen, the computer wants to open or save a file called index.php. If i do, nothing happens. It's very strange. --Captain MAJ 12:19, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
This may solve your problem - go to your Preferences (top right when signed in), select the Editing tab, then make sure that 'Use external editor by default' and 'Use external diff by default' are unchecked, ie, the box for those options is empty. People who have had the same thing on Wikipedia have been directed to that as a solution. -- Michael Warren | Talk 12:26, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
That works now. Thank's to all for the help, and look for my User page soon! --Captain MAJ 12:32, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Thumb and Px size

I thought that we didn't need PX sizes when an image was marked with thumb? That's why I removed them from the Unnamed Ferengi page. Is there a reason you put 'em back in? Did something change? -- Sulfur 02:40, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

  • Lists, unlike everyday articles, of unnamed characters have always been at 150px ever since we created the first (to my knowledge) unnamed species list-page (unnamed Romulans-- prior to the page's later disambiguation) last year-- actually 180px was used on many pages and those too eventually creeped down to 150px as well. The reason for this, aesthetically speaking, was to condense the size of the page (or individual entry) so that the images don't overtake the text, as there are, in many cases, very little supplimental text for the unnamed characters. Typically large image and small text equals large gaps between entries, which simply "looks" bad. --Alan del Beccio 02:59, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Works for me. I figured that I'd check to ensure that I hadn't missed something along the way before making any further thumb|px "fixes". -- Sulfur 03:04, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Uploading pre-existing images

No problem. BTW, this is a cool site! {{SUBST:User:Adamwankenobi/sig}} 03:45, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Possible issue on Shelby

There may be a possible issue forming with an anon on the Shelby article. He seems to be trying to enforce a wikipedia policy on us, even though we are not wikipedia. I have reverted twice, but I am not going to do anything else. It is possible I am wrong (although I am pretty sure I am not), and even if I am right, I don't want to be party to an edit war. As it is, I may already have done too much. I apologize if I have. --OuroborosCobra 05:28, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

  • I'm not sure it belongs there. As an encyclopedia, we really shouldn't be drawing a conclusion like the sentence in question draws. We stated Ron Moore's side of the issue, we stated Peter David's side of the issue and we threw the canon-ball in the court as well, thats all that it needs. In the end its up to the reader to decide. --Alan del Beccio 05:34, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
    • I feel that my last edits were a good compromise, but I'm always open to refinements. I still think its important to a). keep the two Shelbys separate and b). explain both Ron Moore's original intention and Ron Moore's later intention. There isn't a lot of need to use the article to explain the New Frontier side of this, except to note that it is what originated Ron Moore's later opinion, at the behest of Paramount Pictures. It is a significant example of off-screen sources influencing the decisions of the production.
    • Since I'm being accused personally (another user is sending various messages about "Captainmike is wrong" rather than "add my viewpoint into the article differently". He needs to work on submitting info rather than arguing it. I'm bowing out to allow others to work on it, this is called for by the protection policy. I shouldn't be involved anymore now thats its gone personal and i stopped the situation. I am doing this to prove that i can follow policy. -- Captain M.K.B. 05:11, 1 July 2006 (UTC)


Sorry about the spamming of creating things there. I created a couple of the dates, and then realized that it shoved October dates to the top 10-15 items on the wanted list. Doh. So, I figured better to create the entire bunch and clear them all off of the wanted list than otherwise. Regardless, we now have an entire month of the calendar dates done. -- Sulfur 03:20, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Learn to read.

Perhaps, if you're going to accuse someone of failing to start a discussion, you should check the relevant talk page before you embarrass yourself. I raised the issue in September 2005, and for 8 months no one offered response or reply. You might also notice that, after I restored my edit which had been reverted without explanation by another user, a fellow admin has since joined the discussion to agree with me and back up my edit.

Get your facts straight next time before you jump on an anonymous user and assume he's wrong simply because he hasn't bothered to register for an account. I'm restoring my edit once again, and I'll repeat this for you since you seem to be impaired: I've explained my edit. If you object to my reasons, then perhaps you should practice what you've preached and do exactly what I've done, exactly what you accused me of not doing — participate in a civil discussion on the talk page and attempt an intelligent argument.

  • I would thank you to change your tone and address me in a civil manner or I might take this as a personal attack. Regardless, you never signed your original comment, nor any of your other comments, its awefully hard to trace who says what and when with all this randomness...--Alan del Beccio 04:21, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Remind me again, why do we keep adding the welcome message to that anon's talk page? :P --From Andoria with Love 05:09, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Because we want to encourage users to register and not encourage users to blank their talk pages, the latter of which (I believe) we have a policy on. --Alan del Beccio 05:11, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Wil Wheaton article

Someone might want to delete some of the edit history from the Wil Wheaton article. There is some stuff there that should be removed. I might be making to big a deal out of this, but, it just doesn't seem to me like something we want in that edit history. --OuroborosCobra talk 05:30, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I appreciate your help!!

Thanks for helping me with me "Multi-spatial shield" article!! :D I am new to this sort of forum, and doing the post for the first time was really bad, I know. I have since added some pictures to the article. let me know what you think.

Thanks again,



Thanks for deleting "Talk:Multi-spatial shield", I forgot to put it up for immediate deletion along with "multi-spatial shield". --OuroborosCobra talk 22:20, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Unnamed ships

Hello, I noticed you working on the lists of unnamed starships and there is a lot of overlap when dealing with ships in fleets, mostly during the DS9 war. I wonder if it might be better to have pages for the fleets and links on the unknown ship pages back to the pages dealing with the particular fleets. Any thoughts? Jaf 03:52, 7 July 2006 (UTC)Jaf

Wow, I was actually hoping for an "'at a boy" when I saw the talk topic, but I was wrong. Anyway, it is always inevitable that there will be some overlap when dealing with multiple things appearing at once, however, the point of organizing the ships by class is to identify as many ships of a class (as mentioned in the "appearances" of said starship class page) in their own topic page. Redirecting users here, there and everywhere to see all of the appearances of all "unnamed Excelsior class starships" seems much easier when they are all together with their sister (class) ships, verses a mix-match with a little bit over here and a little bit over there. --Alan del Beccio 04:03, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Overlap is not inevitable on a wiki, just lazy. There is no reason that the information shouldn't be compiled in one place. Jaf 04:19, 7 July 2006 (UTC)Jaf

No, that is lazy. Lumping everything together robs those ships of their individuality. They should be (and are currently) treated as if they had their own names, and some of which, actually have details that fortify their individuality. Otherwise, what you suggest would be like removing all information from Star Trek Nemesis in the articles for the Intrepid, Valiant, Galaxy, Aires, Nova, Hood, and Archer and placing it solely in the Star Fleet Battle Group Omega. That robs those ships of their individuality just as much as it does from the unnamed starships that have been individualized. --Alan del Beccio 04:32, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm, how about the other way, create the fleet pages and direct the user back to the ships involved? Jaf 12:14, 7 July 2006 (UTC)Jaf


Is it okay if I restore the other previous revisions for some of the pages you deleted? Up until and excluding the vandalism, of course. --From Andoria with Love 19:26, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Actually most all of those that you just restored were edits made all within one minute of each other, so if there were 5 minor edits in 5 minutes i would restore just the last edit or only the edits that actually said something in the edit summary, otherwise it just takes up more space in the database to have 10 more revisions restored that only minute edits at best added as consequence of someone not using the "show preview"-- that is, if one remembers that each individual edit to a 10kb page duplicates that 10kb page each save, even if it is just one word change in the edit. --Alan del Beccio 19:33, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Oh, ok. I guess I should have gone with my first instinct and just waited for your answer (I thought you would have said "go ahead" :P). Shoulda known you had a good reason for it. I'll stop now, though. I'll remember that in the future. Sorry about the restores. --From Andoria with Love 19:35, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

I normally wouldn't add to an archived discussion, but I just saw that this discussion is being linked to, and it is just so wrong on so many levels. First, if a deleted edit can be restored in the first place, it obviously already has to be saved somewhere for restoration - meaning that restoring it won't alter the amount of database space used. Second, and I have seen this idea floating around several times already, I'm relatively sure that a minor edit to a 10KB page won't mean a duplication of all 10KB when saving. Third, and most important - even a minor edit is still an edit that needs to be attributed to the contributor who did that edit, so randomly deleting individual edits (non-vandalistic, no copyright infringement) from a page history should be a big "NO" for everyone. -- Cid Highwind 09:12, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Star Trek vs. Star Wars comment

Yo, Alan. Just a question regarding your comment on the Vfd regarding the Star Trek versus Star Wars page: I did initially remove the content of the article and moved the discussion at Vfd to Possible copyright infringements, but according to the user who posted it, material at Wookieepedia is under the GDFL copyright license. Since I have absolutely no clue about all the things which copyrights restrict, Does this mean it's still a copyvio here on MA? --From Andoria with Love 04:03, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Tret's Species

Re: i'm perfectly capable of fixing my own links after moving pages if I'm allowed to finish one job at a time

Yeah, but the problem initially arose as I was working through those and fixing the links in the first place to at least make them correct. When I started, you'd last done anything with those pages about 30 minutes before, so when I saw the broken links, I started to change them, and as I was doing so, that was when you starting moving the pages and changing them around. So, we ended up working at cross purposes for a few minutes there. -- Sulfur 02:31, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

As I said, when doing what I was doing, you can really only do one thing at a time, esp. when you are going back and getting quotes, screencaps, etc..and hence why it looks as if I am inactive at times. This stuff happens when you multi-task an entire episode and when you make contributions that go above and beyond the cosmetics. Also, my original point being: if I break links in a delete or page move I will correct them, it's all part of the job-- otherwise it become rather difficult to work when you get edit conflicts while doing site/page maintenance. --Alan del Beccio 02:39, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: Life span

Nice work on the Life span article! -- Renegade54 20:43, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Parodies page separation

Heya, Alan. Would you care to do the honors and split up the Star Trek parodies article as you suggested on the Vfd? I'm not 100% sure how to do it myself, and after last night, I dare not attempt it. But I do think splitting it up really is the best way to handle the increasing length of that article as well as the Star Wreck page. --From Andoria with Love 00:42, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

(Continuation from above) Actually, would it just be okay if the article was split up simply using copy and paste? If so, I can certainly do that, but if several merges are required, then I'll leave to you. --From Andoria with Love 22:58, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
I think cut and paste is fine in this case as long as the page remains a "hub" and as long as we are not deleting any history...have done similar stuff in disambiguating pages in the past, including Unnamed Romulans, etc. --Alan del Beccio 23:00, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Just for the record, i have already left one addition split off from the hub, via a disambiguative title -- "Star Trek parodies (Star Wreck)" seemed large enough to carry its own. -- Captain M.K.B. 23:03, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Re@Alan – Alrighty, I'll get on that then. Thanks! Re@Mike: Can't that be moved to Star Trek parodies (literature)? (reply on my talk page please) --From Andoria with Love 23:05, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Solar System Poster

Hi Alan! The Solar System Poster arrived today. If you are interested in what is depicted, join IRC or contact me per e-mail (the address is all over ex-astris-scientia). Just wanted to let you know ;-) --Jörg 19:43, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

IRC and I'll explain! ;-) --Jörg 23:27, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Re: Image citations, etc

That seems highly ungrateful! I went out of my way to provide this site with screencaps. It's the last time I'll be doing that, that's for sure! What's to stop you from adding the citations yourself if you see it as such a high priority - pure laziness? I'm no longer interested in Trek, anyway, and only continue to contribute here to help out without watching any of the old, boring series again. There are far more members of this site who are obviously interested in Trek and have more time in their days. Sorry, but I do neither. --Defiant 00:09, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

I know that laziness is hardly true of you. However, frankly, I couldn't think of any other reason why you didn't just add the image citation, etc. to the image yourself instead of making the extra step to contact me about it before the information was added to the image page, adding an additional step in proceedings and wasting time by doing that. Honestly, much of my above comment seems pretty silly - it's not the purpose of this site to provide users with gratitude, nor do I expect that (most of the time). I guess I was just tired, my apologies. Had I not been sleepy, I would not have been making such irrational statements and certainly would not have expected gratitude. I agree that you do go out of your way to provide valuable contributions to MA, keep up the good work. :) --Defiant 12:13, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Gas giant

Hey, Alan. Great job with the gas giant article. I was wondering when someone with the capabilities would step up and fix that up. That's one less pna to worry about, woo-hoo! Again, well done. :) --From Andoria with Love 23:30, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Scrolling lists

What is the purpose of the scrolling lists for appearances ? In my opion they are the perfect way to 'fuck-up' an article. (excuse the language) Personnally, I dislike to scroll within a page in which I am already scrolling, it makes reading an article very confusing. I compare this to like being forced to read a page fullscreen because someone thought that's what I would liked to do. An article reads much better without sub-frames in which you need to scroll to read its contents. Just my opinion. -- Q 13:43, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

First off, profanity of that sort is out of place on my talk page, and as well this site as a whole. With that said, simply put, scrolling lists help immensely in condensing space. It is equally unappealing to be forced to look at a ackwardly listed collection of episode names, especially when they take up a large chunk of the article. The alternative is to create a separate page, as was once done with the "list of Klingon appearances", after which, it was decided that having the scrolling list kept the list within the main article, and condensed the total space that was otherwise occupied by the list in question. --Alan del Beccio

Well, I personally like a balanced page (text, pictures, whatever) then one with scrolling lists in them. In my opinion those lists disrupt a page text flow and distracts the reader. Then again, if the communitiy has decided to use them who am I to contradict them. -- Q 17:21, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

We're moving away from the scrolling lists and towards the collapsible tree lists. See TNG recurring characters for an example, or Lorine Mendell. -- Renegade54 17:33, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Aha, that can be discussed elsewere ( not on Gvsualan's talk page because then he would probeably put his phaser on kill setting:) ) when necessary -- Q 17:00, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Background Information vs Behind the Scenes

So, with your latest edit on "Arena", are you intending to change all of the "Background Information" sections to "Behind the Scenes" now, or was that something of an accidental change? The reason I ask is because that episode kinda sorta stands out with different section titles now, and secondly, because changing something like that should be dealt with in a consensus form, no? -- Sulfur 11:51, 25 October 2006 (UTC)


Thanks, and hello

Wow, that was quick! I edited off and on at Wikipedia for at least six months before anyone noticed me. Thanks for the informational links; I'll look them over to see where (or if) they differ much from Wikipedia's. I probably won't be a regular here, though; I just happened to spot an error while looking something up, and I hate to edit anonymously... -- CWesling 00:20, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

I would also like to thank you for welcoming me aboard and also for the valuable tips. I'm slowly learning! Best wishes, Ol' Horta Face 00:50, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for welcoming me but I already have an account. Trueblue9999 21:58, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

FL 940

As others have noted, "Boy, you're quick." My self-imposed PNA was/is explained in the Talk page. Thanks for the help on my modest addition. As regards this message, though, I would just as lief as sent it personal. Ever heard of Gmail? Go Tigers ('07) and good luck on your midterms. --GNDN 06:47, 1 November 2006 (UTC)(Idiot MI Lawboy)

  • That is about the most gibberish in one swallow I have ever consumed. --Alan del Beccio 06:58, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Thanks, sport. --GNDN 07:15, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
  • I'll add this, though. Your comment about my "giberish" might have been heartfelt or sarcastic. Either way, it was unwarranted. I have a certain amount of knowlege of TOS that I am happy to share with this endeavor, subject to the Wiki constraints. What I have contributed has either been supported by on-screen evidence or submitted with self-admitted reservations. To receive a response such as "That is about the most gibberish in one swallow I have ever consumed," is both insulting (to me), and counterproductive (to MA). Perhaps, Mr. Del Becchio, you should consider linking to an off-site email account to prevent gibberish such as mine making it to the MA screens. As for MA, you might moderate your tone so as to avoid the numerous vandals (such as the recent AIDS situation). A great many people have been following Star Trek (and science fiction), for a some time. I, for one, appreciate your contributions. Others, though, might be so put-off or angered by your editorial that untoward comments are added to MA. We all could benefit from a curtailing of the less-than-necessary exhibition of your obvious rhteorical skills. --GNDN 07:33, 1 November 2006 (UTC) (That's right, I signed it).
Seriously, did you read what you first wrote me? What you said makes very little sense to me: "I would just as lief as sent it personal." Additionally, "Ever heard of Gmail? Go Tigers ('07) and good luck on your midterms." Where is this coming from? Finally, I really don't feel it is necessary to make a "public issue" (aka forum post) regarding a misunderstanding and or overreaction. Seems we could be a little more adult than that around here, considering vandalism has about zero to do with these topics and your forum post. --Alan del Beccio 08:09, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
Look at my submission at Ten Forward. If you would take the time to set up an e-mail address, this whole contretemps could have been avoided. As for the obvious Michigan references, maybe an adult could have surmised that these statements were made by one Michiganian to another whom made a point of his residency and educational staus on his user page. Once again, this matter would not be public if you had an e-mail account. Your edits were welcomed and warranted, sir; my comments on same were made necessary by your own choices. After al, you called me out. --GNDN 08:37, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
Here are some simple thoughts for next time. A) Request my email if you wish to talk to me personally, or request to talk on IRC, not start a pubic forum about how I am responsible for vandalism or how you misread my comments; B) I got the Tigers reference, but the Gmail thing and midterms is about totally random, because I really don't see a clear statement from you regarding your residency that would have made me go "ah!", nor am I even in college anymore; C) I still don't know what "I would just as lief as sent it personal" means. See my point? Gibberish. --Alan del Beccio 08:48, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

I wasn't clear on the meaning, either, so I looked it up: lief -- Renegade54 20:01, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Image uploads

Hi Alan. I hadn't really made that clear in my earlier description of the situation, so just for your info - contributors from other language versions can't control which version they want to upload an image to. As I understand it, one of the upload pages just works as expected while the other one uploads any image to "en", without giving the contributor any way to choose. So, asking those contributors to take care of where they upload might be a little misleading to them... -- Cid Highwind 00:11, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

So once they upload it, can they tell where it went? --Alan del Beccio 00:45, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

I guess they are redirected to the english image description page in that case - but I'll get back to you if I know for sure. If that's the case, though, it might still not help someone who doesn't speak a word of english. By the way, this seems to be one of the top priority things to fix at the moment, so I hope we won't have this problem much longer. -- Cid Highwind 10:42, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

In which case can we just immediately delete images that have quite clearly come across the language barrier? --Alan del Beccio 23:24, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

I've got no problem with that, personally, unless one of those images happens to be so good that we really want to keep it - unlikely, though. ;) Most of the images would just end up as orphans, anyway. -- Cid Highwind 23:35, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Ahem, the proble is the "miniupload" image upload page that one gets by clicking the "Insert Image" button on the edit page near the toolbar. It is hard coded to always POST to "/wiki/Special:MiniUpload". Unlike the normal image upload page, when the miniuplad is finished it simply closes the popup and adds the image wiki code to the page the user is editing. When the user clicks Save or Preview, it looks like the image upload failed to work on other language versions, the image is there but it is red linked. There is no obvious sign to an MA/de user, who is ignorant of the problem, that the image has been uploaded to MA/en. I think the users might believe that this is how it is supposed to work, that the link only produces the code and they still have to click the red link, which takes them to a normal upload page, to upload the image. Or something. --Bp 03:25, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia message

Hi, Alan. I have received a message on my talk page at Wikipedia from someone using the name "Alan Del Beccio". However, for one, you already have an accoutn there as gvsualan, and two, the "d" in your name is lower-case, so I am assuming the person who sent me this message is an imposter. However, I need you to verify that it wasn't you before he is banned. --From Andoria with Love 08:43, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

  • No, that definitely wasn't me. I have the same user name across the board. --Alan del Beccio 16:54, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Alrighty then, sannse took care of it. :) --From Andoria with Love 17:41, 20 November 2006 (UTC)


There aren't many of us who'd admit to III Search for Spock being a favorite. I actually sat through it a second time when I went to see it in release. LLaP, Kojiro Vance | Talk 18:01, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Linking to anon user contributions

Just thought I would pass on a trick I have. I noticed you creating links to an anon's user contributions by using an external link. You can actually do it with an internal one, if you would like. Rather than:

[ User:123.456.789.012]

You can use:


Just makes things shorter, and keeps it an internal link. I don't know that either of those really matter, but at least now you know that there is another way to do it (assuming you did not already know, if you did and are using an external for another reason, feel free to disregard). --OuroborosCobra talk 15:51, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Talk page indentation

May I ask which way of indentation you are trying to change discussions to? :) For example, you made this edit earlier, after which my comments were using at least three different levels of indentation (0, 1, 4) instead of the one (1) before. It's suggested that every participant in a discussion uses one and the same level of indentation throughout, and that new comments are always added to the end. This makes it easy to follow discussions both chronologically (vertical) and by participant (horizontal). I think we were using this style for the last few years... -- Cid Highwind 03:50, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

bot stuff

I'm not sure what happened when you left IRC, but here are the remaining steps:

  • create a file "" with this content:
mylang = 'en'
family = 'memoryalpha'
usernames['memoryalpha']['en'] = 'DelBeccio-bot'
  • run ""

Then everything should be operational. Anyway, I'm leaving for a while. Later. --Bp 21:51, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm getting a "wrong password?" error for some reason. --Alan del Beccio 22:36, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Category you suggested

Category talk:Media companies seems to have support. -- Cid Highwind 13:34, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm tryin'

I'm really trying to get the hang of doing the proper wiki-ing of images. I got it mostly right, right? --Babaganoosh 06:17, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Tube Grubs

Thanks for that redirect...I had made "tube grub" before noticing "tube grubS," don't ask me how I whiffed on that one...I was figuring out the code for "#REDIRECT ENTRY" right when you did it...but, thanks. – Lotus000 07:53, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

  • I moved the page history, which automatically turned your page into a redirect. Otherwise, for future reference, the general rule of thumb for article titles is in the singular, rather than plural. There are very few exceptions to this, but most notably, "list of" articles are in plural, example Federation starships is a "list of Federation starships." --Alan del Beccio 08:02, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the tip. I'm (very obviously) new to MA and am still attempting to learn all the subtleties. Would you care to let me have your e-mail so I can ask you a few questions that you could answer when you have time, so as not to clog up your talk page? Thanks... my e-mail is wjcherry[at]
Simple: this username at hotmail. --Alan del Beccio 21:17, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Well it's obvious from the CoCo NoNo debacle that I have yet to master the I'm going to hang myself...thanks again, though! – Lotus000 04:47, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Your bot

I've noticed your bot has appended several notices to the bottom of pages (i.e. [4]) - are these intentional and supposed to be left there? Mafeu 21:47, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Something is wrong with the Special:Export feature. Wikia is currently looking into that, but apparently there is a bug in the new sitenotice feature. --Alan del Beccio 21:51, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
User:DYKBot has over 1300 contributions like that today...I have far less. --Alan del Beccio 21:53, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
I see. So if I see any I'm OK to remove them? Mafeu 22:08, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
I think it would be better to leave it and let the bot fix it's own mistakes. --Bp 22:10, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Law / Crime and punishment

Ok, I think I have a pretty good starting point for the list you suggested at User:Renegade54/Crime and punishment. Take a look when you get a chance, if you would, and make any changes or notes or whatever that you feel appropriate. I think everything on that page could/should fall under a category of Law somewhere, and most (if not all) of the stuff at the top under a subcat of Crime and punishment. I'm not exactly settled on some of the stuff in the middle as far as where it should fall, either under Crime and punishment, directly under Law, or under one or more other subcategories under Law. Let me know what you think. Thanks! -- Renegade54 23:40, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Pic policy

See here. 01:43, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

That is not a policy, it is a statement based on someone's observation, that is in no way established in fact. --Alan del Beccio 01:49, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Meh. Still, wouldn't it make sense to standardise things. As it stands, Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Uhura and Sulu all have the arrangement of a photo from this last appearance at the top of the sidebar and then an early one at the bottom; Scotty and Chekov were the only different ones. 01:54, 10 March 2007 (UTC) Thinking about it, I'd probably be inclined to standardise the other way - have each begin wit a picture from TOS, as it's the most iconic image for each. 01:55, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

My thoughts exactly, on the latter point. Why would we want to see a dried up old shriveled McCoy from a 30 sec guest shot as the primary image of the McCoy page versus the ~80 other appearances he made in his iconic "prime"? --`Alan del Beccio 01:58, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

OK, I'm going to give that a go and see what happens. 02:03, 10 March 2007 (UTC) I'm going to add the older pictures of Chekov and Scotty at the bottom of their sidebars, to match the rest now. Madred 02:22, 10 March 2007 (UTC)


Why is it iritating that every time someone makes an article that has been in the wanted list for weeks, that Sulfur or you jump in there and make a total rewrite?? I mean really you can just tell somone if what they have written is bad or poorly done, and then they might correct it, and if they don't, THEN jump in and rewrite! But no, you like to go in and thrash the work of others just so you can claim the work as "yours"! I suppose its fair since the idea of any Wiki is to add information to the internet as a source for facts, but really how are people like me ever going to be able to improve if some people are always "fixing" the articles we start? I just needed to say that.42bens 18:26, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't know why you find that irritating, but this is a wiki. You can do the same to others' work if you find it poorly written or not formatted correctly. Gvsualan and Sulfur are just rewriting pages for their amusement and the enjoyment of others, the same reason you are writing them. They understand that the work doesn't belong to them, you, or anyone other than the site itself. I doubt they would re-write an article unless it was necessary, but your contributions (the fact that you created the article) are still recorded in the history and they can't "claim" that.--Tim Thomason 18:35, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Thank you Tim. And I'm just guessing here, but I believe this discussion roots to my rewrite of Operation Lovely Angel. The reason for that rewrite was because it was not written in the proper point of view. Additionally, please take note of the notice located about an inch below your edit box when you are editing: "Please note that all contributions to Memory Alpha are considered to be released under Memory Alpha's Creative Commons License. If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then don't submit it here." --Alan del Beccio 18:46, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

FINE! I overreacted and I was wrong but still just because I suck at writing and deserve to have the things I start to be "edited mercilessly and redistributed at will". Do what you will and rewrite it for the good of the trekkers. But really that rewrite did make me feel a little down because what it said to me was, "Man, you really can't write for a wiki, can you!?" I can see that I will never accually have a shot at writing anything more than low class stubs so I give up tring to get you to see it from my view. Maybe Sulfer is the more annoying one. Oh and Tim, I know that the fact that I started an article is always there, but after it is rewriten to a point where it no longer looks like what it started as, I can no longer feel it is my article. Of course I know the article does not belong to me or anyone else, but I would just like to have some article at some time be mostly my work, and not have it be a stub. 42bens 03:50, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

It's not you, so don't let that get you down. I've written my share of articles that have been massively rewritten, and likewise, I have massively rewritten subpar articles. Perfection is not required. I highly suggest reading that link. --Alan del Beccio 03:58, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I understand and see that the article is correct. I just wish I could figure out how to do all this the right way. 42bens 04:10, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Most people don't pick up on it right away. It takes time. I've been on MA for 2 1/2 years and have over 45,000 contributions, you've been here barely 2 months and have made only 68 contributions. Perhaps this or this might help. --Alan del Beccio 04:15, 11 March 2007 (UTC)



oh man that is so much better. Deevolution 05:19, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I thought it matched the TWoK image you uploaded earlier. In fact, I had that exact image lined up to upload myself, but you beat me to it. --Alan del Beccio 05:24, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

i am now attempting to clean up this type 2 phaser article...unless you had that in mind yourself... Deevolution 05:35, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

No, not at all. I'm about to head off for the night. --Alan del Beccio 05:37, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Discussion on article

In our recent argument about the year 1996, I feel you didn't answer one of my complaints. You said that I didn't participate in discussions on my additions. I replied that I am not informed when these discussions take place. Could we have something in place where I could be notified so that I can answer any questions?--Airtram3 03:39, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

I personally check pages that I have worked on recently in the recent changes to note any differences and so forth, they are easy to pick out (if you don't clear you cache) because, on my browser, they appear the color that represents visited links. Otherwise, I feel you didn't respond to the facts regarding the Star Trek Chronology, which I feel you are rather mislead about, and use inaccurately in your arguments and explainations. --Alan del Beccio 22:32, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

USS Copernicus

I have read your comments on this ship. Before jumping the boat and saying categorically the ship in Earth Spacedock is the Copernicus, don't you think it would have been prudent to see if the model had changed its registry by requesting Jorg to obtain scans of the model in its next appearance in (TNG: "The Naked Now")? Or have you forgotten the time when I made a similiar claim for the Oberth-class starship in "The Drumhead" to be categorically the USS Cochrane and how you nailed my ass to the wall stating unless there was actual proof (name in dialogue, a visible registry, etc.) then I had no right to make this declaration? Tread softly, my dear boy, for I have a long memory.--Airtram3 00:10, 5 April 2007 (UTC)


Yeah, I know. I was, in fact, working on restoring it when you did at the same time! Sorry about that! --leandar 13:25, 12 April 2007 (UTC)


Are you going to bot change the others as well? ----Willie 18:45, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Energize (CCG) should also be changed. I don't know how to move a page (if I even can). Wondering if you could help. Thanks! ----Willie 18:47, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Should be a tab at the top of the screen that says "move". --Alan del Beccio 18:59, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I saw it after I asked. I should probably look at the whole page before asking questions. Also, I will fix all the red links on my Roster page and on the CCG page. Thanks again. ----Willie 19:01, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

recent ban

Just to let you know what you might be in for, Memory Beta recently had to take a community vote to perma-ban a user (named VortaExpert) who insisted on frequent blankings, adding his own fan fiction or inappropriate sexual content to Kilana, Yelgrun, Leck, Weyoun and creating a bogus nomination (and disrupting my ascension vote) in Nominations for Adminship.

Sound familiar? -- Captain MKB 13:28, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Oh yah, we knew. Way ahead of you ;) -- Sulfur 14:23, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Shran, 2153.jpg

do you think you can unblock this so it can be replaced with a screen shot? Deevolution 23:16, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Done. it's beena while, so we'll see how it goes :) -- Sulfur 23:44, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
thanks! Deevolution 01:34, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome message. I'm sure it will help me a lot. Live Long and Prosper!--Windu223 21:02, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Response from Noman

Your comments are noted and appreciated. I will attempt to follow them. As to you question concerning Transwarp Humans: I most certainly know that Janeway and Paris were transwarp humans. I stated so in the article I wrote. ("The first two humans to experience this transformation were Tom Paris and Kathryn Janeway"). Are you aware that the transwarp humans listed as characters in the episode as uncredited, Cindy Sorenson as transwarp Human #1 and Susan Rossitto as transwarp Human #2 are different individuals. They were the offspring of Paris and Janeway and therefore transwarp humans. That is why I did the article. Maybe I was not clear enough, which was my fault. Again thank you for your critique. I have copied your points and will use them as further reference.

Now I have a question for you, since I assume your are an administrator. I have actually made contributions to thousands of articles under various ip #s before I logged on as Noman. I can't understand why there are so many fill in the blanks that no one completes, that is why I have started to fill in the blanks, along with expanding hundreds of character articles that were very skimpy. There are many articles that I have written, that need pictures, but no one has added them. I have written in a few discussion pages about various characters and received no opinions or answers. Could I possibly give you this list of pictures that are needed and also the discussions pages. Again, very nice to converse with you. Noman 14:28, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Pictures can be requested on the page Memory Alpha:Requested pictures. -- Renegade54 18:35, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Worf being XO

That whole bit about his promotion and being made XO is non-canon. It is from the novel Resistance, and is already in the apocrypha section of the article. --OuroborosCobra talk 22:43, 4 May 2007 (UTC)


I understand, link to unnamed bolians. OK,ok. See rudeness returns. Oh, by the way, Aquarius, linked it to Unnamed Deep Space 9 personnel. Caretaker is a Voyager episode, so shouldn't it be linked to unnamed Bolians, or was she seen when Voyager was at Deep Space 9. User: 18:35, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Double persons

Hi! sorry, I saw it too late. You've changed the section for the Unnamed Eart Starfleet personnel and removed Ator Tamras. Then we should delete many more... – Tom 16:49, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, please. Unless there is a reasonable doubt, it would make most sense to keep characters together by actor. --Alan 16:53, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Transwarp Gate article in Armada

Newbie here. Not even sure if I'm doing this right, but would appreciate schooling if I'm not. Just checking to see if it was Gvsualan who merged my Transwarp Gate article with Star Trek: Armada and to thank him. Nice to know my first contribution found a good place to live.

Also, the image file I uploaded for use with the article needs help, as in citing the source and proper copyright law for fair use. Can anyone help me figure out how to do that? Many thanks. --Arthor 20:28, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, non-canon people, places and objects, from novels or video games, or rpgs are placed in article that subject originates from...making it its own self-contained reference, and not it's one articles. As for proper citation, I'm not sure off the top of my head, probably best to check how the other images from the game are cited and mimic that. --Alan 22:27, 21 May 2007 (UTC)


Thank you very much for your help on that Jeri Ryan image copyright issue and other matters. I greatly appreciate it. – Orr6000 19:01, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Maintenance Request

Hello, there. Would you mind cleaning up some images I uploaded. Geez, I hope Deevolution is not mad at me, but I updated the image he posted of Kate Mulgrew. I don't know what happened, but it did not go well. The file is Kate Mulgrew.jpg (note: there is another file, KateMulgrew.jpg, please don't do anything on that one.) Can you revert that file, Kate_Mulgrew.jpg back to the original B/W image that Deevolution uploaded. Most kind.– Orr6000 23:42, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Quick wiki training tip. You can actually revert images yourself by clicking on the "rev" link located next to the image you wish to go back to. To double check you image is the right one, you can click on the date/time link and should take you to a new screen showing that image. Additionally, if the main image does not change, you may wish to press the Ctrl and F5 keys together to refresh the image. If, for some reason, that does not work, it may have to do with the server, and you might have to wait a few hours for the image to correct itself.

Thanks for the tip. Now consider this, please. I uploaded an updated image of Michael_Dorn.jpg. The page I got it from has NO COPYRIGHT NOTICE RESTRICTING IMAGE USE. So, I figure it is okay to use it. Secondly, before I remembered the CTRL+F5 command, I uploaded the file as MichaelDorn. jpg, as a new upload. VERY SORRY! Now that I know how to force an image refresh once done, I shall not do that again. It clutters the server with uneccessary stuff. So...*Sheepish look*...mind cleaning it off, as well as my earlier upgrade attempts. Thanks again.– Orr6000 16:36, 26 May 2007 (UTC)


Congratulations on reaching 50,000 edits! A milestone, indeed. :)

Enjoy your shore leave, and bring me back one of those bare-chested 18-year-olds, will ya? ;) --From Andoria with Love 04:32, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

What the hell are you talking about, ya freak? Been sneaking into mommy meds again, eh? What did I tell you about it? Ask first. --Alan 22:16, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you!

I may not be the best speller and sometimes my dyslexia gets the best of me but I thank you for fixing my spelling errors in the episode I recently edited. Maybe in time, I will get better. Editor3000 01:56, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

You know, I think to help with my spelling issue, I will do my summary in a program with spell correction like, Microsoft Office: Word, then copy and paste! Editor3000 02:19, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Unproduced Episodes

I enjoy reading your "Unproduced Episodes" article, doubly so since you often use my work as a reference. I've posted a lot of new material gleaned from early scripts and story outlines recently, including a pretty detailed beat-per-beat synopsis of Gene Roddenberry's "Trekless" pilot script for "Assignment: Earth." as well as an early draft of the Art Wallace/Roddenberry aired version of "A:E" Feel free to make use of it as you see fit. I could add it all, but since you consider it your "pet project," I'll stand clear. There's new stuff at the "Origins" section on the same site as well.Sir Rhosis 23:14, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

No, no, by far, do with it what you want or can-- as you can see I haven't worked on it in a while. The TNG episodes will likely be my "primary focus," and with you being the primary-secondary source for the TOS information, it would almost make more sense for you to do it, and believe me, I'd be more than happy if you worked on it. --Alan 23:17, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Cool. Sir Rhosis 23:29, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Image used in MA/de

Talking about your edit <removed> removing the note that this image is used in the MA/de:

I don't know whether you even noticed, but since the last update every image uploaded in the MA/en can be used in the MA/de (and the other versions, too) without uploading it there, directly from your database. I left this note only to show, that this happened, but I guess I should have talked about it befor (honestly, I added the note to start bring up the topic). In the moment we are still discussing how to use this new feature (here, if this helps), and Cid has even told us, that that won't change the behavior of the MA/en's users. I understand that you are not very interested in that, and I guess notes like this won't be necessary, but I think I should inform at least one of the admins here (you are the chosen one!). We created a category with the used images in (here) if you wat to know, which images are used.

So don't change the way you work and don't expect more links to other MA versions, I won't add more, simply feel informed and please ignore my horrible English--Bravomike 21:56, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

My talk page

Uh, is there a reason why I can't do an interwiki redirect on my talk page, because everybody keeps reverting it. I understand it doesn't work, but I prefer it that way. {{SUBST:User:Supergeeky1/signature}} 22:55, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Well for one, you weren't logged it, and that could be perceived as vandalism. Secondly, any discussions about MA should be held on MA, not on another wiki's talk page. --Alan 23:15, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Ah, my apologies. I didn't realize I wasn't logged in, I've been gone for a long time, so it didn't even hit me. {{SUBST:User:Supergeeky1/signature}} 03:52, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

What to do??

I am confused. Before uploading images for my episode reviews, I check the episode images page to ensure that I do not upload anything that is already there. I did not see any Seven-of-Nine_Torrot image. How was I supposed to know that it was uploaded already? Is a contributor expected to peruse every single image on the site to make sure he does not upload one that is already present?– Orr6000 23:41, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Just check the image category page by episode, it requires a very small degree of "preusing". Just click on any image from the episode in question, generally there is one on the episode page, click on the image-episode category link at the bottom of the page, and it would more than likely show you every image linked to the episode in question. --Alan 00:52, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome

Hey Alan, thanks for the welcome mat! I'm looking forward to editing; fortunately I've notice a lot of similarities to Wikipedia, so I don't think it'll be too terrible hard for me to get into the swing of things. Thanks again, --Milton Stanley 03:07, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Hawkins in MA/de

Hi, why did you move "Hawkins" tho "Hawkins (Begriffsklärung)" and made it a redirect to "Hawkins (Botschafter)". In my eyes this is not very usefull, because both Hawkins are not very known, but especially the ambassedor ist not more known than the MACO.--Bravomike 17:47, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Because MACO Hawkins has a first initial, therefore is F. Hawkins, and doesn't need the (Corporal) qualifier, which opens up Hawkins to be replaced with the only remaining qualified name "Hawkins (Ambassador)", but since I am not an admin over there, I could not make the necessary changes properly. See: Hawkins, "Hawkins (disambiguation)", F. Hawkins. --Alan 17:52, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

OK, but still the two Hawkins are both very minor characters, and the ambassador is not the first I think of when linking Hawkins. So in my opinion Hawkins should stay a disambiguation-page. I will start a disussion on this in the MA/de to find a solution there, but IMO "Hawkins" should stay a disambiguation-page, so I will revert this changes, but thanks for giving the F.-initial for the MACO, it helps (but doesn't change the situation)--Bravomike 18:00, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Forget my last comment, your plan got already finished by Kobi, so I will let it be.--Bravomike 18:02, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I was going to say, what you suggested is not the proper way to use disambiguation pages. "Hawkins (Ambassador)" is the only "natural" title that uses the name Hawkins, both Willie Hawkins and F. Hawkins have their own distinguishing qualifiers "F" and "Willie" that sets them apart from "plain, no-given-name/initial" Hawkins, but just in case, as I did on the en/Hawkins, I linked to Hawkins (disambiguation). Otherwise, Corporal minor? He made several appearances, and had lines, that easily trumps the Ambassador, who was just a namedrop. --Alan 18:07, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

You are perfectly right, corporal hawkins is a much more important character than the ambassador, but that is the reason for me wanting a disambiguation-page under "Hawkins", because most links on this page would not aim on the ambassador, but I surrender ;) The way it is now ("Hawkins" now is the article about the ambassador, from it you find the disambituation-page, it is like here in the MA/en) is OK. (In the end I think it is better like this, too)--Bravomike 18:32, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

There may be a similar change with "Ryan (Corporal)" and the "Ryan" page as well, I think I just found his first initial too. --Alan 18:34, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

would be great, the more we know the better it is. Let us know when you can confirm it--Bravomike 18:42, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the "R.", I did the other changes when I saw it--Bravomike 19:32, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

This is Ensign Q

Yeah, I'm already registered. This is Ensign Q. 16:59, 12 July 2007 (UTC) (Ensign Q)

So sign in, it makes associating comments with users a little easier for the rest of us. --Alan 17:01, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
OK, and please don't delete the Nebula Melbourne article!! Ensign q 17:13, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Dark Frontier...OUCH!!! *laughs*

You mean I spent two days doing all that work for nothing?! OUCH!!!! *Snickers and sighs heavily* Well... thanks for telling me. Feel free to revert the Dark Frontier article to what it was before. I do not think you will want to merge the two together...that would be way too long. OUCH! DAMMIT, MAN! *laughs*– Orr6000 21:08, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Just a tip: we've pretty much had the episode page titles accurately established for the past 3 years. --Alan 21:17, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

I have been watching Voyager on Spike. They split it in two : Opening Credits, First Part, End Credits, Opening Credits, Second Part, End Credits. SO I thought it was a two-part episode. I could put what I was calling Part II together with Part I on the page, but it would be quite long: nearly 70 K. Should I?– Orr6000 23:03, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

I have been watching Voyager on Spike. They split it in two : Opening Credits, First Part, End Credits, Opening Credits, Second Part, End Credits. SO I thought it was a two-part episode. I could put what I was calling Part II together with Part I on the page, but it would be quite long: nearly 70 K. Should I?– Orr6000 23:05, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Together they are technically one episode, as was "Way of the Warrior", and several pilots and finales. That is how we treat them here. --Alan 23:08, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

OK. But should I put them together to form one summary in the page, given how long it would be? Is there a limit on page length?– Orr6000 23:16, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Since it was technically one episode, yes they would go together. Also bare in mind that there is probably some information missing from your two-part version of the summary and portions were most likely cut for syndication from the original feature length version. – Alan 23:24, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Hey Alan

Hooray! And thanks for the welcome message. And cheers. And hooray! Jenningshall 05:11, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Thundercats wiki

I know this isn't a Trek related thing, though I'm a huge fan, but I found your Thundercats wiki and I've actually started one of my own with some other members of the fandom. Thunderpedia Our goal is to be the most accurate and complete site possible. We have several connections to people who used to work on the show and comics including writers, artists and the man behind the voice of Lion-O, Larry Kenny. I noticed that yours hasn't been worked on in a while. Are you not going to finish it or are you just taking care of things here first? If you like we can join forces and work on Thunderpedia together. Either way I would like to use some of the images you have up. Please feel free to email me at

Thanks for your consideration - Omicron from Thunderpedia and


I was sorting out the error as you were making your edits. I know how it is with new users, so I take no offense. I appreciate the work that has gone into this site and hope that there are some things that still need to be done.

I'll take a look at the project pages and see what seems to be the main work items. -Mak 20:07, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

SSN info, link?

Hi Alan. You changed the birthdate of William Ware Theiss, stating in the edit summary that "he was born in 1931, based on his SSN records". Is this info available somewhere on the web, so that we can have a citation for that change? ...just asking because all other sources still have the 1930 date. -- Cid Highwind 11:34, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Philosophy category, and stuff

The more I wait for whatever process of approval a category needs here, I'm afraid the more it teaches me to dislike democracy, or perhaps bureaucracy, for its seemingly INFINITE slowness. My original idea was simply to do it the Wikipedia way: being bold, and just making all the necessary links and recategorizations myself, if required. After your comment about how it hadn't been approved, I submitted to that process...and have realized that I might actually be waiting six or more months for a nod to come, which is precisely the opposite of what wikis were supposed to be for, when they were first invented. What solution to this [self-deletes certain expletives from passing into conversation] situation would you, as an administrator, suggest? --a slightly agitated, and knowing agitation is valuable to accomplishing things, ChrisK 04:01, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Since Alan appears to be AWOL (I never gave him permission to leave :-P), I will answer in his stead. I, myself, have become somewhat annoyed at the slowness of the category suggestions page, as has Alan, I believe (I don't mean to speak for you, Alan, but I recall you getting aggravated at how long it takes for some things to get done around here). Personally, I think we either need to get rid of the cat suggestions page altogether and instead keeping track of all the new ones created (and deleting unnecessary ones or bringing them up for deletion) or make a change to the cat suggestion policy stating that categories can be created within 7 days if there are no opposing votes. I think the latter would be a better choice and a good compromise be those who want to keep the suggestion page and those who want things done a bit quicker. ;) --From Andoria with Love 20:54, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Awaiting your return

Alan!!! Come baaaaaaaaaack!!! :( --From Andoria with Love 20:54, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Braga Nemesis Premier 2002.jpg

Greetings. I don't know if you remember this image. Can you remember the source?–- Eyes Only 22:17, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Alan was not the one who uploaded the original image; that user was Mike Nobody, but the original upload was deleted. However, neither Mike Nobody or GVSUAlan is around anymore to answer your question, I'm afraid – both have apparently moved on. --From Andoria with Love 20:38, 7 September 2007 (UTC)


WP:POINT. You should know better, being an administrator. --OuroborosCobra talk 08:02, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

  1. Funny, you think you are on some other wiki. This is Memory Alpha, so I guess that link is kind of moot, eh.
  2. The edit I made was perfectly canon to the best of my anal capacities. Cite to me where it was established as being on Earth, or for that matter, a former nation on said planet.
  3. Not everything I do or say here is done as an administrator, so you can just stop throwing that at me every time I do something around that you don't like, especially when what I did was perfectly canon. The only thing I did here that I, as an administrator, did that I should have known better about not doing was not properly archiving the removed text. For that, kind sir, I apologize. --Alan del Beccio 19:27, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
I think you're both very good at putting fuel on the fire. I see childish behaviour on both sides of this "debate" (using this term very losely) and frankly, I'm sick of it. All this time would better be spent constructively instead of citing policies at each other, finding yet another precedence, trying to get even more people involved in your private war and, yes, breaking WP:POINT, which might be policy on Wikipedia only, but still should be fucking common sense here as well. So, please, get your act together and stop stepping on each others toes. -- Cid Highwind 10:23, 21 September 2007 (UTC)


Welcome back. :) --From Andoria with Love 06:02, 12 November 2007 (UTC)



Oy, a lotta edit conflicts, we need to coordinate our efforts, lol! --From Andoria with Love 04:37, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


About the DS9 cast images I uploaded...sorry-i shouldn't have uploaded them-it won't happen again.JemHadar359

Contributions to look at

Can you take a look at Special:Contributions/ Many of the articles seem to be very very poor duplicates of existing materials, and other seem to be articles for unnamed species which we only have a single example member of, which I seem to recall were deemed not acceptable by the community when Homesun was adding tons of them (I actually think this may be Homesun not logged in). I would look over more of them myself, but I don't have the time right now to pull out all of the resources I would need to confirm stuff, especially given the complete lack of citations in both the new articles and in the lists they link from. I'm reading documents for a RL job, or I would take a bigger stab tackling these. Thanks in advance. --OuroborosCobra talk 05:16, 23 January 2008 (UTC)


I meant no offense, nor did I mean to make you look bad. If that is how it came out, I am truly sorry.– Watching... listening... 21:38, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Image categories

Just a thought, but what about Category:Memory Alpha images (temporary)? Clean it out every so often... -- Sulfur 05:25, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Well it would seem from the discussion that they are permanently temporary for discussions. At least from what I get from Cid: "Forum:New Wikia-wide skin - without the images, the rest of the discussion wouldn't really make much sense anymore" Otherwise I was think Category:Memory Alpha images (discussions). --Alan del Beccio 05:28, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
The thing is... the nightmare that is "Wikia's new skin" apparently still isn't over. Last time I checked, there still were problems with it, and while the idea to force all wikis to that as a default doesn't seem to be pursued actively at the moment, who knows what the future might bring.
In this (or a similar) case, I just think it's not too necessary or sensible to delete images that are part of a potentially ongoing discussion - sensible, because we might lose context of the discussion, and necessary, because it won't save us one bit of disk space, now that images can be undeleted. :) -- Cid Highwind 09:42, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

FA/AOTW process suggestion

Hi Alan. I found my old suggestion quicker than I thought... see here. Some concerns might be a little outdated by now, but I still think the procedure in general would work. -- Cid Highwind 09:36, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Edit reversion

Just because YOU take something out does not mean it DESERVES to be out, Gvsualan. And giving a reason on a talk page does also not make your edits reversion proofCapt Christopher Donovan 03:10, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I explained why I removed it, which is in accordance to our guidelines. If there are objections to the removal of content, then they are discussed by both or all sides, not simply readded by the original contributor without discussion, "because I'm right and you're wrong", especially when it comes to speculation without any form of legitimate citation. --Alan del Beccio 16:11, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Formal Protest

Sir, I respect you on this site but what you did seems very immature. I was not edit warring, I was listening to every comment that you made and trying to improve the article. I explained my reasons, listened to yours, and as a result we had a good background section added in and were working it to improve it. For you to then revert to your preferred version, lock the article, ann then post some kind of a note that I was edit warring and "adding and readding" items to that article without discussing is extremely uncalled for and also untrue. If you would like to take out the fleet captain reference until I can find a hard core source from the script notes then so be it. But dont abuse your admin powers and act this way when we are all just trying to work together. -FleetCaptain 05:19, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Dont take this the wrong way, but I'm letting you know that I formally protested your actions to other administrators. I dont think you should have reverted and protected an article that you were directly involved in editing and you had no reason to add a user talk page note on a mainspace article which implies that the article was protected because I was constantly editing it. We can still work together and I look forward to doing so. I just dont think you had cause to lock articles when you weren't getting your way. -FleetCaptain 05:36, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

The only way I was not getting was not on the article, but on the talk page: NO DISCUSSION. I locked it so finally get some attention directed to the talk page, where the action really was, and you, sir, were all but ignoring. I removed something, moved it to the talk page and left a reason why it was removed. Common courtesy at that point was to discuss the removal, bring up the pros and cons, and ultimately, some sort of proof supporting what was removed, followed by the re-addition of said removed comment. But apparently, sir, that was too much to ask, and instead, a dozen edits later, the link is still on the page, with ZERO justification whatsoever. I hope you are happy. --Alan del Beccio 19:22, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Looking for input regarding video-wikis on Memory Alpha

Hi, As you may have heard, in the next few days there will be a new collaborative video feature on Memory Alpha. The feature is based on technology created by Kaltura, where I work. We’re really excited to have our technology on Memory Alpha and are hoping that it can be a great tool for the Memory Alpha community. I am contacting you and a few other administrators hoping that you can tell me where you think collaborative videos might fit in within Memory Alpha. We have a few people that are great with rich-media, and that are active in the community and would like to get a few videos rolling as soon as the feature goes live. For example – what pages do you think could benefit from a collaborative video that any user can add, edit and remix? Are there 5-10 top pages/topics that you think could be cool to add videos to? Any specific ideas of the kind of videos the community would like? Maybe a tribute to a certain character, or possibly a video that talks about why people joined Memory Alpha, etc. Any input you could provide would be excellent, we’re hoping that the Memory Alpha community gets familiar with the collaborative video feature and enjoys it. Thank you! Lishkee 14:21, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Come back

"Do not let the puny humans drive you from Memory Alpha! Return to vanquish them and adorn their skin to the hull of your ship!!" Believe it or not, you won in the debate. The Fleet Captain mention in the article is out. My plan is to now develop a new navigation template to link all Starfleet ranks and titles. -FC 23:25, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Good to see you back here. Welcome back :) – Tom 13:51, 17 February 2008 (EST)

TMP Aliens - Thanks

I'd just like to personally thank you for your work on the TMP species articles. Those articles were misleading before - mixing non-canon info in, having only non-canon images etc - and I wouldn't have had a clue where to start to fix them. Now canon and non-canon info is nicely separated and we have screen shot proof of their existence, and textual information on when they can be seen.

I personally really appreciate it when you work on these huge projects, and the wiki benefits enormously.– Cleanse talk 06:20, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Established continuity remark (no spoilers)

(no spoilers) Hey, Alan. Regarding the remark you made when editing the movie news panel – "well doesnt that just screw with about half of established continuity..." – actually, it does not screw with it. I can't explain any further without going into spoiler territory, so I will just say that you have no reason to worry about established Trek continuity. :) --From Andoria with Love 21:03, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

user pages

Hey Alan, tired or just too fast? I always though user talk pages are for the welcome note? Should the user page now be deleted? ;) – Tom 04:15, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Kosst Amojan Picture

Thanks for adding that source on the image, I wasn't 100% sure where to put it. – Bertaut talk 18:43, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, just add it if it were an episode citation. --Alan 18:54, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Delete and block

Hey Alan. Can you delete and ? Might as well ban User:Firestone as well :P --OuroborosCobra talk 18:26, 8 March 2008 (UTC)


Congrats on reaching 60,000 edits. Here's to the next 60,000! :-D --From Andoria with Love 04:57, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I dont think I could. --Alan 05:00, 9 March 2008 (UTC)


How was it "messing up" the redirect page? Wouldn't people be redirected from it anyway?

I was just trying to add some clarification there with respect to the different spellings of the ship.

Would it have been okay to add the information I was putting up top *below* the redirect Link at the top of that Page instead?

I'm just wondering here because it didn't strike me as an especially big deal. --Globular Cluster 19:42, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

A redirect doesn't work when you add stuff to it. A redirect is simply that. It redirects you immediately to the "correct" page. Adding the information anywhere on a redirect is a waste of time. -- Sulfur 19:57, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Otherwise, the article notes the various spellings in for this name. So there should be no issue. --Alan 22:55, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Reverting an image?

Alan, sorry to bother you with this, but how do you revert an image? I saw that idiotic Ronald McDonald thing that was loaded in place of Admiral Janeway's picture. Before you got to it and fixed it, I went to the history page for the image and clicked "Undo," but since the preview didn't show what image it was reverting to, I was afraid to go any further for fear of making a bigger mess. Is it as simple as clicking "Undo" or is something else involved? Thanks. - Bridge 03:22, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I was going to say you just hit "revert", but I had to log out of my account and see that those without "sysop" can no longer do that, used to be you could, but I guess that caused too much trouble with users? Anyway, I guess in this case, you could go to the "date/time" part of the "file history" below the image and description, click on that date/time of the previous "good" version, save the file to your computer and reupload it over the vandal file, at least for quick fix. --Alan 04:05, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Federation Article Suggestions

Thanks. Good ideas. However, with my very limited knowledge of episode history, I would be hard-pressed to actually shape such considerations into a proper addition to the article without having (citation needed) getting put on. Not good for a Featured Article. Which brings me to another point.

In cases where an article was posted for FA candidacy, but failed to get approval, how long should it be before re-nomination? I was planning to wait 2 months. I put it up for peer review. Additions and edits were made. Then it stopped, to the point where an admin removed the peer review. So, I thought it was ready again. Nothing changed in the article for two weeks. So I posted it again. But is there a specific time period between reposting? I've never seen any.– Watching... listening... 21:58, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I dont think an admin removed it before, but if nothing is happening to it, then i might just wait. I think after two or three failed noms it needs some serious rewrite before it can be up for featured article again. --Alan 11:45, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Phase II

New Voyages has been renamed to Phase II. Why don't you join IRC, dude? ;-) --Jörg 20:26, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Moving Pages

Good job on moving all of the episode pages so quickly to the new naming scheme (if one could say it like that :P). There is one thing I am curious about though, as I am myself trying to learn the things a MediaWiki can offer, and do. How were you able to move so many so fast? Did you just navigate really fast or is there a tool of some sort that I don't know about? --Terran Officer 22:28, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I wish there was a tool to do that, but I did it all manually. --Alan 22:32, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

My subpage

Thanks for putting the eplinks on my subpage. Most of that article was written before the episode link templates had been made. --OuroborosCobra talk 18:22, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Just Wondering

I was wondering if you like my Stardates page? Even know it's not done. --From TrekkyStar Peace and Long Life 18:23, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Portal talk:Main

I've responded to your comment on Portal talk:Main. (also, as it states on my user talk, please leave any and all future messages at this usertalk as I work on several wikis and I like to have my messages on one page.) Regards, Nat.tang 21:10, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I saw you message on your talk page, and regardless, it only makes sense to keep all Memory Alpha discussions on Memory Alpha, not off-site and out of sight. --Alan 21:14, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Portal talk:Main

I've responded to your reply. Regards, Nat.tang 04:22, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

What's wrong with "Dialogue"?

One of your bots, User:DelBeccio-bot, recently changed the spelling of "dialogue" to "dialog" in the page Unnatural Selection (episode). Why? They're both considered valid spellings in American English, with the original being most common. – Pesky 15:22, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I've been also meaning to ask you about your bot. It has been "removing self links" from several image maps which in turn disrupts the whole thing because a link is needed after the coordinates in an image map, even if it is a "self link". Nat.tang 17:51, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Question 1, I was trying to make the usage consistent throughout the site, and spell check liked one over the other so I went with it. Question 2, I don't think that was my bot. --Alan 20:10, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
If by several you mean 4, then yes, 4 of the several dozen unnecessary self links that were removed by my bot were unintentional. Not a big deal, just revert it. --Alan 20:35, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Seeing we've had previous discussions about "dialogue"/"dialog", perhaps it should be added to List of common misspellings? (With a note preferably)– Cleanse 01:25, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Not aware of that, and go for it. All I was going after is consistency. But anyway, after further review, "dialogue" seems to get first 'props' in my 'Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary' (be damned spell check), and as well, I've recently noticed that the spelling used in various onscreen credits, also uses the spelling. Regardless, the bot swings both ways, any and all can be fixed, it's not that big of an issue as this discussion is making it. --Alan 01:30, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
I created a discussion over on that talk page.– Cleanse 02:00, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


How do you find so many images without categorys? --From TrekkyStar Open Hailing Frequencies 00:52, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

They have categories, they are just being moved to more specific categories. --Alan 00:53, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Nemesis credits

Hey, Alan. Are you almost done with the credits for Star Trek Nemesis? If you don't have time to finish them or don't feel like finishing them and need help, just let me know. --From Andoria with Love 19:37, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm probably not going to have time to finish them in the near future --Alan 20:30, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Ahh, well if you want, go ahead and e-mail what you have done to me and I'll finish 'em up. :) --From Andoria with Love 20:37, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

New Template

On Memory Beta they have a template named Template:User current age so when you put {{user current age|day=17|month=04|year=1984}} it put's This user is 23 years, 11 months, and 29 days old. I'm thinking that we could put it on Memory Alpha. --From TrekkyStar Open Hailing Frequencies 22:09, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Moved to Forum:Age template. Please don't address individual users on topics that relevant to the entire site, versus that specific user. {{ma|Ten Forward]] is the most appropriate location for such discussions. --Alan 22:15, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

New image

Hi, I was wondering if you could help me with something. I've just uploaded a new image, which can be found at: - could you sort it out? I can't find any mention at all of this ship, from "Silent Enemy" (ENT), or the species. They're not named, but could you link it all up and maybe edit the unnamed species and ships pages to include this one? Cheers, Dave 01:53, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, that was on my agenda. The ship-type and species were never identified. The article would go in the appropriate section of Unnamed Alpha and Beta Quadrant starships (22nd century) and the species...I'm not sure where that would go yet, we have Unnamed humanoids (22nd century), but I'm not sure they qualify as "humanoid". Looking at the other images from that episode, Category:Memory Alpha images by episode (ENT: Silent Enemy), I'd say they've been avoided altogether. --Alan 02:07, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I know what you mean by non-humans. They were bipeds, with faces almost like humans (the eyes were in the right place, the "mouth" was....). I'll edit the necessary pages now, unless you're doing so. Dave 02:11, 26 April 2008 (UTC) And how do I get the pic on this page: Category:Memory Alpha images by episode (ENT: Silent Enemy)? Dave 02:14, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

You have to cite the image, as well as give it proper wiki markup, and copyright template. See: MA:CYS. For example the wiki content should look something like:

An unknown alien starship encountered by Enterprise NX-01 in 2151. (ENT: "Silent Enemy")

{{image star trek}}

Category:Memory Alpha images (starships)

I already changed the image content to what is shown above, so you can look at that too, but it is the adding of {{ENT|Silent Enemy}} that gets you to that category: Category:Memory_Alpha_images_by_episode_(ENT:_Silent_Enemy). You'd have to look at the actual markup on that page to do it properly, the way I posted it above was so you could see the outcome. Also, instead of posting the entire we address, you can do like I did above and bracket [[ ]] the last part of the address following the ____ -- if that makes sense--Alan 02:28, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Cheers, thanks for your help. I've sorted the rest out about the ship and species. Dave 02:57, 26 April 2008 (UTC)


Hey Alan. Just a small point. Was it necessary to rag on Ultraice on the IfD? I know there were some issues with him in the past, but he's served his time, and I think we should play nice. The fact that he's back demonstrates he probably just wants to contribute.

Also, off topic, but I just wanted to say, nice work on Andorian cruiser yesterday. I don't know where you dig this stuff up from, but its great. --- Jaz 05:06, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but you must be confused, or unsure what you are really defending. Ultraice is a sockpuppet vandal, per Angela, who was blocked, and then reblocked by you, 17 days ago, for the duration of a year for "Vandalism: Returning vandal, previously given 3 days, threatened to continue vandalism". So, to be accurate, he's serving his time, and far from being back nor demonstrating anything anytime soon.
Also, thanks, but other than an image tweak a week ago, I haven't done anything significant with Andorian cruiser since June '07... --Alan 05:19, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

My mistake. How did he get back on? --- Jaz 05:22, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Looking at the log, his 3 month (not 3 day) block was up on April 4th, and on April 10th he came back..briefly. --Alan 05:30, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

CCG Question

Could I get your opinion on this? Thanks. ---- Willie LLAP 20:45, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

ENT:Future Tense

Why are you reversing my edits for this episode? The least you could do is leave me a message about it! I thought I was going crazy until I checked the recent changes page.

The quotes I corrected are incorrect in your version (I just finished watching the episode), and the ones I added are relevant and memorable. Also, unless you have evidence to the contrary, nobody played the "timeship pilot", it was probably just a prop. As for the other "uncredited actors", I changed them to a format I found in earlier episodes that allows for an easy change if someone comes up with a name for one of them.

And my other changes were legit as well. There is an existing page for State of the Union Address, I only added the link to make it easier to access.

The wiki is supposed to be a collaborative effort,right? Are you going to start reversing all of my changes? — Greg (talk) 00:25, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

I did leave a message about why i reverted it – the first time i reverted it. the Timeship pilot is a "character", regardless if we know it was a dummy or not (which we don't). Also, the need to list "unknown actor" for every unnamed character is not necessary, it can all be grouped together under a single unknown actor or unknown performers. Everything else was collateral damage, so to say, because I got tired of changing the same "uncredited" section over and over after I had explained the first revert, yet it still continued without explanation, until now. --Alan 00:59, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Okay, Alan, explanation accepted, now listen to my side. The reason I resubmitted the changes several times is because I was convinced that I had somehow forgotten to submit the changes after looking at the preview - I have done this before, as, no doubt, have we all! I did not even think to look at the recent changes page until after the last time I submitted the changes, when I was certain I had submitted the changes yet they did not show up on the page! So I was not trying to defy you, I was simply trying to compensate for my apparent error in not submitting the changes.

Imagine my frustration before I finally looked at the recent changes page. If you had simply left me a quick message on my talk page, I would have received a "new message" alert and I would not have resubmitted the changes as I did. We could have had an orderly discussion about it there and all of this would never have happened.

BTW, your snyde "That's not all you were changing..." comment on the discussion page for that episode completely discredits your explanation now that the rest was "collateral damage". You were clearly resistant to any changes being made on the page. But that is the point of the wiki, isn't it. Unless the changes are wrong or somehow detract from the usefulness of the wiki (like vandalism), we are all welcome to make changes as we see fit.

I am perfectly willing to drop the whole thing now if you are, but this should give you a better idea about my side of our shared experience. Again, thanks for all you do here... I know it is a lot of work. I am relatively new to memory-alpha but I am an admin and contributor for several wikia pages and have been doing this for most of the last year, so I am not a babe in the woods. No hard feelings... — Greg (talk) 13:05, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, aill I kept seeing was you chancging the single unknown performers]to multiple unknown actors linkss, but what you brought up on the talk page was only referring to the one part of teh "uncredited actors section", whcih is qquite honestly the only thing I *saw*, (just like all you saw was me removing your quote fixes and links) yet you only brought up part of the changes that were happening to that section that I explained in my first revert, or were ever concerned with, hnece: "That's not all you were changing...". It had nothing to do with "resistance" to your :other" edits, just the ones that were removing or deevoloving the format that I jad just updated to the proper format. I didnt care about anything else you were doing..that's not what I was 'monitoring', which is what i explained on the other talk page with the two recent changes links i pointed out,. Thats all i have to say on that--Alan 15:55, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

It's that time...

Happy birthday, old man! ;)

I accept all major credit cards.


Alan, please take a look at Talk:Rossi when you get a chance. I think I've proved that Hilde Garcia is this character. What do you think? Should we proceed with adjusting all the relevant pages? I've left this same note at ThomasHL's talk page, since he seems to be our resident background extra expert, and I wanted his opinion as well. It looked like from the history of the Rossi page that you created it, which is why I'm asking you to weigh in on the subject. Thanks! - Bridge 23:25, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

You're a machine

I don't think I can keep up with all your images (checking them and fixing if necessary). I was planning on doing something similar when I had some free time to update all the images with as high-quality ones as I could get...I guess you're saving me some time :) --Morder 22:23, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm not uploading new images, I'm just fixing the categories on the existing images. --Alan 22:25, 8 May 2008 (UTC)


I noticed a glitch on the Vulcan Uniform page. In the second ambassadorial uniform section, both thumbnails are the same image (Lojal), but the first one is supposed to be T'Pel, and clicking on the thumbnail brings you to the correct image. I can't see anything in the code that wrong, but I noticed you had tweaked the image once before and thought you might have an idea on how to correct it. Thoughts? --User:twilder

WTF? I just went to look at again, and now it's fine. But nobody's edited the page. Now I'm really confused.

Yeah, looked fine to me...also, really dont think a "tweak" i did year and a half ago would still be affecting it today. --Alan 03:51, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

No, but I figured you might have an idea since you seem to do a fair amount image work (better to ask someone with experience, yes?). Thanks anyway. Maybe it was a glitch with my browser. --User:twilder

Tuvok Article Discussion Page.

Visit it. Let us reason with one another on this. – Watching... listening... 18:25, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Star Trek: Borg character images

I was looking at the stuff you did with Star Trek: Borg -- good work btw, just remember to add non-canon redirects to the non-canon redirect list. Also, for the images, logically, they should be in the game art image category, and strictly speaking the company to which they're copyright is Simon and Schuster, the publishers of the game. Just some thoughts and such. -- Sulfur 13:59, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

To quote myself on my last edit, "for a start, will finish later" ... so yeah, preaching to the choir here, but I wasn't done yet. :) But seeing as you had time to kill, thanks for the hand. --Alan 17:38, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Episode: I Borg

I was absolutely positive there was a comma in the title. Just checked several places and they all say there is... then checked the episode and couldn't believe there wasn't! Well spotted... Dave 00:08, 13 October 2008 (UTC)


Let's discuss this here. --Alan 05:02, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about that

Sorry for creating the talk page ahead of you....I didn't realize nothing had been written on it yet.--31dot 02:49, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Section headers

Hey. I've noticed that you've reverted several edits I've made in the last time, especially for the section headers in the cast list of the episodes. I know the policy but have you ever checked the episodes? We go for every screen credit and try to spell and write all what is seen on screen. When you check the episodes there is always "Guest Stars" and "Co-Star", both words capitalized. I don't want to start an "edit war", so any ideas? Shouldn't we go for the screen credits? And btw, I always write "Uncredited Stunt doubles", because they received no screen credit and served as doubles. When you or someone else is changing this into simply "stunts", we should list all stunt performers in this section, what means also the performers who actually portray a character... and I think they should belong into the "Uncredited Co-Stars" section. – Tom 12:20, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't have any problem following on screen formatting, but as I see to be getting singled out for this, I must say that I think Renegade really is the one who started the header thing, as it contradicted MA title formatting, and I (and others) have simply been following through with it (vs. falling victim to Renegade's no-win formatting axe), you've been the only one who has had a problem with it, and it always seems to come back to me somehow. (Victim of my own edit count, I guess) Also, other than films, what TV stunt double has been credited that would require them to be differentiated from an uncredited stunt double? None, so short form makes the most sense here. --Alan 14:46, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Take it to my talk page

If you want to attack me, take it to my talk page. Don't spread the crap where both you and sulfur are acting like 3 year olds (you've earned a demotion from 5) on to completely unrelated pages to your original dispute. Unless you want to continue proving that the admins here have no business being that. --OuroborosCobra talk 22:35, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

What in the name of the Seven Gods are you talking about... --Alan 22:52, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

You know exactly what I am talking about, and now you are trying to play the victim. It doesn't work when you play it with sulfur, with me, or anyone else. I'm not taking crap from you. --OuroborosCobra talk 22:58, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

So what you're saying is that it's all fair game as long as you keep the name calling to the summary lines... Perhaps you should explain that to WoWWiki-Xavius, because I apparently failed in my attempt. --Alan 23:12, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

So you were lying when you said you didn't know what this was about. Fun, so dishonesty is also an admin function, I guess. You guys disgust me. --OuroborosCobra talk 23:42, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Pot, meet Kattle. Kattle, meet pot. Whatever you do, please keep me out of this particular discussion (and, yes, that includes edit summaries). This is just childish bullshit - and if you're insulted be me calling it this, I most likely have a point. Anyway, no need to insult others in edit summaries - which, somehow, all three of you managed to do nicely within the last 48 hours, while at the same time complaining about exactly this behaviour. Congratulations! :)
Alan: No need to spread this to other peoples talk pages. Avoid Sarcasm, it most often does not work in print. Fucking stop!
Cobra: No need to play the lawyer for someone who can very well do that himself, if he thinks it's necessary. Fucking stop!
Everyone:Good night. -- Cid Highwind 23:44, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
Cid, you smell bad, and your mother dresses you funny. --Bp 23:47, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
Well, it was a guess, actually. Anyway, thank you Cid for ending this... :) --Alan 23:59, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Changes German MA

Thank you for the linkfix in de:Sodbrennen. But please be aware: In German it is: "Externe Links" as it was, not "Externe link". Thank you.--Tobi72 06:16, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

So one link is plural in german? --Alan 06:18, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
LMFAO sorry couldn't resist an LOL at that one :P --Jlandeen 22:45, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

On a more positive note...

Out of curiosity, were you a member of GVSU's Sci Fi club between 2004 and 2006? If so, I think I may have met ya before! Feel free to delete this if you don't want RL stuff on this page, I couldn't find a way to contact you otherwise. --Talon Lardner 08:00, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

No, I graduated from there in '02. Otherwise you can contact me via this link. --Alan 08:03, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Ah, sorry about that, false alarm, I suppose. Sorry about that. --Talon Lardner 08:09, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

np. im'a closet trekker anyway, my name is an alias and i speak of it to no one off the net. so while i had no knowledge of such a club when i was there, i probably wouldn't have joined it anyway. ;) ---Alan 08:11, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Quit messing around

Quit messing around with my talk page, will you? Its really annoying and rather pointless on top of it all. Who cares if there are spelling errors or something, on my damn talk page. Their not even in your posts. – Marjolijn 00:20, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm doing site maintenance. It's part of my job. So chill... Let's not forget to mention that I explained that in the edit summary as well. --Alan 00:24, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Hamlet and Macbeth

In this image (), Karidian is actually performing Macbeth. Is a re-upload with an altered title justified? --JemHadar359 18:12, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Calling all hands

I would really like to invite your input on what to do about the Able Seaman situation. Fletcher's notes DO list the rank by that title which contradicts several other Star Trek productions which call that pin simply as Crewman. Please chime in over at Talk:Starfleet ranks. Thanks. -FC 20:03, 1 December 2008 (UTC)


Hey, how are you. I mean this in a good way...I really do. I hit by accident your "User contributions" and saw the edits you made in the past day. Did you really edit Memory Alpha for nine straight hours? That is impressive and I'm sure the site benefited! :-) -FC 06:22, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

You probably dont need to protect the talk page. I was done with that conversation and have no plans to add further too it. I think anyone reading it can see what happened after you and I finished talking. As far as your edit header getting changed, I guess if thats okay with you then its okay with me too. By the way, all kidding aside, excellent expansion of that article; well done. -FC 03:10, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

His title made more sense, and really, mine only went with my "pre-rewrite" version of the talk page...just didn't change it after I decided to rewrite that too. --Alan 03:19, 10 December 2008 (UTC)


Thanks for the welcome

Thanks for the welcome and links. Not sure I can offer much here, but if I "DO" see a typo or something, I'll be happy to fix it. Have a great 2009

  • oops ... forgot sig Omega Memory 14:17, 3 January 2009 (UTC)


You are the God of wiki burns. Jaf 22:31, 5 January 2009 (UTC)Jaf


This is going to sound very stupid but what exactly am I doing wrong? The preceding unsigned comment was added by Vince47 (talk • contribs).

The links you are using are all the redirect. Just look at my changes, paying specific attention to the episode linking here, here and here. See: Linking to episodes and films. --Alan 01:13, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Feedback needed

Sorry to bother you, but I would really like to prevent my FA-nomination from passing unnoticed. I'd be deeply grateful for every feedback! Thank you, --36ophiuchi 11:34, 18 January 2009 (UTC)


Hey. Why Vangerweg and not Vanderweg? – Tom 14:25, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Appears to have been a typo. I've moved the page, and fixed the typo and discovered that there was another link to the "correct" spelling. -- sulfur 15:31, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Indeed, without too much overthinking, that is the logical conclusion. --Alan 16:30, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Hey, just wanted to say, I really love your alternate MA logo...– Distantlycharmed 20:32, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Cynthia Uhrich

Okay, sorry about the quip! I didn't intend to add that message to every episode, just the few (three) where I did it, thinking I would get a better response than I would on her own discussion page.

I see you added a list of appearances to her article, but should she have a spot in Unnamed Enterprise (NX-01) personnel as well? I would add it myself but I'm not sure where she should go or what name to assign to her. — Greg (talk) 07:39, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Starfleet Command II

Hi Alan, I was just wondering. I have been looking at the Star Trek: Starfleet Command II - Empires at War page in an attempt to increase the size of it, as it is currently a stub and I am playing the game at the moment. In terms of the species that appear, should I create new pages for them or add them to the page? As they're not canon it could be difficult, and I don't want the article to get too long. I'll be uploading some screenshots soon (I hope). Actually, just thought. Could I create the species a page that links to the SCII page with a "/" in the title? So, eg, like this: [[Star Trek: Starfleet Command II - Empires at War/Hydrans]]? Do let me know. DaveSubspace Message 01:21, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

There should definitely be no new articles created for non-canon stuff, nor the creation of sub-pages (your "/" suggestion.) I would suggest taking a look and probably following the format used on say Star Trek: Armada, or Star Trek: The Next Generation - A Final Unity, where each non-canon item gets a subsection and possibly a link on memory beta. In addition, you can do what you wish (create new pages and such) on memory beta, the wiki for such things. --Alan 04:20, 9 February 2009 (UTC)


Should be working now. — Morder 19:55, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Crewman first class, The Crossing.jpg

Just fyi, I removed the actors name because this image already links to the actor, below in the section Links. – Tom 22:55, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I am fully aware of that, but an fyi back to ya, it didn't link here, which is just as important in building the web. --Alan

Alright, understood your message. Thanks. – Tom 23:02, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

"Wecome" Image

I don't appreciate you posting an image from "Enterprise" on my discussion page. What's worse, is that I can't take the damn thing off! I'd like to keep the links and information that you posted, but I can't stand that non-canon bullsh*t. How can I remove that stupid picture?!? Get rid of it!! --TOS Purist 05:16, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

It's the standard welcome template. --Alan 05:18, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

I know that. Get rid of the picture (please). --TOS Purist 05:21, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

That's just how it is. It's your talk page, not your user page and hardly worth your drama, and this discussion is absolutely ridiculous to the point of being immature. --Alan 05:26, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

What's ridiculous is the stupid picture that you HAD to include with the welcome, and the fact that you're treating a valid user complaint like it's not worth your time. What image did you use before "Unity" was aired? If you're not going to help me, I'll just have to get rid of all the information and links - so thanks for nothing. --TOS Purist 05:30, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

First of all, I didn't include, create, or even suggest the use of the image (which is, by the way, the only image ever used) for this template. Second, it's permanently hardwired into the {{Welcome|template in question}}, a template that has been used on over 3800 user talk pages. You are hardly the first, nor the last to see it. --Alan 05:49, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for editing the template - I really appreciate it. :) --TOS Purist 20:59, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Jeannie Malone

Hello, I've noticed you adding Jeannie Malone to a bunch of TOS episodes. I'm guessing this is the blonde woman usually seen on the bridge. I was wondering where you got the information about her from? In an e-mail conversation I had with Eddie Paskey he said her last name was Shephard. Myko 08:10, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Jeannie Shepard is an article we already have, although a stub. – Tom 08:33, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Bill Blackburn in one of his treasure chest home movie/interviews from either TOS-R Season 2 DVD or TOS-R Season 3 DVD, which also has at least two shots of her being used for makeup tests. --Alan 12:55, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


Sorry, I had no idea that I could directly replace a file. I have done that now, and replaced the fuzzy Borg image that I didn't like with my better, enhanced one. You can delete the duplicate image, if you'd like. Now the implants are more readily visible. If you don't like it, you could always change it back, this is a wiki... But first, compare the two, I saw a big difference. Mine may be a slightly larger file size, however, it is also higher quality. It is the same image, just heavily enhanced, so that viewers can better admire the Borg implants. As an appreciator of the Borg, and any images of them, I have to say, that mine is better, but, as you are more experienced, you make the final say. Thanks, ZephramCochran 18:59, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for the "trouble"

Sorry for the "trouble", but they were contacting me. --From TrekkyStar Open Hailing Frequencies 20:24, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

I know, I just wanted to make sure everyone involved was contacted. --Alan 22:10, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Background Bullets


The background bullets are acting up for me as I mentioned before. They appear fine on my home computer, but at work, using XP and Explorer, they don't. Instead of lining up with the first line of BG info, they center on it, and it's difficult to read. I'm only bringing it up because it might be some kind of wikia issue that I thought you should be aware of. — Vince47 07:18, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Vince, it's a problem with IE and it's a global wikia problem. It's a general stylesheet issue that has been brought up everywhere. I think there's a forum here about it but there hasn't been a solution other than stop using IE :) — Morder 07:28, 5 March 2009 (UTC)


That was fast. :-p Keep up the good work.– Cleanse 10:37, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

yup. For whatever reason the TNG one didnt come up for me. --Alan 10:38, 19 March 2009 (UTC)


Alan, I don't know if you're around right now, but I could do with some help in the IRC channel. We've got a moron who needs kicking, and ChanServ won't let me op myself. I know you've held an op position in the past, so maybe you have it figured out. -- Michael Warren | Talk 15:43, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Dealt with. -- sulfur 15:57, 21 March 2009 (UTC)


Thanks for the invite. unfortunately, i think i use up far more time than i should on Wikipedia. you can always contact me at my wikipedia talk page though. Thanks 05:48, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Picard impostor

How the fuck is questioning the rationale behind adding that useless link that is not even mirror any kind of violation of anything? I thought the proper procedure for finalizing these is to take to the talk page (which was done) and discuss. And mind you, I believe i gave a damn good explanation as to why this link is clutter and shouldnt be up there. If you have any reasons as to why it should be there then mention it in the discussion and dont freakin' have your robot automatically remove it. I dont think that goes with policy does it? – Distantlycharmed 04:41, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

First of all, what are you spazzing out about, and second, what gives you the right to talk to me in that tone? My 'bot' removed nothing, it was making a maintenance related edit. That is all it does. --Alan 04:44, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

What maintenance? It was the link on the JLP page that kept getting reverted and yours was the last entry that "undid". And yeah sorry for going off on you - you're right, I shouldnt have done that - my apologies. I assumed you knew what your thingy was doing. – Distantlycharmed 04:50, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

I didnt know what "my thing" was doing, and the only reason why it was doing it is because the "I" is "(Impostor)" is lower case per naming conventions. I haven't read nor am giving much a thought on reading whatever discussions that are going on, and even if there is a dispute, shouldn't the disputed title at least follow naming guidelines? Yeah, probably. --Alan 04:53, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

I mean your robot. I dont know it goes around automatically moving/fixing stuff around. Anyway I really thought you knew what was going on. Sorry again for going off on you like that. I hope you believe me.– Distantlycharmed 05:01, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Scratch that. I meant to say that I did know what it was doing, I have to tell it what to do. And besides, I moved the page, all it did was correct the links so I didn't have to doing it manually. And regardless, no content was changed whatsoever, so I have no idea why that should even matter to you. --Alan 05:05, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
I was looking at the very last entry and the edit had been reverted and it was showing your robot etc - so I thought the content was changed. I didnt even know it was a robot frankly, it had your name on it and that's all I saw. I guess i didnt look closely enough to see that this actually didnt change the contents but mere spelling. My bad - really. – Distantlycharmed 05:14, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Invitiation to join service record game

Hey, how are you doing. I would like to invite you to take a look at a new internet game I designed. If you wuld like to play it, you can send an e-mail to It requires as much or as little participation as you want and the records generated by the game are regularly e-mailed and can be burned to a CD when/if a character retires. I think you will truely enjoy it and I am looking for live action player. Thank you! -FC 17:54, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

120m Defiant

I've started a discussion on the Defiant class length issue, so we can actually try and get a real solution. It seems like we aren't all on the same page here, some people thinking there is a source, some people thinking it is speculation, etc. Let's try to actually present a source, all that jazz. --OuroborosCobra talk 20:40, 23 April 2009 (UTC)


Hi. I am wondering: what is up with the MA Chat? It is the strangest I've ever seen; I see many names as being logged in, but no conversation in the chat window and frequently get no response on saying something. What's up? – Crimsondawn hears you... 17:55, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

"Please wait for a response as we are constantly phasing in and out of the space-time continuum." in, I, for one, am on all the time, just not at my computer. The joys of cable internet. --Alan 18:03, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
OK. Got it. Thanks. :) – Crimsondawn hears you... 18:17, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Good news, everyone Alan!

Image moving is now possible, thanks to the recent MediaWiki upgrade we got! (Available for sysops only at the moment, but that of course doesn't matter to you...) -- Michael Warren | Talk 15:01, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Canon Policy

I am wondering: is there any flexibility at all in the "Only Information Films and Shows Are Allowed Here" rule or is it cast-iron? – Crimsondawn hears you... 00:18, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, first I have to ask what you had in mind, but ultimately, to answer you, no, the definition of canon is pretty clear, both in reality and in our policy. --Alan 00:20, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
If you want to bring up suggestions and comments about it, then you might want to visit the talk page as relates to the policy. That's the best place to do it. -- sulfur 00:22, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I was just wondering if there was any room here for characters from novels. Some of the novel characters are, in my opinion, a lot better than anything seen onscreen. One in particular comes to mind: Jekri Kaleh from the Dark Matters trilogy by Christie Golden. But never mind. The policy is clear. – Crimsondawn hears you... 00:32, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

In that case... you want to check out Memory Beta. :) -- sulfur 00:37, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Just did. A non-canon trek wiki that will accept information from novels. Thanks. :) – Crimsondawn hears you... 00:40, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Unlocking Star Trek film page

How come this hasn't been done yet? I have a complete version of the story ready to place in the page, but it is still locked. DaveSubspace Message 04:15, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, all I can say is that if you left this message, then it's not locked. --Alan 04:16, 9 May 2009 (UTC)


Congratulations on your marriage. :) – Crimsondawn hears you... 15:09, 9 May 2009 (UTC)


Thanks for cleaning up all those redirects! -- Captain MKB 17:23, 9 May 2009 (UTC)


Seriously what?- JustPhil 17:38, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

What i said and what you ignored in my previous message... --Alan 17:39, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

I didn't know what you mean.- JustPhil 17:40, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Re-read the note i left on your talk page about wikification. Something you are not doing when creating new articles... --Alan 17:41, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but my style is to get something started so more knowledgeable people can finish it off.- JustPhil 17:43, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Just so you can be first to create the article... well if that's best for you... --Alan 17:48, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

No offense, but that style has worked for me on Wikipedia and a few other Wikis since 2004.- JustPhil 17:50, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Will this wiki is neither, and no offense, but creates a hell of a lot of unnecessary work for the rest of us running doing insanely simple tasks the previous contributor could have done. If there is one thing this wiki prides, it is how tidy we try to keep it. --Alan 17:53, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

ST XI actor images

I have downloaded an HD vid of the LA primiere, with very nice footage of the individual stars posing , giving interviews etc. I am able to pause it and clip stills off of it as images. Can they be used here legally until better images are obtained? – Crimsondawn hears you... 22:57, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Forum:Star Trek (film) - Reminder: Image use policy / Copyrights --Alan 22:59, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Right. So they cannot be used here. Thanks anyway. :) – Crimsondawn hears you... 23:02, 9 May 2009 (UTC)


A couple of questions:

  • Just wondering: how long will the spoiler notices be used on ST XI articles and content? When will it become "old news"?
  • How exactly does ST IX fit into canon? I thought it was a mainline look at the early lives of the TOS crew, but it is something very different: a whole new timeline. Is it a reboot of the franchise?

Crimsondawn hears you... 23:17, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

The spoiler notice may be days, weeks, months, or up to the DVD release, afaik that hasnt been determined. It fits into canon by being an alternate reality parallel to the other 40 years worth of material. Again, this is all being discussed in the various film related forums. --Alan 23:20, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for deleting and moving that PfD discussion. I thought about it but wasn't sure if that was the correct move. Now I know. :) --31dot 01:53, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Image for Kirk

Hey, question: why do you keep removing the profile pic for James T. Kirk (alternate reality) and state that it's the wrong POV? How is that the wrong POV for the profile pic? The current picture is a little larger than a thumbnail and not really appropriate as a "profile" picture. Thanks. – Distantlycharmed 07:35, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

The previous picutre is a publicity photo of Chris Pine, not a photo of Kirk from the movie. Hence, wrong POV.--31dot 07:38, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
I suspect that once the movie comes out on DVD we will be able to get a better photo.--31dot 07:39, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
It's a picture of Kirk on the bridge, with Sulu I believe behind him. How is that not a picture of Kirk from the movie?– Distantlycharmed 07:42, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Pine is looking right at the camera, as is Cho, I think. The photo ws also distributed as a publicity photo and is not from the movie itself.--31dot 07:46, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
The man is in uniform. He has scrapes and scratches on his face. He is on the bridge. Speaking of nit-picking. Moreover, nearly all of the other profile pics have been distributed as publicity and/or are stills. Profile pics dont have to be screen-shots from the movie and looking into the camera is not a disqualifier for a profile pic or wrong POV. It's not like he is in a suit and tie or a sweater at a promo. – Distantlycharmed 07:51, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
The fact that he is in uniform is irrelevant, as he was not in character if he was looking at the camera. That mixes the POV of the article and photo. If there are other publicity photos used on a charater's page, then those should be changed, too.--31dot 07:56, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
What?? "It's not a picture of Kirk in the movie"?. Are you kididng. Sorry, sounds made-up to me. It's like you trying really hard to justify why this image shouldnt be there, even though it would be a perfectly good one as Kirk's profile picture. It's not like the man is shown in a photograph at some award show, it's a shot from the movie for cryin' out loud. Give it a rest. – Distantlycharmed 17:47, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
I've responded to this on your userpage, as this does not involve Alan.--31dot 18:25, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Sean Hawk fix

Thanks for the help!! leandar 03:11, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Deck layout

Sorry, I had not seen that guideline; still, as you can see, I had to modify my message to make sense with the quote being placed directly above, and you couldn't have done that yourself without altering my text. – NotOfTheBody 20:42, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

neophyte query

Greetings, I am new here (though I frequent about a dozen other wiki's) and would like to know which pages I should avoid to keep from getting substantial spoilers for the new movie. I know the standard spoiler policy applies, but would like to lessen exposure to such things as much as possible. Exdeath64 22:27, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Most likely anything linked here, here or here. --Alan 22:45, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Preator's block

You know Preator can still edit his talk page while blocked, right? :) I would just protect his talk page and leave his account unblocked, it's not like he's going to edit anything, anyway. --From Andoria with Love 14:50, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Eh, I guess the thought was to give him an opportunity to respond to comments; obviously he responded, but not the way I had hoped. I blame the intense sugar rush from the *new* Mountain Dew: Throwback I had for breakfast. (PS: it tastes awful).. --Alan 14:56, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
I prefer Mr. PiBB- JustPhil 14:57, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, what the heck is with those Pepsi Throwback drinks, anyway? "Made with natural sugar", huh? :-P --From Andoria with Love 14:59, 21 May 2009 (UTC) Nevermind, I neglected to realize sodas are made with high fructose corn syrup now rather than natural sugar. Doy! Okay, time for some sleep, later. :) --From Andoria with Love 15:01, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I was disappointed to learn that I found HFCS to be more tasteful than sugar. I was even more disappointed to learn that they didnt go well with my favorite Mnt. Dew companion food, Nacho Combos. --Alan 15:05, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

A Well-Deserved Salutation

I must say you admins are good. You have carefully controlled the adjustment to the quantum shift in the ST universe that has occurred with ST XI, setting out specific policies and guidelines on which new additions to the wiki are added from the movie, and regulated the input in a very competent. To be honest, I was expecting chaos. I should have known better; this wiki has existed for years and thus has certainly had to deal with such changes before, every time a new movie or series comes out. You, Shran, Morder Jörg and the other admins handle your business here very well indeed. I salute all of you, as should every other user. :) – Crimsondawn hears you... 21:38, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Heads up

Just wanted to be forthright and let you know I tweaked the whole alternate Constitution class page, just because we still haven't found an in-film justification yet. I'm just going with site policy, no trying to be contrary or anything. I'd like to think we're both working towards site improvement, here. Thanks in advance, Dangerdan97 15:54, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

block status

I've unblocked you as I can't see any harrassment you have committed. I have never seen you act in a harassing manner and absent direct proof I see no reason to block you at all, let alone for a month.--31dot 21:53, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, but it didn't matter, I could have unblocked myself at any time. --Alan 00:39, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


Hi, Alan! I'd like to take this opportunity to let you know that I am truly very sorry for having believed you were "out to get me", as it were, and for consequently banning you. I realize I probably should have made another attempt to talk through my issues with another admin, instead of trying to deal with it myself. You have my humble apologies, and your work here is fantastic - I never meant to criticize the majority of your edits and, now that Cid Highwind has helped me by explaining the need for disk space, I have a better understanding of why you've been deleting previous versions of images and I'm consequently more accepting of this happening, since I now know that the reason is disk space rather than sort of personal vendetta! I hope our disagreements are over, Alan, as I honestly am a fan of your work here on MA and would sincerely hate to "fall out" with such a valuable contributor as yourself! All the best, and may your good work continue! --Defiant 14:03, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Background performers

I'm working on a new subpage for you (and others) that will contain captures of the prominent background performers that we don't have articles for, yet. I'm not including each and every one but mainly the ones that stick out. I'll be posting them here. — Morder 22:53, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Re:Cleanup of ISS Enterprise bridge image

Hi! I saw you recently added an "image cleanup" boilerplate to this image - . May I ask how you think the image could be improved? Since it has no black bars or borders (at least, none that I can see), am I right in thinking that you believe the image's quality could be improved? I'd like to help out, if I can! :-) --Defiant 04:05, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Could use a new cap from the remastered episode, yes. --Alan 20:35, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply, Alan. I'd forgot those were available! I do agree that your suggestion would be a good idea. I'm personally unable to take screencaps from the remastered eps, though, so hopefully someone else can. Thanks again, Alan! :-) --Defiant 21:19, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Alan. I saw you uploaded the remastered cap. That's fantastic! The pic's well cool, too! Great job. --Defiant 14:41, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Great work, also, on Cargo bay of HMS Bounty.jpg], it's much better than my attempt (I can't do collages very well but I try, when need be!) Any chance you could let me know if you included any of my previous attempt in yours? Not only for the "created by" part of the image description page but also because I'd be interested to know how you managed to so successfully merge the caps. By the way, regarding the fairly new remasters, do you know what's up with Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country at all? It seems to have a completely different aspect ratio to the Special Edition DVD and cuts off part of the picture. Anyways, I don't mean to keep you, Alan - just thought I should let you know I'm impressed. :-) --Defiant 15:00, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Nah, it's an old file: "Created: Monday, September 15, 2008, 7:44:11 PM." I have most all the interior caps for the BoP filed, I just never had time to do the write-ups for them after I finished everything above the "Interior" section of the article. --Alan 15:05, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

[I.S.S. Enterprise

You deleted I.S.S. Enterprise with the edit summery "Unused redirect: content was: '#REDIRECT ISS Enterprise' (and the only contributor was 'Emmette Hernandez Coleman'". What did you mean by "unused"?--Emmette Hernandez Coleman 22:37, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

That was almost a year ago so let me speculate: Unused = not used. Nevermind the fact that it is not is standard MA naming format and is actually more keystrokes than where it is going to: ISS Enterprise. --Alan 14:58, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Some people could be in the habit of using periods after abbreviations, and just because nothing links to the redirect does not mean people are not typing it into the search box--Emmette Hernandez Coleman 18:27, 8 July 2009 (UTC)


Hey, Alan. Sorry I missed you on IRC yesterday, but I had a ton of things to do to get ready for my first week back at CNU, among other things. Also sorry for missing you this afternoon, I was actually sleeping at that time, lol! I will be online most of this evening if you want to talk. Sorry again. :( --From Andoria with Love 22:18, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Barclay Program 15 holograms

Thank you for the help, sorry about the first incorrect page, I will be more carefull next time. User:Shamutto 14:37, 29 August 2009 (UTC)


Re: "Why don't you lick me?" -- Because, despite popular belief, I don't actually swing that way. ;) Seriously, though, what's up? Sorry I missed you. From this moment on I demand that you not leave until I've replied to your message, no matter how long you have to wait! That's right, a Deeeeemaaaaaaaand it!!!! So, yah, um... reply back. :P --From Andoria with Love 19:35, September 19, 2009 (UTC)

IRC keeps disconnecting me. --Alan 20:08, September 19, 2009 (UTC)

Can you give me the website where you got the Buck-Tothed Alien Image?

Can you give me the website where you got the Buck-Tothed Alien Image?

Emergency turbolift

I believe the merge deleted the file, since I'm getting the "No file by this name exists, but you can upload one." message. - Archduk3:talk 22:28, November 3, 2009 (UTC)

Or I could look like a big jerk since you were in the middle of several merges. Sorry for the interrupt. :) - Archduk3:talk 22:42, November 3, 2009 (UTC)


My main thought was... do we really need a 10 page treatise on shirts? Or should we just link that one to Hawaiian shirts? :) -- sulfur 16:38, November 8, 2009 (UTC)

Do we really need two? --Alan 16:40, November 8, 2009 (UTC)

Star Trek starships

Hey. This may be interesting for you. I've added three images of Federation starships from the movie here. – Tom 14:54, November 13, 2009 (UTC)

Argo buggy image

As you started Argo (buggy) with 2 images (first edit), I figure you might know where they are. I clicked both image links and didn't see a deletion note. I replaced the first with an existing image that fits the caption, but didn't see one among the Nemesis images for the second one. Setacourse 21:18, November 25, 2009 (UTC)

It appears that someone moved the images and forgot to update pages that linked to them. I've fixed the second image now. -- sulfur 22:45, November 25, 2009 (UTC)

Thank you Sulfur! Setacourse 22:52, November 25, 2009 (UTC)

that would be Morder... not myself. --Alan 19:13, November 29, 2009 (UTC)

Unblock request

The user BlockProofed User, also known as User:, whom you blocked on October 10th of 2006, has requested to be unblocked on his talk page. As the admin who blocked him I thought you should know. You stated that it was due to block circumvention and harrasment, among other things. I don't know the circumstances of it but I did not wish to take action on his request since you dealt with it.--31dot 20:41, December 9, 2009 (UTC)

Actually Sannse blocked him for sockpuppetting indefinitely. I already talked to her about it and there's no reason to unblock him. — Morder (talk) 20:57, December 9, 2009 (UTC)

Ah- I only checked our block log.--31dot 21:14, December 9, 2009 (UTC)

How many Intrepid-class phaser arrays

Shran suggested I request your input at Talk:Intrepid class#Number of Phaser Arrays, as you're a knowledgable fellow about ship specs. Setacourse 00:43, December 25, 2009 (UTC)



I guess you're right. The talk page for the sidebar character notes that we should have one format - the most recent image first - and we tend to follow that everywhere. Though the template creator suggested otherwise. You're right that it's not a firm policy but it is an accepted one as evidenced by every character page except the few TOS ones. If we're going to have one standard for everyone one but TOS then it should be stated somewhere to avoid confusion for other editors who might do the same thing. — Morder (talk) 21:58, January 12, 2010 (UTC)

The sidebar template(s) should be updated to suit, and it should likely fit into the MOS in the character section. -- sulfur 22:04, January 12, 2010 (UTC)
I personally don't see a need for double sidebar images for most characters anyway, for the reasons of 1) the sidebar takes up too much of the the article in a section (eg. "early career/life") that is already "lite" and 2) the spinoff characters barely changed in their general appearance over their seven years and posting similar to identical images of the same individual is a redundant waste of article space. Otherwise, familiarity, as I recall, was always the guiding light towards which image was on top. 80 hours of 30 something actors vs. 6 hours of 60 something actors. --Alan 22:18, January 12, 2010 (UTC)


Hey Alan, long time no chat.

Mind if I bounce a 'user relations' question off of you, since you're active today also? What's the deal with OC? He's really upset about something but I'm not sure what he's on about. He's really clogging up my talk page. -- Captain MKB 01:48, January 31, 2010 (UTC)

He is upset that you have blocked an account that has not done any vandalism in a full week since their last block was lifted. Meaning that you have done a block on an IP address, possibly effecting multiple people, when no behavior warranted it. You did this as an honest mistake, but refuse to correct it. --OuroborosCobra talk 01:50, January 31, 2010 (UTC)

Darndest thing, OC -- every time I go to the block page, i get this message at the top of my screen saying I have a new talk page message. So I go to my talk page to read what's been written, and then I realize "oh, I navigated away from that other page before I finished changing that block setting". I guess it's really slowing me down from getting this situation dealt with. I must be lazy, just slowly chugging along trying slovenly to try and figure out how to work those darn checkboxes...

Sorry, Alan. -- Captain MKB 01:55, January 31, 2010 (UTC)

Unlikely, since you openly stated on your talk page that you have no intention of getting the situation dealt with via changing anything on block settings. --OuroborosCobra talk 01:57, January 31, 2010 (UTC)
No, I initially thought you had permissions to fix the setting, which was another error on my part, I interpreted your interest as your willingness to help figure out why the vandalism page had been expanded. I said it could be fixed, and I meant that. Instead of just saying "Gee, I'm not an admin", you launched into a long-winded and somewhat mean-spirited summary of my mistake(s) even as I started to open some tabs to clean up the vandalism page. After really trying to not take you seriously when you called me lazy and started showing your outrage, I'm kind of waiting for you to calm down, now, I guess, before I finish my administrative duties here. If I'd gone out for pizza, I guess Alan could have helped with the unblocking, as I would've been unable to answer your messages, OC. -- Captain MKB 02:14, January 31, 2010 (UTC)
Had you been out for a pizza and unable to answer my posts, you would have been unable to say you were doing the exact opposite of what you now claim you were doing. Which is entirely what caused this negativity on my part. You've now flipped and flopped on what you claim you were doing, intended to do, wanted to do, more times than I can count. Gee, you're wondering why someone might not get what it is you're doing? --OuroborosCobra talk 02:19, January 31, 2010 (UTC)
I guess all this conversation, along with your negativity, has made me quite confused as to what was more important: fixing that block setting, or answering your criticism. Even now, I'm just not sure whether I've stated exactly what my intention was. One sad note, however: I don't have enough cash on me to buy pizza. :( - Captain MKB 02:22, January 31, 2010 (UTC)


Will you please drop in on User Edisonfilms? He is currently in the process of vandalizing MA, some of which I've reversed. Blair2009 03:33, February 21, 2010 (UTC)

The creator of the Cardassian Guard article

The creator (Kyle) is very much to blame - he made an off-the-cuff decision without taking into consideration this impossible procedure for moving the article to another title. If he had named it "Cardassian military" from the start, none of this would've happened.

I've had to bend over backwards to demonstrate the obvious, namely that Gul Jasad never said that the Cardassian Guard is the military, but for whatever reason nobody wants to hear this - it's as if a nebulous consensus of people who haven't entered the discussion is more important than listening to a quote from the show. I'm not sure what the problem is here - what would be so wrong with moving the article to "Cardassian military"? Is MA supposed to be canon-derived or not? – NotOfTheBody 19:17, February 22, 2010 (UTC)

First of all, you need to check your facts before you go pointing fingers at people. "Kyle" did not create the name nor even prominently mention the name "Cardassian Guard" in any of his edits, and is in no way to blame for the discussion.
Second, you need to stop overdramatizing everyting by talking so much. No one is reading, replying or responding to your little naming vendettas because you are writing massive blocks of text that no one cares to read. In fact, I didn't even read what you wrote above beyond the name Kyle because I know don't have the desire to be innundated with the lack of succinctness. --Alan 19:41, February 22, 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, it was Tim Thomason who later moved it there, and his argument (as seen on the Romulan Guard page) is that making an assumption is fine. Mine is that it's equal to creativity, and MA isn't allowed to create, so we need to use "Cardassian military". It's a matter of MA principles, not so much the specific point of contention. Is that succinct enough for you? – NotOfTheBody 20:29, February 22, 2010 (UTC)

Kahless the Unforgettable

Hi, you had commented on my talk page back in 2008 to put in the cut legends about Kahless from Birthright II in the background section. I only noticed that comment now. I've added the information back in; better late than never! Puritan 17:46, July 3, 2010 (UTC)

HMS Enterprize Photo

I love that photo! It might be because it's awesome. Period. Or that I'm addicted to Star Trek!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :) The preceding unsigned comment was added by Renesmee Janeway (talk • contribs). 20:20, October 22, 2010



In VOY episode "Innocence," Paris mentions "pre-flight" and lists the categories checked. I can't find a page for this. Would it be an appropriate new page or is this info found elsewhere? Thanks.--Esllera 18:13, January 3, 2011 (UTC)

iPhone app

Moved to User talk:Xstefanx

Side bar individual pix

Since Memory Alpha changed the format for these pictures from image-top and caption-top to image and imagecap, I am having a problem printing these pixs. I use monobook and when I view the pix it is perfect, but if I look at it in print preview, or print it, the caption under the picture is doubled. Example: Anan 7: the caption Anan 7 is shown twice. One under the pix and the other right under the caption under the picture. This happens also with two pixs in the Sidebar mode. See below please, this is how it looks. Picture: imagecap:Anan 7 (2267) Anan 7 (2267) Gender: Male Species: Eminian Affiliation: Eminian Union Occupation: Leader of the Eminian High Council Status: Active (2267) Played by: David Opatoshu. Any help will be appreciated and I thank you. --Shamutto 19:41, March 19, 2011 (UTC)

You don't need to post this on every admin's talk page. One is enough. -- sulfur 23:59, March 19, 2011 (UTC)

Sorry when I didn't get a solution to the problem, I thought someone else could help me. Shamutto 21:36, March 19, 2011 (UTC)

please help

my friends and i want to build a prometheus class alfa section and where loking for blueprints that whe can use

if you have any please let me know

if you want to be in the crew also let me know that (please remember to let me know what department you want to be in --Armando.thijssen 21:17, June 23, 2011 (UTC)

Script for "The Lorelei Signal"?

Hello, Gvsualan. I see that, in 2006, you initiated the page about Dara, leaving the bg info note, "Dara was voiced by Nichelle Nichols. Her name was not spoken on screen, but comes from the episode's script." Does this imply that you have access to the script for TAS: "The Lorelei Signal"? If so, it would be helpful if you could double-check the scripted spelling of the name, as it is spelled "Darah" in the episode's novelization (in Star Trek Log 2). --Defiant 15:34, July 13, 2011 (UTC)

The same goes for Davison, which Alan Dean Foster (in "The Lorelei Signal"'s novelization) spelled "Davidson" but which you spelled "Davison" upon creating the page about her, in 2005. Any insight into how you obtained these spellings would be much appreciated. --Defiant 16:42, July 13, 2011 (UTC)



Hey I notice you haven't added since March. Are you still around? Noticed you created the Thundercats wiki on Wikia and was wondering if you would ever return to take an active hand in administration now that there's a new animated series out. Tyc 04:04, September 12, 2011 (UTC)

I don't have time much anymore. Kind of lost interest in Trek because there is nothing new to mull over & the TC wiki is still functioning? --Alan 02:56, December 1, 2011 (UTC)


Please see the discussion at the Memory Alfa forum --GNDN 19:18, March 5, 2012 (UTC)


Hi Gvsualan I expanded your edits on the Fenna page for DS9. I had just watched the episode tonight and I had searched for the page and thought I would edit it.

In addition to adding more text, I noticed the bottom photo of Fenna shedding a tear is not captioned correctly. This was not during the scene where she says goodbye to Sisko, rather she was standing on the bridge and she had just witnessed Gideon committing suicide in order to set Nidell free. I edited a caption for this photo but it didn't change on the front page and I was hoping that you might have the ability to change it since you added the photo. I know this is a photo of the day so I understand if you decide to leave it untouched.

thank you --Janiesuper (talk) 02:13, July 20, 2012 (UTC)

Caitian Admiral

I'm wondering about the image at Caitian-brown.jpg Where did it come from? As far as I can tell, it isn't a screen grab from Star Trek IV. The only shots I can find in the film of the Caitian Admiral are at 0:6:14, 0:4:40, both of which are out of focus, and have the wrong background, at 1:48:09, which seems to be the previous version of that file, and at 1:56:06 (during the credits), which has the wrong pose and lighting. Is it a scan from the Star Trek IV Sourcebook? Squigish (talk) 11:11, October 7, 2012 (UTC)


Hey, you.

I see you edited a few things on October 8th. What are the chances of you becoming a regular contributor again? Come to think of it, what are the chances of ME becoming a regular contributor again? :-P (Oh, and how the heck are you?) --From Andoria with Love (talk) 06:57, October 23, 2013 (UTC)

I'm good. Been watching TNG chronologically, been surprised how much has been missed, but really don't have the time I used to anymore... :( --Alan (talk) 00:46, November 26, 2013 (UTC)

You are stupid?!

Olympic class is a Star Trek Encyclopedia information. 09:43, November 2, 2013 (UTC)

No idea what you are getting at (as if I can remember something so specific that you are obviously singling out from something I've edited once in the past 9 years. --Alan (talk) 00:47, November 26, 2013 (UTC)


In which episode was this mentioned?

Greetings! In this edit you added "Dansk Lovsamling" and "Verdenskrigen IV" to the list of Human books in the Trek universe. Do you know which episodes they were mentioned in? Best Regards 20:33, September 19, 2014 (UTC)


Qwizards: Star Trek

Hello! We're starting to get things ready for the Trek 50th Anniversary, and we're looking for fans of the franchise that might be interested in participating in a Star Trek-themed Qwizards, Wikia's original quiz show! As an active admin on this community, I was wondering if you had any interest in participating in Qwizards: Star Trek? If you're not sure what Qwizards is, this landing page will give you a bit more information. This would probably happen around August, so let me know what you think! Grace (profile)•(talk) 21:25, March 4, 2015 (UTC)

Hello! Just checking in to make sure you saw this :) Grace (profile)•(talk) 16:11, March 13, 2015 (UTC)



Just wanted to say hi -- hope all is going well with you these days. -- sulfur (talk) 14:24, July 26, 2016 (UTC)

Yes, thanks. Married with Children took over my life, so to say. Saw the new movie last weekend and got the bug to come back. --Alan (talk) 21:24, July 26, 2016 (UTC)

Hi there

Hey Alan, just happened to be looking at RecentChanges and saw your name. I do not check in here very often at all, and edit even less frequently, but wanted to say hi. I hope all is going well with you and your family. I to know the busy life. Got my own great family now, and some nice professional obligations. --OuroborosCobra talk 23:47, August 12, 2016 (UTC)

Apologizes for the image

I should have consulted someone on the matter While we are on the subject, please take a look at this

this phaser pistol has a picture, though the item itself is a bit hard to see, and it doesn't seem to be talked about.

That and for the Mazarite sidearm and Tandaran pistol, is it alright that I put pictures for the weapons there

Let me know what you think about this, please and thank you for your time.

Aiden1700's [[User Talk:Aiden1700'stalk]]

Kantare pistols

the Kantare in the Enterprise episode Oasis had pistols that shot green beams, though they didn't kill on the first shot and were used on Malcolm,

These weapons were the only thing about the holographic crew that were real, as they fell to the floor when the crew were temporarily deactivated.

However, there is no mention of these weapons on the wiki

Let me know what you think about this, please and thank you for your time.

Aiden1700's [[User Talk:Aiden1700'stalk]]

Unnamed personnel redirects

It was my understanding that the categories were counterparts to list pages, so the Human category only contains the redirects to the the Human list pages, not that the category should contain all the redirects to Humans. Each list page, or group of list pages, should have their own category. Not sure if this makes sense, or if this is even what sulfur had in mind, but it was how I was doing it. - Archduk3 05:44, August 30, 2016 (UTC)

I don't know, it seems like every time I think I have it figured out, it changes. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 11:35, August 30, 2016 (UTC)
I started by list, then we started moving people around on the various lists. As such, I've been defaulting to species more often than not now, as it's easier.
Also, I've been trying to leave just one category on the RDs, since they're not the same as "real people", they don't need all of the descriptor categories. More the idea here is to be able to find them, and not lose them. -- sulfur (talk) 11:51, August 30, 2016 (UTC)

I still think "category name = target page(s)" is easier, since the redirects tend to include the species in the title, but it's not like I'm the one doing the work. :) - Archduk3 17:05, August 30, 2016 (UTC)

And that inevitably fails when we start to move stuff around like we've been doing a lot of as we start to clean these up. Ah well. As long as they're catalogued, I'm (personally) more or less happy. :) -- sulfur (talk) 18:28, August 30, 2016 (UTC)

USS Havana

I noted your changes to the USS Havana page. It seems to me that you went halfway in changing this page. As you claimed that this starship was not a Starfleet ship and did not really have USS, why did you not fully changed this page and rename it to Havana?--Memphis77 (talk) 19:21, September 8, 2016 (UTC)

I apparently don't have the hours you have to make all of the necessary edits required along with moving pages. I planned on getting around to it when I had more time. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 20:55, September 8, 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for responding.--Memphis77 (talk) 21:14, September 8, 2016 (UTC)

Category fixing

I wanted to thank you for the changes to "arts". I thought maybe you'd be interested in a similar suggestion I made about Category:Clothing @ MA:CS. --LauraCC (talk) 20:16, September 22, 2016 (UTC)


Hey there. Are you planning to create a new template? "Template:Main" was created by your bot on at least two pages, including Performers considered for Star Trek roles. Right now the links are red... Tom (talk) 12:55, September 24, 2016 (UTC)

Your username

I'm sure you've been asked this before, and I hope I don't come off as insulting, but I'm just curious: What in the oblivion is the origin of your username? Did you just smash your face into your keyboard and decide on the resulting string of characters? Now, I know that sounds insulting, but I ask because I have actually done that, and the randomness of your username made me assume that you formulated it in a similar manner.

If you don't respond, I understand, as this is a trivial/tangential topic, but I'd really like to know. It is truly unique username. 06:34, October 1, 2016 (UTC)

My former university + my name. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 06:36, October 1, 2016 (UTC)


Tried you on slack, realized you weren't on, so: I think the Bajoran scavengers were on the planet, not the station, which is why I left them. - Archduk3 03:38, October 2, 2016 (UTC)

"Unnamed..." lists

Hey there. We always sorted the entries on these pages alphabetically. Why have you decided to sort the entries on Unnamed Deep Space 9 Starfleet sciences division personnel chronologically? Tom (talk) 14:58, October 14, 2016 (UTC)

Why did you merge the Kzinti Telepath page?

I explained in Unnamed Kzinti discussion page why Kzinti Telepath should not be merged and you never addressed my points. --NetSpiker (talk) 00:56, November 7, 2016 (UTC) Never mind, I see that you've now unmerged it. --NetSpiker (talk) 07:09, November 7, 2016 (UTC)

Joan vs Julie

Hey. I am just curious. How do you know that Joan Johnson is Julie Johnson? Tom (talk) 16:24, November 22, 2016 (UTC)

Can you place Humanoid Figure under continued protection?

An unnamed contributor is continuing to add information about Noye to the Humanoid Figure article even though there is no evidence that they are the same character and there is evidence that they are not the same. Since I don't want to engage in another edit war, can you remove the information yourself and place the page under continued protection? --NetSpiker (talk) 00:28, December 6, 2016 (UTC)

Deleting files

Hey. When deleting "duplicate files", please leave at least one of the original files in the history to have a better comparison to the remastered file. Thanks. Tom (talk) 13:11, December 19, 2016 (UTC)

Linguistic Students

Hi, the anchors for the Human 22nd century linguistic students don't work when linked to, but I don't know how to fix this myself. Kennelly (talk) 14:53, December 20, 2016 (UTC)

it should be fixed now --Alan del Beccio (talk) 15:45, December 20, 2016 (UTC)


IS there a source that firmly establishes when the El-Aurian HW was assimilated?--Marhawkman (talk) 18:16, December 22, 2016 (UTC)

Why don't you leave that discussion to that page, instead of harassing other users.... --Alan del Beccio (talk) 00:41, December 23, 2016 (UTC)


Darryl Henriques

When removing an incite tag it would be great when you could provide a source. What for "public records" are you talking about? Tom (talk) 12:40, January 12, 2017 (UTC)

U.S. public records. Do i question every edit you do that i cannot personally verify? So, to quote you, "You can't have a web source for everything." --Alan del Beccio (talk) 13:16, January 12, 2017 (UTC)
I think that ThomasHL would've been happy if you'd simply said "US public records" as opposed to "public record". That's all. -- sulfur (talk) 13:36, January 12, 2017 (UTC)

[edit conflict] No you don't and I simply asked a question for a citation to verify information published, removed, published, and removed again here. No need to fire photon torpedoes. Tom (talk) 13:38, January 12, 2017 (UTC)

He lives in the U.S., so forgive me for assuming that one should presume 'that' to be the source of said public records.--Alan del Beccio (talk) 13:44, January 12, 2017 (UTC)


Hi Gvsualan, I have request. Do you know this Actor? [5]

--Matthew Bowyer Fan (talk) 12:35, January 26, 2017 (UTC)

No, could you hum a few bars?--Alan del Beccio (talk) 12:47, January 26, 2017 (UTC)

Not sure what do you mean? --Matthew Bowyer Fan (talk) 13:16, January 26, 2017 (UTC)

He appeared in one episode of Stargate SG-1: (Ethon) 9x15.

  • He wasn't credited.
  • He had no speaking role.


--Matthew Bowyer Fan (talk) 13:23, January 26, 2017 (UTC)

What I was saying is that I have no idea. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 15:29, January 29, 2017 (UTC)

Different actors

Hey. Just want to let you know that you've mixed two different actors into one character and added wrong information to the article about Ivor Bartels. The actor on the first picture is not Bartels and the appearances of him were added separated deliberately. Tom (talk) 19:59, January 27, 2017 (UTC)

I'm having a hard time believing that. The two actors pictured could not look any more alike, and indeed, the episode list between their two appearances perfectly coincide, where the "first actor's" last appearance ends within one episode of the "second actor's" first appearance. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 15:28, January 29, 2017 (UTC)

Request for feedback

I'd be very grateful for your opinion on the current Featured Article nomination (Bajoran history). --36ophiuchi (talk) 14:07, February 25, 2017 (UTC)

I wasn't aware that those were still a thing. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 14:15, February 25, 2017 (UTC)
The nominations or the Bajorans? :p Anyhow, does MA have an alternative way to feature articles? --36ophiuchi (talk) 17:29, February 25, 2017 (UTC)

Unnamed Humans

Hey, I think it was an inspired (though very untransparently executed) idea to put the uncertain era humans simply on the unnamed humans page like how it's done on the unnamed planets page. But why the hell not leave the links there, that makes no sense to me on so many levels. A page named "unnamed humans" surely should, if not directly cover, give access to all unnamed humans, not just cover a single type and then link to the category it is in for people wanting to see the rest. Or use a navigational template in a way that templates aren't meant to be used on part of a page templates aren't supposed to be, to replace part of a list. And, at the very least the page ought to be similar in function and setup to pages on unnamed members of other species.

What you've done essentially amounts to keeping the unknown era humans humans (all in one page), but deleting the unnamed humans page out of the blue and compensating for that by adding some frills. -- Capricorn (talk) 11:29, March 27, 2017 (UTC)

This wasn't something new. It was exactly what was done on the Unnamed Romulans page, ages ago. So in every sense it was transparent in the conformity of an existing format. Also, the whole point of categories was to get rid of lists, again, something that is not a new concept. But for shits and giggles, the Humans on the Ajilon Prime personnel are already listed, in the way you speak of, on the |Unnamed Humans (24th century) page, in context. Category:Unnamed Humans already "lists" the rest of the unnamed Humans you feel should be on that page, again using frills is the point of having frills, versus the 2005 approach on things. The rest is explained in the opening for the article. So I'm really not sure why I have to explain this after so long, like it's a new concept, because a less complicated way of expressing information was established a long time ago. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 11:40, March 27, 2017 (UTC)

Great, I'm aware of pages like those on the Romulans and the Klingons, and I'm all for rationalizing the pages along those lines. It's just that what you did isn't "exactly" what's done there, and it's the specific way you implemented your idea that I think is very odd. There's a template placed at a position in the article where templates have no busines being, seemingly to replace a list of "sub-pages", which isn't what templates are for. And as long as you do have an "unnamed humans" page rather then just a category, all articles relevant to that should be accessible from either that or its subpages, it doesn't do to do half a job and link to the category to compensate.
I can't say my main concern was the pages like Ajilon Prime personnel, I just put those them back because many of the entries on the list were not linked from where they ought to be, mostly the century-based subpages. (point in case, the Ajilon page is not actually currently linked where you say it is) Delete them there without placing them on the propper pages, and you just sever them from a hierarchy where they ought to be in. It's a mess, but it's important so I figured it needs to be either fixed or kept for now, not simply cut.
But ok, now that it's clear that you and me share essentially the same vision, so I hope it's ok that I'm going to give it another try. What I'm going to do is 1) make the page more like Unnamed Romulans, which means bringing back the century subpages and make changes re the template (which I figure is still worth having, but at it's proper page location) and changing the link to the category, and 2) make sure all other pages that were formally on the page are linked from the relevant century (or starfleet) lists, so that there's no reason they need to be on the Unnamed Humans page anymore. -- Capricorn (talk) 15:16, March 27, 2017 (UTC)


Why in the photo that I inputted this morning does Uhura's communication console (which is more accurate of what exploded in the episode Charlie X, because it was NOT the entire communications station) need to be changed?

Furthermore, the line in the photos that I or anyone else submit really do not the additional line that the images are from Paramount, because that is picked in the separate licensing information and further it doesn't pick up as line that is in the information that is seen onscreen on the internet. I dare say that line and it's need to be there should be considered redundant and useless especially if people are not seeing it there, and it is later in the licensing information.

And I write this, because as a person with Bachelor's Degree in History who had to take a lot of English classes and writing classes before I could graduate and pass them with at least a B or an A, I know that redundancy (especially that adds nothing) is really unnecessary and actually very inappropriate and offensive to many.

-- 13:35, May 11, 2017 (UTC)Peter Bradfield|Newman3-- 13:35, May 11, 2017 (UTC)

First of all, several of the images you uploaded have an incorrect aspect ratio. They are all stretched wider than they should be. For one of the Uhura images, there's a black line down the one side of the image.
In terms of the "line in the photos" portion that you reference, at Memory Alpha, we require that all images are described, cited, have ownership shown, and categorized. The first and the last are for the purposes of other users of the site in order to be able to find useful images that may already be uploaded. The citation tells people WHERE the image is from (whether an episode, a movie, a book, etc). The ownership shows the licensing that the image is used under, and who owns it. For images from episodes and films, we use the {{image star trek}} shortcut. This gives the required information in a very simple fashion.
I'm not sure how this information is "very inappropriate and offensive to many".
Finally, for someone who had to take a lot of English classes, I'm disappointed that you still have issue with "it's" and "its". -- sulfur (talk) 14:53, May 11, 2017 (UTC)

Then in your correction on the photo of Uhura loses her singing voice, you get very wrong the correction that it is "looses". I suggest you look at your dictionaries before you correct someone on this wiki or any other, because I had "loses" correct. There is a very big difference. I'm glad someone has corrected it behind you.

This goes along with your getting wrong correcting it from 'communication console' to 'communications station' 'that exploded'. As well as the redundant need you find to have to post that the image came from Paramount, when that is already stated quite clearly, and your redundant line on that doesn't even show up.

I know Michigan where you are from went stupidly to Trump in the last election, but please don't continue the stupidity by not knowing English in terms of writing.

As I meant to post earlier, I at least had to take many English and writing classes and pass them between a B and an A to get my Bachelor's Degree in History, so I'm very well aware to write and that includes knowing the English language, including the difference between "lose(s)" and "loose(s)", Uhura lost her voice or was about to lose it, her voice was "loose" -- totally different concept, as well as the difference between a single console (which by the way was in the script of the episode of Charlie X, and aired as such) and whole station. Do you? --Newman3 (talk) 19:19, May 11, 2017 (UTC)Peter Bradfield Newman3--Newman3 (talk) 19:19, May 11, 2017 (UTC)

You are new here, and it is my job to help keep things in order. I don't give a crap what you think your credentials supposedly are and how they are relevant here, nor why you even bothering with this discussion, nor how your attitude about this is going to help your weak position. Point blank: your contributions are chocked full of spelling errors, your grammar is poorly formulated and overstated, and your facts are completely backwards. No one "corrected" anything "behind" me.
The use of the {{image paramount}} is the only copyright plate we use on every single episode screencap posted to this site, so seriously, get off that already. In the meantime, you might want to reread communications station article, where you will find, by no means, that my correction "wrong", as you say. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 19:54, May 11, 2017 (UTC)

Just wanted clarification

Hello Alan, I'm a relatively new user and heavily edited the Starfleet uniform (mirror) article. I would just like an active admin to clarify that my edits were appropriate, since no other user has made a comment yet. Green47 (talk) 16:01, June 1, 2017 (UTC)

Yeah. It seems fine. Usually no comment is a good comment. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 16:03, June 1, 2017 (UTC)
Thanks! Seems I'm off to a good start. Green47 (talk) 16:04, June 1, 2017 (UTC)


Related to what you've been doing recently. Do you have anything to add to this discussion? --LauraCC (talk) 18:42, June 12, 2017 (UTC)


your profile image isnt a image but an as image embedded text document with an error. May fix that??

-- 12:06, June 13, 2017 (UTC)

Pout-Pout Fish Goes to Space

I have removed all photos from my page. Feel free to delete them from the library. It aint worth it. --Jeff111458

We have 40,000+ files on this site that are all tagged and stamped the same way. I'm just trying to get yours in sync with the rest of our database. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 15:43, July 6, 2017 (UTC)

Nah. It's fine. I don't need any photos. The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jeff111458 (talk • contribs).

But asking whether or not mine contribute or are for self-promotion? Believe me, it is not worth it. The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jeff111458 (talk • contribs).

Because that was a legitimate question. You have a website, as do we, but ours is on a singular focus. I'm just trying to bring up the rationale of whether or not all those "examples" of work are really necessary here or not. There's a fine line. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 16:22, July 6, 2017 (UTC)

And the problem is solved. They are gone. The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jeff111458 (talk • contribs).

Glad to see we could handle this like adults. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 16:36, July 6, 2017 (UTC)
Atta boy. The preceding unsigned comment was added by 2601:241:C200:5E20:3AC9:86FF:FE22:EA49 (talk).

Quite a lovely universe you've created. The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jeff111458 (talk • contribs).

Ditto. Clearly compromise was never on the table. Just clear your page and stomp away. Alan del Beccio (talk) 17:50, July 6, 2017 (UTC)

LOL! The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jeff111458 (talk • contribs).

Adults, yes. I like the heading you added. Well done.

It is what it is. Are you done trolling now? --Alan del Beccio (talk) 03:04, July 7, 2017 (UTC)

I've seen your edit. You're very kind. Thank you.

Jean-Luc Picard (mirror)

Can you please delete the Jean-Luc Picard (mirror) page, a user made it and Jean-Luc Picard (mirror) wasn't in any Star Trek show, thank you.--Typhuss999 (talk) 23:44, July 6, 2017 (UTC)

A note of appreciation

Just wanted to say I noticed that you have done so much lately, particularly tedious redirect, delete, and move work. (some of the last one (okay, LOTS of the last one) I initiated. This is kind of a thank you/appreciate it/etc. --LauraCC (talk) 18:12, July 13, 2017 (UTC)

Latest Revert

Hello, I was wondering if there is a reason you reverted my last edits. I would like this wiki to be as accurate as possible. I have been researching this change with the royalties for a long time now. I even attempted to contact the original person who made the original claim. Asking him what evidence he had for this claim. Jrt05 (talk) 14:17, July 15, 2017 (UTC)

I did open a talk page to discuss if you're interested: Talk:Nicholas_Locarno#Paying_Royalties_-_Tom_Paris

Jrt05 (talk) 14:24, July 15, 2017 (UTC)

You removed a large chunk of text that was cited to the TNG season 5 dvd special features with prejudice. If you have concerns with a specific portion of the text remove just that portion, because clearly something regarding the connection of the two characters was mentioned in that citation to that paragraph, and you disregarded the entire thing. That's why I reverted it. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 23:08, July 15, 2017 (UTC)

I did only delete what wasn't sourced. I watched that memorable missions feature TNG season 5 disk 7 many times. I just watched it again to make sure my memory wasn't wrong. The things I deleted aren't sourced by that. Robert McNeil talks about other things with Locarno and Paris, but not that. I honestly don't understand the hostility here. Maybe this wiki isn't for me. Jrt05 (talk) 00:39, July 16, 2017 (UTC)

What hostility? You have to understand from the administrative standpoint where your first two edits to MA are removing information and making no effort to preserve or explain the effort that seems to be legitimately cited, on the talk page, that's all. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 02:27, July 16, 2017 (UTC)

I don't know what to tell you. I attempted to make a good faith edit, I put the following explanation for my edit in my edit comment "No evidence for statement. If evidence is found, will be added back in."

I was reverted by you without comment. I nicely asked the reasoning behind the revert, I even opened a talk page if you wanted to discuss it, I put a lot more info about my edit in the talk page. I was met with a terse response about removing too much text. No discussion, no nothing.

I tried everything I knew to reach out, and attempt to resolve what I was thinking and attempting to do. Should I reserve my edits to simple spelling corrections? Save the large edits for Administrators?

If you don't want to discuss this, please let me know. I'm honestly not sure of the etiquette of talking on somebody else's page. Jrt05 (talk) 02:51, July 16, 2017 (UTC)

You are taking this too personally. Just next time add a discussion to the talk page after you remove something that has been long-standing on a page that is of questionable content. Leave it there for discussion as you remove it and start the discussion with the text in question heading the discussion. Always try to preserve information. Again, based on my understanding of what was removed and the placement of the citation, it looked like you removed something that was cited, declaring that it wasn't. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 18:27, July 16, 2017 (UTC)


Do you know those 2 actresses?

Link:latest?cb=20110820181313 Link:latest?cb=20110820182311

Thanks in Advance! --Matthew Bowyer Fan (talk) 15:31, July 20, 2017 (UTC)

No. Are they missing? --Alan del Beccio (talk) 15:32, July 20, 2017 (UTC)

Nope. I'm trying to identify some unknown extras, which sometimes appear in another film/show. Sometimes there's chance that someone will recognize them. Thanks for trying! --Matthew Bowyer Fan (talk) 15:37, July 20, 2017 (UTC)

Renaming character pages

I've noticed that you renamed the Andrew Stiles, Dawson Walking Bear, George Stocker and Vincent DeSalle pages to remove their script-only first names. Are you planning to do the same with every page that has a script-only first name or last name? --NetSpiker (talk) 10:50, July 31, 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure the scope yet. The discussion stopped dead, so I basically just "undid" #1, #3, and #4 because I moved them originally (or last, I suppose), and I was going through TAS stuff and just moved #2 because it was simple enough at the time to do, and until you had said something, I never realized it was wrong. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 12:01, July 31, 2017 (UTC)


I understand the block but is there a reason you removed talk page access for this person? 31dot (talk) 10:20, August 3, 2017 (UTC)

Nope, probably an accident. Not that there is anything to discuss. The big ole message boilerplate that says "no spoilers" when you first log onto MA should be indication enough. When your first 7 edits to this site break that, then you know what you're doing. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 10:38, August 3, 2017 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks for clarifying 31dot (talk) 10:50, August 3, 2017 (UTC)


I did an "Oops!". I created a new page, Zefram Cochrane Space Flight Center, based on information from the Star Trek Encyclopedia. According to this source (4th ed., vol. 2, p. 513), the name came from signage on the set. It is the formal name for the facility informally named NX-Launch Complex. I was not aware of this other page, as there were few links to it. Can you please merge the two pages? Thanks.--Memphis77 (talk) 21:45, August 15, 2017 (UTC)

How about you just move the affected text from one to the other where you want it, then I'll merge the histories when you're done? --Alan del Beccio (talk) 21:49, August 15, 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion. It's done. The page to keep is the Zefram Cochrane Space Flight Center. Again, thanks.--Memphis77 (talk) 22:18, August 15, 2017 (UTC)

Chicago Cubs anchors

Hi, somehow the anchors for the Chicago Cubs don't work, at least not for me. Kennelly (talk) 17:04, August 22, 2017 (UTC)

The anchor had a capitalization error in it. Fixed now. -- sulfur (talk) 17:14, August 22, 2017 (UTC)

Adding assumption of foreknowledge

Hi, Alan. Please don't make any more edits like this: [6] I've been attempting to iron out assumption of foreknowledge, so please don't add it. The policies and guidelines clearly state to "use simple and unambiguous language. Although Memory Alpha is primarily intended for other Star Trek fans, it should also be readily accessible for non-fans. This means that jargon should be explained, and the context should be established, to make the setting and background abundantly clear for all readers." TOS nowadays isn't watched by even all Star Trek fans, so I suggest you bear that in mind while editing. Thank you. --Defiant (talk) 06:08, August 30, 2017 (UTC)

Of course, yet another reason not to state "Kirk's five-year mission..." is because we don't know whether TOS portrays the only five-year mission Kirk went on. As the five-year mission page states, some sources speculate he went on another five-year mission during the TOS movie era. As a result, stating "a five-year mission," as was originally stated on that page you changed, was a lot more accurate. --Defiant (talk) 06:11, August 30, 2017 (UTC)


Sorry for the wrong placement of the template (but if it's wrong, it's also wrongly placed in the other Great Houses articles, like House of Duras or House of Mogh, which I based my edits on). JagoAndLitefoot (talk) 01:53, September 27, 2017 (UTC)

Starfleet Armada in Discovery

On your comments about the naming of the Starfleet armada in Discovery "Battle at the Binary Stars," I names the ships in order of when they dropped out of warp. Helmsman Connor reads the names an order that is not alphabetical, and I assumed they were read in when the ships dropped out of warp to assist the Shenzhou.

Hope this Helps

Cap1701 The preceding unsigned comment was added by CaptainKirk1701 (talk • contribs).

Thanks. Though try explain it next time without saying "assumed". --Alan del Beccio (talk) 00:50, September 29, 2017 (UTC)


I'm concerned about accessibility for blind users. Do you have a better solution on how to refactor comments on talk pages so that they are accessible to screen readers? —Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 23:34, October 1, 2017 (UTC)

Are you a blind user? --Alan del Beccio (talk) 23:42, October 1, 2017 (UTC)

No. —Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 00:37, October 2, 2017 (UTC)

You're welcome. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 00:43, October 2, 2017 (UTC)


I'm not sure why I would be thanking you, nor am I sure why you are implying that only the blind should care about accessibility. So, again, do you have a solution for making comments more legible for screen readers other than just following the help documentation at MediaWiki and the practice of every other wiki using it? —Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 20:00, October 3, 2017 (UTC)

Quite frankly, we've been doing it this way for well over a decade, and not once has anyone complained about their screen readers not working on our format. That tells me two things: first, that you are wrong about screen readers, and second, you're wasting my time trolling about the way we do things. It's clearly never been a problem until you arrived, which means, odds are, you are the problem, so adapt or leave. Thanks. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 20:29, October 3, 2017 (UTC)

Gabriel Lorca page.

I just wanted to let you know that I added the Gabriel Lorca page, as the new episode of Star Trek: Discovery airs earlier in Canada than it does here in the United States. I included a spoiler warning, so I believe that it was okay to add this. I just wanted to let you know, because I saw that you removed the page last week for being early. Here, I feel it is the right time. Roger Murtaugh (talk) 00:01, October 2, 2017 (UTC)

Well last week made sense because he hadn't appeared yet. I guess it would have made more sense if there was actual context from the episode than generic stuff but sure, do whatever. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 00:05, October 2, 2017 (UTC)

That's good to know for future additions. Thank you. Roger Murtaugh (talk) 00:11, October 2, 2017 (UTC)

It would probably be best to reply to other people's comments on the page they left their comment on rather than replying on their page. Also, if you start a conversation, you will also hold the same position in the conversation, in terms of intents, so that each indent represents the same person, that way it is easier to follow who says what. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 00:14, October 2, 2017 (UTC)

I realized it after I had posted the reply on their page that I should've posted it on my page and by the second part of your message, do you mean that I don't have to put a colon before my message? I always assumed you just indented once more than the person who had just replied. Roger Murtaugh (talk) 00:17, October 2, 2017 (UTC)

Spoiler tag

Yes sir, my bad...

--Noah Tall (talk) 14:12, October 2, 2017 (UTC)


Why did you remove the ship being designed by John Eaves?--- Jaz 02:51, October 11, 2017 (UTC)

The best answer would be that ship design information has always tended to go on the class, or in the case, Clarke-type, page. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 02:54, October 11, 2017 (UTC)

Nice to see that I can come back after 10 years and nothing's changed...--- Jaz 02:57, October 11, 2017 (UTC)

Glad to be of service! Welcome back! --Alan del Beccio (talk) 03:00, October 11, 2017 (UTC)

Monac's sun

I left a response to your question about the star "Monac" in the talk page.--Memphis77 (talk) 01:56, October 12, 2017 (UTC)

New episode of "Star Trek: Discovery".

"Choose Your Pain", the new episode of Star Trek: Discovery is on CBS All Access. I guess it's early. I just thought I'd let you know as I've begun adding new content. Roger Murtaugh (talk) 00:14, October 16, 2017 (UTC)

Old Britain

I would like to make a small addition to Old Britain, which as you might recall is protected. What's the way to do this, exactly? Do I request temporary unprotection or submit text or something? -- Capricorn (talk) 13:48, October 16, 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, I'll just unlock it. If the user that was a problem comes back I'll deal with him differently. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 13:52, October 16, 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. -- Capricorn (talk) 15:19, October 16, 2017 (UTC)

A question about progress

I want to ask, if there is still interest about leaving Wikia/FANDOM. The discussion in the german MA have reached a crucial point, but before we decide our further actions, we want to know if you're (the english MA) planning to follow us. It is a consent, that we won't make any further movements, as long, as this question is not or negativ answered.

At the moment, we have three different options: 1. Move to Miraheeze (a service which is depending on donations; which is perhaps a little bit fishy, look for your self); 2. Move to ShoutWiki; 3. Make an own Website (this case is only an option, when both, the german und english version, are moving and is financed through donations over Patreon (perhaps mainly through english fans). We are not able to finance the website on our own through Patreon; the german fanbase is simply to small).

Have a nice day. --Phoenixclaw ~ Doctor Who Wiki - Memory Alpha (DE) 15:19, October 17, 2017 (UTC)

Addendum: Because we received no answer to this request, we're going to halt the process of our movement; even, as there are further tensions with Wikia. If you or another archivist of MA/en still want to give a statement to this discussion, please answer here (first or last section). --Phoenixclaw ~ Doctor Who Wiki - Memory Alpha (DE) 13:14, October 21, 2017 (UTC)

I can't get a response in my side. So I guess we're just going to suffer on. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 14:00, October 21, 2017 (UTC)

Well, in this case... I'm going to inform the others, that we have no other choice than to stop the project. It simply doesn't make any sense to be the only version of Memory Alpha, which is breaking apart. Even when the struggle is going on (what we just feel some days ago).

The next step is to archive all gained information, including the software, with which we can save the pages und images of our wiki; and then to archive the whole discussion. Until next time... Whenever the wind is changing, just follow the link and reactivate the discussion. Bye from the german MA. --Phoenixclaw ~ Doctor Who Wiki - Memory Alpha (DE) 17:20, October 27, 2017 (UTC)

Update: We chanced our plans. We're not going to halt the discussion, but push it forward. Our community decided, that we have finally enough from Wikia, after they deleted an entire article for no reason and without commentary. I hope the MA/en will join us sooner or later in this process. -- --Phoenixclaw ~ Doctor Who Wiki - Memory Alpha (DE) 11:44, November 3, 2017 (UTC)

We apparently are content with just simply being annoyed when wikia involves themselves with our wiki, and being apathetic the rest of the time. So yeah. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 11:47, November 3, 2017 (UTC)

Update #2: We started the final talks about the leaving process and are now standing in front of the final decisions we need to take. (Yes, bad expression. Shh.) We're still hoping, that the MA/en will join us, now, that we are really going to start the leaving process. Just leave a message or start a discussion or whatsoever. We're waiting for your turn. --Phoenixclaw ~ Doctor Who Wiki - Memory Alpha (DE) 19:27, November 24, 2017 (UTC)

Regarding the comment you removed at Talk:Starbase 157

I can see why you removed the comment, it was harsh to the point of being ugly. And somehow since I went to bed yesterday the whole issue has kinda resolved itself, so the what I'm going to ask you is kinda moot. But, how should I have handled the situation? The user in question posted a reply that made it pretty clear that they did not have good reason to add the Beta Quadrant location. But since they removed it you say I can't use this information - meaning I have no basis to remove information that I know is wrong.

I very much want to do better in the future, but embarrassingly I don't really know what other direction I could have taken. So I'd like to humbly ask you for some guidance. -- Capricorn (talk) 18:57, October 18, 2017 (UTC)

I replied to the talk page in question, but even looking at the map with fresh eyes, and having no comparative basis (ie the map books the images came from), you can clearly see a distinct line between the Alpha and Beta Quadrants, and most everything that is legible falls into the Beta Quadrant portion of the map. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 23:09, October 19, 2017 (UTC)

Okay. That wasn't really the kind of answer I expected, but I'll take it from here and look at that comment, and if needed continue the discussion in a more level headed manner. Though for now I've got to say, whether the large map had an Alpha/Beta boundary isn't really very relevant to the discussion I was trying to have. -- Capricorn (talk) 13:34, October 20, 2017 (UTC)

For whatever reason, your comment and the discussion on the other talk question is somewhat lost on me. For one, I am not watching DIS, and for another, it's hard to reply to a question that to me, reads really rather open ended(ly). In my last reply, I was just trying to objectively address the map issue that created the situation that made this personal.
To me, he tried to defuse the situation by removing his comment because I can certainly understand the need to walk away once in a while. Reverting his edit, then pouring fire on it doesn't instill the community spirit we are often accused on lacking. So it's probably just easier to leave it at that. Whether directly, or indirectly, after reviewing the evidence, he seems to be right, I just don't think he knew it, exactly. I think he is an above average contributor, so he deserves the benefit of the doubt, until things are figured out, conclusively.
Probably still not the answer you were looking for, but I guess, I'm still not seeing things the same way you were. I'd rather not see his contributions here end. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 13:58, October 20, 2017 (UTC)

No, that is actually exactly the insight I hoped for when I asked you the question and it has helped me. To be clear, I really do not want to lose Memphis either, although part of why I reacted so strongly, was triggered one could almost say, is was that the situation seemed freakishly similar to the one that resulted in the very painful incident and then banning of what I'm pretty sure is Memphis' previous alias. (though if something like that was really going on, the tone of my comment was going to make things worse rather then better, so shame on me)

That being said, for me discussions like this are purely about getting getting the facts and thereby the article right (to the smallest and most pedantic details). Those discussions should purely be about arguments and I think I manage pretty well to have them without taking things personally or seeing people as opponents to beat. But it's not completely realistic to expect others and yourself to act like perfect logicians, and I only recognized that for Memphis it must have seemed more threatening when it was too late. And that's where I go wrong, I didn't see the situation as a tension building up and in possible need of diffusion, but just as an ongoing technical discussion. And ultimatly I've always been able to accept when a community consensus disagreed with me, but it's much harder when I feel a fair discussion isn't being held. So I felt that removed comment warranted a follow up - but it just wasn't worth it in human cost, I see that now. I should have disengaged myself, or at the very least very strongly de-escalated (I think I might be up to the latter in future situations, hope I'm right. In any case I'll be very careful). Now that the emotional component of the discussion seemed cooled down, I'll add one more post where I try to steer the discussion back to the issue I think I see. At this point I don't know how much good that will do, but it's as good as I can state my case, which is important to me, and I think it won't cause further problems. If that doesn't lead anywhere, then I'll accept that consensus is against me and move on.

As a final thought: I really want to thank you for making so much effort to engage with me here. I was a bit shocked myself by my outburst, and have been in soulsearching mode ever since about the balance between having a discussion I think needs to be had and, well, avoiding things like that. And your view on the situation was very helpful. You're a fantastic Admin. -- Capricorn (talk) 15:30, October 20, 2017 (UTC)

Warp factor

Hi Gvsualan

I tried to add warp factor 63.88 as mentioned in Voyager episode Equinox.

Where the crew of the Equinox captured a nucleogenic life-form, whose dead bodies could be used as a special fuel for a converted reactor on the Equinox.

As far as I know, this seems to be the highest warp factor mentioned in trek.

I'm not sure why it was deleted.

Do I need to supply screen cap of dialogue to the admin or something ?

--Tp4tissue (talk) 02:51, October 19, 2017 (UTC)

Because what you are stating is original research. No such warp factor was stated and warp factor calculations have never been established. See MA:NOT. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 02:57, October 19, 2017 (UTC)

--Alan del Beccio

So, Even if the character specifically states that he traveled 10,000 light years in 2 weeks.

We can not infer a warp factor ?

I see that in the tables used in the warp factor section directly use warp factor cubed to deduce the speed at which the discussed vehicle is traveling at.

Why is the backwards application not valid ?

If it's 10,000 lightyears, divided by 14/365 days, Apply warp factor equation, Cube root, = 63.88 --Tp4tissue

This is more of a discussion for talk:Warp factor. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 23:01, October 19, 2017 (UTC)


Is there a way I can contact you privately, like we did some years ago? ;-) --Jörg (talk) 11:05, November 5, 2017 (UTC)

I'll send you a FB message. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 14:42, November 6, 2017 (UTC)

Mhh, nothing came through. --Jörg (talk) 15:42, November 6, 2017 (UTC)

Oh sorry, I haven't gotten to it yet. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 15:43, November 6, 2017 (UTC)

I'm sorry. I misread and thought you had written "I've sent". --Jörg (talk) 15:47, November 6, 2017 (UTC)

Ok, sent --Alan del Beccio (talk) 15:51, November 6, 2017 (UTC)

Cheeron name source

Regarding the Cheeron page that you created, can you tell me which version of the script the name comes from? --NetSpiker (talk) 11:23, November 7, 2017 (UTC)

Not offhand. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 11:58, November 7, 2017 (UTC)


Stockholm is most definitely not in North Eastern Eurasia, if anything it's North Western Eurasia. I think NE stands for North Europe, but in order not to speculate of course NE is sufficient in the Eurasia article. And what that has to do with "common sense" eludes me. I agree with your edit, but frankly didn't like the tone of your edit summary. Kennelly (talk) 09:08, December 7, 2017 (UTC)

Sorry you feel that way. Regardless, it was just as completely unnecessary to pretentiously remove it altogether, in the first place. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 12:48, December 7, 2017 (UTC)



Since 2011 disambiguation pages are for both the natural title and similar titles. You seem to be working on the older policy. - Archduk3 20:52, January 9, 2018 (UTC)

Explain.--Alan (talk) 20:59, January 9, 2018 (UTC)

Memory Alpha talk:Disambiguation#Policy adjustment. It was my understanding that since then we wanted Jason Alexander listed at Alexander (disambiguation), for example. - Archduk3 21:03, January 9, 2018 (UTC)

That's certainly not my understanding of that, as this works just fine in finding the same information, while Alexander (disambiguation), at preseent, still satisifies " resolve the conflict that occurs when articles about two or more different topics have the same natural title or are substantially similar in title". There is no conceivable situation that I see that someone will confuse Jason Alexander and Alexander, so as to link one when they meant the other. --Alan (talk) 21:12, January 9, 2018 (UTC)

Fair enough, but I still think Ben went to far, since we don't even list the other Bens anymore. - Archduk3 21:31, January 9, 2018 (UTC)

You lost me there, so I'll guess? I'm just retooling the less malignant pages in this shit storm of misused, misunderstood and inconsistent system. Yes, I probably [c]ould put Ben back together into something more comparable to Bill (which, really, I discovered that slightly sense appealing format after the fact), but at the moment prior, I was really trying to focus on the namespace conflict resolution thing and appeal more towards avoiding misusing/confusing links, not as an alternative t=o search function that needs to be constantly updated and monitored – maybe there is a universe where this makes sense, but I don't see it here. --Alan (talk) 22:19, January 9, 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, my reply was longer before I had to reload the page and lost it. I figured it was better to leave something instead of leave you hanging for a bit.

Wikia used to break the search every few years, if not more often, so there have been times when the search was pretty much useless. Searching on mobile still isn't great, depending on a number of factors outside of our control, so there are still some reasons to have lists like Bill, which is a good example IMO. My personal opinion has pretty much been so long as the disambiguation links to the required pages, everything else is just a bonus. If you're trying to impose some order though, that would be a different story. - Archduk3 22:39, January 9, 2018 (UTC)

Carender and N. Myers

Back in 2008 you left a message saying that the characters Carender and N. Myers should be switched around. Can you explain why? --NetSpiker (talk) 04:50, January 27, 2018 (UTC)

"UDF-RPR" split discussion

Hello Alan, would you mind weighing back in on this discussion? Thank you. --| TrekFan Open a channel 22:01, February 3, 2018 (UTC)


Hello, could you help us on MA-fr ? Ours topbanners ("real wolrd article", "multiple realities", "mirror universe") are invisibles. I don't understand how to change comon.CSS for to correct that. Thank you. C-IMZADI-4 (talk) 01:24, March 6, 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, that's not my strong suit. Try User:Archduk3. --Alan (talk) 01:25, March 6, 2018 (UTC)

ok, thank you, I asked him, but he didn't answer me C-IMZADI-4 (talk) 04:37, March 6, 2018 (UTC)

Qo'noS and editing in general

It may be just me, but I've always thought that a wiki is a collaborative environment where other contributors see what I'm going for (especially after insanely detailed change explanations in history) and together we arrive at some kind of an improved version that everyone is happy with, as opposed to the current approach of Attempt 1 (um, revert?), Attempt 2 (what is this, revert), Attempt 3 (obviously revert, block article).

You can't make a page into holy writ where each sentence must be discussed before being inserted (otherwise, revert). Rather, everyone should be required to understand the problem before reverting and make only the changes that are absolutely necessary, the default assumption being that the editor knows what they're doing (especially after they explain the issue in editing history). -- PreviouslyOn24 (talk) 13:44, March 27, 2018 (UTC)

If there is an "edit war", which is a 'thing' because it is one of the default reasons to lock a page, then it is best to return it to the pre-"edit war" state and allow the involved parties discuss why or why not on the talk page. Had you simply removed the "Kling" reference, added it to the talk page, and explained/discussed why it was removed, that would have been one way to avert how far things have gotten. Had you not re-reverted two previous reverts (not saying the others involved were any better for what they did) and started a discussion on the talk page, that too would have been one way to avert how far things have gotten. strive for community solutions because the talk page can be used to iron out differences of opinion concerning the article's validity. I don't personally care to be involved with the discussion; I am more interested in seeing a discussion hammered out instead. --Alan (talk) 13:54, March 27, 2018 (UTC)

The key difference is that I did not actually "re-revert reverts", but instead made three separate attempts at coming up with a version others would be happy with, yet all I saw were three different people treating this sentence as the intro to the Constitution. I've seen this situation here often; it often allows the original writer of the article to have fun with hidden assumptions and incorrect emphasis, while everyone afterwards must take the ultimate pains to discuss each and every holy word before changing it. I'm just saying it's not a sufficiently dynamic approach; rather, anyone should be able to change anything given actual arguments, while unsubstantiated, simple reverts (which is what actually caused the "war") should be forbidden. -- PreviouslyOn24 (talk) 14:04, March 27, 2018 (UTC)

I can't disagree, some are more liberal that other's with the revert button ("see talk page" would have helped in this case), but in the end (and this is a fact that I was not aware of until I read talk:Qo'noS because I don't watch Discovery) those names are in the intro are legit, so perhaps, after all, having all the facts is key before attempting to change something that should decidedly not be changed. --Alan (talk) 14:09, March 27, 2018 (UTC)

Communication category

It wasn't clear to me what you wanted to do with Category:Communication in regards to reorganizing communications technology, so I pretty much left it as is. I figured when you're not busy with unnamed redirects you can take a look at this. You know, sometime in 2020. - Archduk3 11:52, April 6, 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll add it to the list. (told ya) --Alan (talk) 11:57, April 6, 2018 (UTC)

Merging the unnamed Risians pages

Why did you merge those pages? Was it because there's (as of yet) no 23rd century Risians, so there's a gap there? --LauraCC (talk) 17:16, April 6, 2018 (UTC)

Than was a nonfactor, but I won't say it didn't cross my mind. I separated it because I thought it would be easier to organize and create redirect links for, but it was more an experiment than a necessity, because either way it's still manageable. So yeah, I really didn't have any better reason to separate it than I did to re-merge it. --Alan (talk) 17:48, April 6, 2018 (UTC)

Acceptable redirect

Would it be acceptable to make Sherval Das personnel a redirect to Unnamed Valerians? Or what instead should I do? --LauraCC (talk) 19:29, April 11, 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. :) --LauraCC (talk) 19:32, April 11, 2018 (UTC)

Also, keep an eye out for the makeup. It might have reappeared on one of those unnamed humanoids pages, for all we know. --LauraCC (talk) 19:34, April 11, 2018 (UTC)

Unidentified individual Pics for Tomorrowland Wiki

Hi! Could you maybe help me post pics for unidentified individuals on Tomorrowland Wiki, please? (Hobbiton777 (talk) 01:24, April 28, 2018 (UTC))

Not being able to make new articles

Recently, I attempted to make a new article. However, when I begin the process, I find myself trapped on the loading screen. I have attempted refresh, cleaning history and cache from my computer, and putting the computer into shut down and restart mode. Each time, I am end up at the same place, waiting for the loading screen to clear. Do you have any ideas on how this can be solved?--Memphis77 (talk) 05:30, May 17, 2018 (UTC)

I found a possible solution. If I stop the loading process, I can click on the edit this page option. I am still worried that this is happening as it is not what I have come to expect. What is happening here?--Memphis77 (talk) 05:33, May 17, 2018 (UTC)

There was some glitch going on last night before I gave up and went offline. It wouldn't let me do certain admin functions either. I also had a similar problem last week. Next time you can contact wikia about the bug, directly, here: Special:Contact/bug. --Alan (talk) 16:59, May 17, 2018 (UTC)

Great tip. Thanks.--Memphis77 (talk) 19:32, May 17, 2018 (UTC)

Why did you delete me?

Dear Alan: For what reason have you deleted my user page and my discussion page? And why can't I even see my own edits? I am quite unhappy with that.

Moved to de:Benutzer Diskussion:Gvsualan Userkp (talk) 07:47, August 26, 2018 (UTC)

If you don't want my corrections

then ban me.

Bil Mesa AZ EoGuy99 (talk) 18:22, September 16, 2018 (UTC)

or just stop being a dumbass. --Alan (talk) 00:11, September 17, 2018 (UTC)


It seems like you reverted my edits and not the vandal's. Was that done by mistake? -- Cube-shaped garbage can 22:33, September 19, 2018 (UTC)

Ah, alright. I'll undo the revert on my userpage and if you want you can revert Special:Diff/2246707 I suppose. -- Cube-shaped garbage can 22:36, September 19, 2018 (UTC)


I just don't understand why you turned El-Auria into a realworld article instead of merging it. Literally don't get the logic - for example, where does this leave Soran's actual canon homeworld? Could you explain your thinking? -- Capricorn (talk) 15:56, October 2, 2018 (UTC)

The situation with El-Auria is pretty self explanatory. The reference was removed from the script, therefore it's unused producation material, meanwhile, we know of three refugees by name, who all came from the same place, fed to us in different bits and pieces that justifies El-Aurian homeworld, just as much as any other X homeworld page we have. --Alan (talk) 16:01, October 2, 2018 (UTC)

The place the El-Aurians are usually said to come from is the El-Aurian system, which is implied to have contained almost the whole El-Aurian race but is also to have had multiple inhabited locations. Only Soran is ever tied to a specific world. (discounting Nova Kron, oc) I don't think your approach is self explanatory at all, because you had to disregard previous talk page findings to arrive at it. This course of action just throws away a lot of work closely looking at what we can learn from the dialog in favor of a "well, they're a species so they must come from that species' homeworld, duh" approach.
Furthermore, assuming that having the page El-Aurian homeworld does make sense, then why still have El-Auria? Surely once "El-Aurian homeworld" exists, the El-Auria info makes more sense as a background note there (in the style of Category:Deleted and unused material in background‎) -- Capricorn (talk) 16:45, October 2, 2018 (UTC)

Bahni Turpin edit

I tried to fix it, but the edit didn't show up - so, I thought it best to leave a message for someone else to fix it. Apparently, someone else did, perhaps you? If so, thank you. I've never ever ever tried to edit a Wiki. Since there are 1,000's of pages in the memory-alpha wiki, I thought it best to at least let someone know of the error. And I tried to go to your comment and respond to that but I couldn't figure out how to do that. So, I think this is probably going to your inbox and you most-likely have no clue what I'm referring to. Yes, I read the instructions on how to edit but I don't think it worked. I figure "another way" that Wikis work is to, at the very least, alert someone to an error - with 1,000's of pages, no ONE person could possibly catch all the errors! DelennDax7 (talk) 04:06, November 28, 2018 (UTC)DelennDax7

Seven-year cycle of Pon Far

Pon far is described by Spock in "The Cloud Minders" as a "seven-year cycle". What is a good link for this use of cycle?--Memphis77 (talk) 22:23, December 20, 2018 (UTC)

I think mating cycle is the most valid analogous use of the term I've found from the list I compiled here: cycle (disambiguation).
Yes, actually in "Fusion" the same 7 year reference was made specifically referring to the Vulcan mating cycle. --Alan (talk) 00:16, December 21, 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, Alan.--Memphis77 (talk) 10:13, December 21, 2018 (UTC)



How much speculation is possible? That was kinda a big deal made in the show about the weapon ship. It erasing itself from time undid all the damage it did to the timeline.--Marhawkman (talk) 18:12, January 15, 2019 (UTC)

I don't know. Sometimes it can be a sticky wicket. Looking back at it, it seems more like one of those things that is kind of assumed, without stating as such, but now looking at the article about the species itself, it could have probably been included in the article itself with some tweaks to the verbiage. --Alan (talk) 18:31, January 15, 2019 (UTC)

Where to watch


Can you update the Croatia Where to watch because is wrong. On HRT 3 is only Star Trek Deep Space Nine, Monday to Friday at 13:30 and next day at 6:35. On RTL Kockica is Star Trek The Next Generation at most of the time 21:50 and 22:20

Many thanks (Jedi Raven (talk) 21:02, January 17, 2019 (UTC))

Let me know if that looks right: Portal:Main/Panels/Where_to_watch. --Alan (talk) 21:14, January 17, 2019 (UTC)

I does. Thank you (Jedi Raven (talk) 23:19, January 17, 2019 (UTC))

Respecting other users

Please respect others' writing styles, Alan. --Defiant (talk) 18:26, January 25, 2019 (UTC)

Last I checked this is a collaborative effort. And valid or not, it still reads clunky. This isn't a university thesis. And really, you need to knock the nitpicky anal tweak crap off anyway. --Alan (talk) 18:28, January 25, 2019 (UTC)
Guys, calm -- let's roll our brains back about 15 minutes, and try to avoid insults and digs at others. Please. -- sulfur (talk) 18:35, January 25, 2019 (UTC)
I'm just stating facts I've been patiently and quietly observing until I'm given a reason to state them. --Alan (talk) 18:37, January 25, 2019 (UTC)
The edit you're discussing changed improper grammar and poor style into proper English. You reverted it, claiming the poor grammar/style was just as good. Then, when it was corrected again, you added a spurious edit that in no way improved readability, exchanging one idiom for another. I think there's more than one person who's puzzled as to what you were trying to achieve. NokiaTouchscreen (talk) 20:24, January 27, 2019 (UTC)
Yes, two is more than one. --Alan (talk) 12:51, January 28, 2019 (UTC)

Do not vandalize my talk page

Do not vandalize my talk page again. Not only did you revert a conversation archived under site policy, you outright deleted a reply to another editor, meaning that you have committed a violation not only against me but against that user. Do not do so again. NokiaTouchscreen (talk) 20:17, January 27, 2019 (UTC)

you deleted it, you didnt "archive" anything. --Alan (talk)
certainly issues you havent acknowledged --Alan (talk) 20:24, January 27, 2019 (UTC)

Wrong. Check that page's edit history. Even if that were the case, you still had no reason whatsoever to remove a reply to another editor. NokiaTouchscreen (talk) 20:27, January 27, 2019 (UTC)

First, learn how to use talk pages and how to properly indent, and noting your comment in the above section, you don't just weasel your comment in between two other comments however you please.
Second, that's not the correct way to archive anything, especially when it looks like a blatant attempt to ignore two admins who are doing what this unpaid "job" affords them to do, and inform you to knock off removing huge chucks of text from articles, and again, not correctly archiving it on the talk page with your explanation there. Edit summaries aren't discussion points.
Finally, speaking of vandalism, what is this? Entering BS edit summaries and an even bigger BS explanation elsewhere hardly supports whatever your slanted motivations are. --Alan (talk) 12:50, January 28, 2019 (UTC)


I could use a hand. Could you take a look at my thread and drop a line or fix any mistakes I made?

Thanks! Lexers615 (talk) 21:54, February 23, 2019 (UTC)

MA documents all releases, but only material from on-screen is treated as canon. Many of the novels, comics, etc are expanded (and not duplicated from Memory Beta) because they are of interest to people. -- sulfur (talk) 02:00, February 24, 2019 (UTC)

USS Saratoga (2250s)

FYI: The editor Noash Retrac keeps changing the status of this ship. I do not know if this rises up to the level of an editorial war, but I do think it needs to be looked into.--Memphis77 (talk) 00:49, February 24, 2019 (UTC)

Disney Live Action Remakes Wiki

Could you please help me expand the List of Minor Characters page for the Disney Live Action Remakes Wiki? (Hobbiton777 (talk) 18:55, February 25, 2019 (UTC))

Common proper nouns

I saw the list you added to MA:Talk:Links to disambiguating pages of common proper nouns (and figured it would be cleaner to ask this here then start a discussion under it). Does that mean that these kinds of pseudo-disambiguations are now fully accepted? Like, if I were to stumble upon other such reference complexes, would it be A-ok to create such a page for them? I've been hesitant about that stuff due to the weird nature of it, but I know of at least one other (previously deleted no less) and I'm guessing there might still be more. -- Capricorn (talk) 23:14, February 26, 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm just going to sneak that one back in, but otherwise, no, I was just taking notes on various anomalies on that page. Nothing official, just getting a lay of the land. --Alan (talk) 01:26, February 27, 2019 (UTC)

Fair enough, thanks for the clarification. -- Capricorn (talk) 09:11, February 27, 2019 (UTC)


I was trying to find a way to make everything fit the format. The MSD is already in the page - under the physical arrangement section.

Which is awfully hard to tell at a glance because the page is AFU now. When and where was this transition to tabbing discussed, because if this is the result, it's going to ruin a lot of stuff. --Alan (talk) 18:00, March 4, 2019 (UTC)

I discussed it with several other editors, and admin sulfur seemed to like it. Granted some of the pages I've done it on it doesn't work well. I'm willing to discuss which pages to do, or not do it, to. My intent was to make it so the pages weren't so large and could open quicker.

Any ongoing projects you'd like to hand-off?

Hey! I'm new to Memory Alpha, but I've logged more than 5,000 edits on a previous passion project of mine - the glorious and similarly-dorky Weezerpedia. I'm not an endless wealth of ST knowledge quite yet(I've watched TNG, DS9, and I'm almost done with VOY), but I've recently fallen in love with Star Trek and would love to contribute to MA any way I can. I was wondering if there are any projects you're working on right now that you could use a hand with!

JasonDanielBoxer (talk) 06:12, March 11, 2019 (UTC)

Ocular implant

I have undone the edit you made to this page, as Doctor Pulaski does talk about the optical implants with La Forge. However, she does not name the procedure in the filmed episode. It's name comes from a scene, which is not in the aired episode. Right now, this information is in a real world article - optic nerve laser welding. Should this information be moved to the ocular implant page, to the background section?--Memphis77 (talk) 23:01, March 12, 2019 (UTC)

Not other than a background note.--Alan (talk) 00:40, March 13, 2019 (UTC)

Ferengi women

Hey - not upset, just curious. Why did you revert the Category:Ferengi Women edits I was making? It seemed to me that, given that the role of women is such an idiosyncratic part of Ferengi culture, the category was warranted. Is there a policy surrounding category creation that I wasn't in accordance with? Truly asking out of curiosity, so as to avoid making any mistakes moving forward. --JasonDanielBoxer (talk) 23:35, March 17, 2019 (UTC)

Yes, we have category suggestions here: MA:CS; second, this isn't one that would really work, it's too specific and doesn't really fit anywhere into our category tree. --Alan (talk) 00:04, March 23, 2019 (UTC)

USS Saratoga

Fair enough - just figured having a link at the top would help those that don't to scroll to the bottom. --Hawkeye Pierce (talk) 21:41, March 22, 2019 (UTC)

There are four Saratogas. Singling out one for one page and another for the second page is frivolous. The only way you can get to either of the specified Saratoga pages is by clicking a link specifically to that Saratoga. Otherwise, anyone who simply types in "USS Saratoga" is going to find the disambiguation page linking to all of them anyway. Our system is pretty foolproof in that sense for allowing people to find what they want without forcing the issue. --Alan (talk) 23:55, March 22, 2019 (UTC)

Star Trek III

Hi, I noticed that you removed my edits placing Star Trek III in March 2285. Can you explain to me why you removed my edits when the movie picked up where The Wrath Of Khan left off? 01:44, March 28, 2019 (UTC)

Because it didn't. Enough time passed that it cannot be proved without a reasonable doubt that that film took place the same month. Kirk's birthday, march 22nd, was at the beginningest part of TWoK. That leaves 9 days for the following to happen:
  • Presumably the next day:
  • Reliant finds khan, picks him up, maroons the crew.
  • Kirk has an inspection tour and goes on a cruise
  • Reliant diverts to Regula I. They are three days away.
  • Enterprise is contacted by carol marcus, is too diverted to Regula I
  • 12 hours out (at warp) from Regula I, and presumably 3 days later:
  • Battle the reliant.
  • Both ships essentially limp to regula i (at impulse)
  • Days? Later...
  • 2 hours spent at Regula I, then the chase to the mutara nebula.
  • Battling the reliant again
  • Have a funeral for spock
  • Presumably 3 days later...
  • They arrive at ceti alpha vi to get the marooned reliant crew
  • Presumably another 3-6 or more days later (which happened between the two films (so not immediately)):
  • Most of trainee crew is offloaded
  • David and Saavik are transferred to the Grissom and return to Genesis
  • The Enterprise returns to Earth.
Tell me after all of that you still think you are still comfortable says STIII happened less than 9 days later...--Alan (talk) 02:31, March 28, 2019 (UTC)

Would April work? 02:04, March 29, 2019 (UTC)

Doctari Alpha raid

Should the doctari alpha raid get it's own page?--Hawkeye Pierce (talk) 12:32, March 29, 2019 (UTC)

No. Just it's own section. Same situation and reasoning as the "raid on Corvan II" example (see: talk:Corvan II). --Alan (talk)

NCIA-93 type

What if the NCIA-93 type is an upgraded version of the Warp Delta from the 22nd century? The designs look really similar--Hawkeye Pierce (talk) 22:52, March 29, 2019 (UTC)


I'm going on the star trek cruise next year. I'm meeting shatner as well!--Hawkeye Pierce (talk) 18:59, April 1, 2019 (UTC)

Cool. I'm probably not going to meet him, that was a $100 or something more, but we got 5th row seats, so I'm good with that. It's actually a special viewing of ST:TWOK with conversation and a Q&A.[7] Unfortunately, I cannot think of any questions to ask him... that I don't feel like I couldn't find the answer for on the internet already. --Alan (talk) 19:26, April 1, 2019 (UTC)

Cruiser itself is costing me $2700 but doesn't include excursions or meet/greets.--Hawkeye Pierce (talk) 19:59, April 1, 2019 (UTC)


Hello, could you please explain why you have twice now deleted the addition of facts about the relief operations officer from Nemesis on the Unnamed Enterprise-E personnel page?The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

because your edits are introducing a plethora of formatting errors and rogue elements to the article. Likes scores of the correct ''' are being replaced with ‘’’, which are quite different in practice. Just look for yourself all the bad edits that were made with your contribution. --Alan (talk) 22:44, April 4, 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying. My apologies for the formatting errors. I believe a Chrome extension that automatically changes quote marks to smart quote marks is the culprit. I’ll definitely make sure that doesn’t happen in the future. 17:35, April 5, 2019 (UTC)


Since I had also asked in the history notes at Star Trek: Fleet Command about the correct format for adding a Commercial Type Company page as was more than happy to add more information. There is no real guideline for that, as unlike a Character or otherwise, it is not a regular page. The idea of simply having a Guideline for a Scopely or Digit Game Studios type of page is all I had asked for, so as not to be 'roused' on seemingly quite strict at MAtherefore in the interim, I tried to be extremely brief especially with all the new laws. In my opinion, constructive criticism works best along with a link to a page for Memory Alpha RULES concerning Commercial Page references and additions. TIA Nb: I had read both the pna-incomplete and many other pages on editingUser:Gemma0z

It was more of an "in general" comment, because it lacked 100% of any sort of anything an article should have, save text. Even if there remained a question in the end how to set up a "commercial company type page" , there are still a half dozen other things that were completely irrelevant to that matter that were completely overlooked. --Alan (talk) 19:34, April 29, 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, Since it had needed the pages since last year, at least they're there now and sulfur provided the 'template' fairly quickly, if I ever need to add a page similar in the future, I now have something to go on, apologies for offending.User:Gemma0z

Any galactic maps of the 4 quadrants?

Could you please direct me to a detailed image of the galactic map including all the planets, expanses, territories, anomalies, aliens encountered, etc? There are some crude maps on the internet, but nothing to the detail of what memory-alpha provides in the descriptions. I'm watching VOY and can't find many of the references on any maps/images. Thank you,

Nina Magnesson

Moved to Talk:Nina Magnesson.

Kivas Fajo's father

I am not sure as to how proceed with this character from "The Most Toys". Kivas Fajo described his father as a wealthy thief.

As an unnamed Zibalian, he would be placed on this page; however, the link to this page goes to a listing of personnel on the Jovis. As far as we know, he was never a crewmember on board the Jovis.

What can be done to add this character to Memory Alpha?--Memphis77 (talk) 10:22, June 6, 2019 (UTC)

RE: Vandalism

I used the IRC CVN Channels (for more info see w:c:vstf:VSTF Wiki:IRC). It's free for everyone to join (instructions are on that page). --DarkBarbarian.pngBarbar (talk) 11:56, June 12, 2019 (UTC)


Awesome!! So silly that I missed that when I made the page - it's perfect! --JasonDanielBoxer (talk) 04:21, August 10, 2019 (UTC)

Where to watch 2

Can you update the Croatia Where to watch. On HRT 3 is Star Trek Deep Space Nine double feauture, is Monday to Sunday at 1:00 AM and Star Trek: Voyager also double feauture that stars at 13:30 Moday to Friday and the next day at 6:55. On RTL Kockica is Star Trek The Next Generation at most of the time 21:50 and 22:20 from Monday to Thursday (Jedi Raven (talk) 11:39, August 11, 2019 (UTC))

Crewman #4

Hello Alan. Could you comment on the discussion at Talk:Unnamed USS Enterprise (NCC-1701) personnel#Crewman #4, since you were the one who wrote that section back in December 2016? --NetSpiker (talk) 02:55, November 14, 2019 (UTC)


Sorry -- just beat you to the punch apparently. Haha. -- sulfur (talk) 02:20, December 1, 2019 (UTC)

That's fine, I was on my phone while feeding a baby, so my thumb typing was at a less than leisurely pace. --Alan (talk) 03:06, December 1, 2019 (UTC)

Memorable Quotes

I'll make necessary edits. Apologies for any violations. (ThrashMetallix (talk) 18:38, December 6, 2019 (UTC))

Please contact us directly at for further confirmation regarding the removal of the incorrect Paige Brooks Memory Alpha page. We would like to have the opportunity to address your concerns directly and via an avenue that you will know is legitimate. We look forward to hearing from you so we may get the deletion process wrapped up. Thank you! Info19 (talk) 04:02, December 15, 2019 (UTC)

Stellar cartography department

Regarding that discussion we had a while back at Talk: Stellar cartography department, could I ask you to you clarify clarify your position? You brought up a lot of things but I don't find any real clear statement in favor or in opposition to the rename suggestion. I'm inclined to take the lack of opposition as a sign that I can rename, but I figured it would be safer to ask you first, just to be sure. -- Capricorn (talk) 06:45, December 23, 2019 (UTC)

Ok then, no comment, so move made. -- Capricorn (talk) 13:13, December 30, 2019 (UTC)


"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: [8] [9] --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

See Category talk:Articles named from supplementary resources.

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)

Courtesy message

Sorry if addition to idiom creates work for but I can’t stand making changes with “computer speak”; much better with Word copy/paste etc. BTW given your change on thyroid about Denobulan language do you have script access?  If so, you could anticipate my query to Defiant about whether pericardium or -dia is said and delete latter as a false redirect if it’s the former.  Which’d be nice ;-) Archer4real (talk) 17:35, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Click your profile image icon thingy in the upper right of your screen, then do the following:
  • Select "my preferences"
  • Select the "editing" tab
  • Under the 'Editor' heading, change 'Preferred editor:' to "source editor" in the drop down menu
  • Click 'save'
Your editing experience should then be "more normal" for you. –Gvsualan (talk) 17:47, 28 October 2020 (UTC)


See this edit... -- Sulfur (talk) 19:07, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

I was testing the product. Responded elsewhere --Gvsualan (talk) 19:17, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Arik Soong

...hold off on this one, I'm looking into something. - Archduk3 03:32, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Sure. I just wanted to get some of the "easy" ones out of the way. –Gvsualan (talk) 04:53, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

The "Starfleet Medical Personnel" category

Hi Alan! I came across this stub of a category and I've been trying to fill it out by adding qualifying pages to the category. Should I not be doing this? Or please let me know why you're undoing my edits. :) Thanks! Ashleyisachild (talk) 15:44, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Deleted help redirects

Community page help links.png

FYI, those three help redirects are required to keep these three links on-site. Seems like a kludge, I know, but it seems to be the only way to make it work, since there's not a specific MediaWiki: page to change them. -- Renegade54 (talk) 14:30, 10 November 2020 (UTC)


I am seeing this term being used to describe the Emerald Chain henchman. I am not sure where this term came from, as they are not called that in the credits nor in the episodes. They are called regulators in both, and I created a page for them. See: Regulator. I thought I might bring this up, as we have seen regulators in three episodes to date. It seems that a conflict between terms is on the horizon.Memphis77 (talk) 13:30, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

I'm just using whatever is already being used based on second hand information, so I'm not sure where whoever originally added the term got it from. –Gvsualan (talk) 13:34, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Film and Television Wiki

Could you maybe help post pics for this wiki I've been expanding since 2016? ThomasHL has posted pics for the film 10 and some cameo appearances of Stan Lee in the MCU films and shows. Yes, I know that the link shared to other site, I just don't know how to rename the wiki's link yet.

I hope you're interested. (Hobbiton777 (talk) 03:43, 12 December 2020 (UTC))

Next week's episode - "There is a tide..."

I have a question about this next week's episode. I did a google search of the title and discovered that it is a partial quote from Shakespeare's Julius Caesar: "There is a tide in the affairs of man." When is the right time to add this to the episode page?Memphis77 (talk) 22:51, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

No reason that couldn't be added now. -- Sulfur (talk) 23:14, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
yeah, it is in essence "production material", so that's why. --Gvsualan (talk) 23:34, 24 December 2020 (UTC)