Linking to years

Please make sure that you're linking to the right article when adding links to years. 1991 is very different from 1991. For production material, use the {{y}} template. For in-universe stuff, just link directly to the year. Thanks. -- sulfur 16:47, December 5, 2009 (UTC)

Read this sentence above. Carefully. -- sulfur 13:41, December 8, 2009 (UTC)

Further year linking stuff

Make sure that only Trek related stuff has year links. For example, when talking about a production staff person, only link Trek-relevant years. The years that they worked on X, Y, and Z are irrelevant to MA, but the year that they worked on a Trek TV episode is relevant. -- sulfur 15:11, December 15, 2009 (UTC)

Geordi Hologram

Hey, I was merging your image you recently uploaded ("File:Geordihologram23662.jpg") with one that already existed at File:La Forge hologram.jpg. Anyway, wikia is having problems and I was wondering if you could upload your file again at the File:La Forge hologram.jpg location? :) Thanks! — Morder (talk) 00:48, January 14, 2010 (UTC) and BG sections

When you're using things from that site, can you please actually put a link to the page in question? That way it helps future people know where an item has come from, and it also provides a portal for them to explore further. Thanks. -- sulfur 14:00, April 10, 2010 (UTC)


When changing a category on someone, please make absolute certain that you add in the sort key that existed on the previous category. -- sulfur 12:59, May 7, 2010 (UTC)

?? Please explain. After 12 years of English at school, it seems there's still sentences too complex for me to understand. -- Lt. Arex 20:37, May 7, 2010 (CET)

You edited the Robert Justman article this morning and changed "[[Category:Directors|Justman, Robert]]" to "[[Category:Assistant and second unit directors]]. The first has a category sort key (as in, it's sorting his category entry by his last name), whereas the addition you made does not have a sort key. -- sulfur 18:49, May 7, 2010 (UTC)

Again, when creating articles about real people, pay attention to this. In addition, pay attention to your use of "it's" and "its". "its" is possessive, and "it's" only even means "it is" or "it has". -- sulfur 16:06, July 17, 2010 (UTC)

You are forgetting to add the category sort key again on categories. Are you using the automatic category select mechanism perhaps? If so, I would recommend going to your preferences, editing tab, and ensuring that "Disable Category Select" is selected. This will allow you to actually see the code for the categories, which should help remind you to add the sort keys. Thanks. -- sulfur 18:24, February 11, 2011 (UTC)


Please make sure you cite notes you add, such as the one about Meyer improvising the line for Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. Thanks. – Cleanse ( talk | contribs ) 23:26, May 15, 2010 (UTC)

Actually I was thinking on putting the citation to the info (actually it's from the director's audio commentary on the Special Edition DVD), but I rather thought I shall leave it without citing the source, and wonder if one of the admins put a note about it to my talk page, or not. I thought they will, and voilá, I was correct. I wouldn't put a false, unsourced info to MA, but there are many of these from others, so don't bother me, bother them. -- Ltarex 13:03, May 16, 2010 (CET)
If you see a statement missing a citation feel free to add {{incite}} to it. We don't catch them all but we catch some. If you see someone add an uncited claim feel free to call them on it as well. We're not around 24/7. — Morder (talk) 11:27, May 16, 2010 (UTC)

Chase Masterson's birthdate

Please see the discussion on the talk page before changing her birthdate again. There is a reason that the article keeps getting reverted. -- sulfur 14:03, July 30, 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, now I see. BUT then why is her birth year on the Star Trek birthdays, 26 February and 1963 pages??? You've forgotten to remove it from there... That was where I got the info... -- Ltarex 18:54, July 30, 2010 (CET)

Image source?

I saw that you've been uploading a bunch of behind the scenes photos from the DVD sets, but I've got a question on File:Filming wolf in the fold.jpg. What's the source for that one? Looks like you accidentally forgot to include it. -- sulfur 11:10, August 9, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry: I try to get most of those images from the DVD sets, to get a valid Paramount source. -- Ltarex 14:02, August 9, 2010 (CET)

The idea was for you to add the source (ie, where TrekCore nabbed it from) to the image citation. ;) -- sulfur 12:25, August 9, 2010 (UTC)

Someone (probably a still photographer) took the snapshot in June, 1967 at Desilu Studios, Hollywood, California. Probably that's where TrekCore took the image. Why bother me with things like that? There are COUNTLESS images uploaded by others similar which doesn't have a citation (almost all of the "behind-the-scenes" photos not uploaded by me). And you're not nagging them. You must really hate me for some reason. -- Ltarex 16:48, August 9, 2010 (CET)

I nag everyone I can find that uploads an image with no source. Without a source, we cannot verify that Paramount actually owns the image. For example, if it is reproduced from a book, then the actual owner of the image is the book's publisher, who licensed it from the photographer. If you look through all of our images, most of them are actually appropriately cited and licensed. We regularly go through them and try to find as much information as possible, otherwise there is always the threat of having to remove them for legal reasons (as much as we hate to take that route).

It might be worth contacting the TrekCore guys asking them where some of those "Specials" images are actually sourced from. -- sulfur 15:12, August 9, 2010 (UTC)


I see that you're linking to the year properly (as per our conversation above), but when you're linking to a full date, check out the {{d}} template. For months, use {{m}}. They are good for the consistency. :) -- sulfur 10:02, October 21, 2010 (UTC)

Book citations

When adding citations to books in future, can you start adding page nrs too? This is a recent change to the way that we've chosen to cite material. It allows people in the future to find exactly where things are from if they want to get more information. Thanks! -- sulfur 01:34, January 4, 2011 (UTC)

Categories (again)

As per this discussion, you are still not adding category sort keys. Please take some time to re-read that discussion, and try to do all of the work when adding categories. As it stands, someone has to follow your edits and correct them each and every time. If you still do not understand what you are doing wrong, take the time to ask. Take the time to try things out. Look at the category when you add someone. See where they get sorted in the list. See how other people are sorted. Look at their articles to see how that is done. Seriously. -- sulfur 11:37, February 14, 2011 (UTC)

You created an article for Oscar Katz today, and once again, left off a category sort key. Please add these. If you do not understand how to add them, at least respond here, and I can try to explain anew.

Also, CBS is a disabmgiuation page. If you mean the channel, then you want to use CBS Television Network instead. -- sulfur 10:17, April 28, 2011 (UTC)

Image categories

When uploading images, please don't forget to add on a category. If it's of a member of a species (like your recent Klingons), just add the [[Category:Memory Alpha images (Klingons)]] category listing on a line below the image license.

Thanks, and good finds on the unnamed characters. -- sulfur 17:55, May 25, 2011 (UTC)

FYI, you don't need to add the categories for the license or episode. Those two get added automatically by the templates for the episode and license (not in that order though!). Just to save you some typing. :) -- sulfur 14:50, May 26, 2011 (UTC)

Crewwoman a word?

I posed the question here, but I can see that it might be easily overlooked. I don't think creweomen is a existing word and think that it might be better to refer to the as crew-members or female crew-members. feel free to continue this on the the talk page of the unnamed crew-members -- OvBacon(Talk) 21:08, May 31, 2011 (UTC)

"The Practical Joker" citation

Thanks for adding the citation to the page about "The Practical Joker". --Defiant 21:40, June 20, 2011 (UTC)

File names

Please use a space between words and numbers in file names, as there isn't any reason to mash everything together. - Archduk3 10:57, June 26, 2011 (UTC)

Images from TOS remastered

When you use images from remastered episodes of TOS, could you add "Remastered image" to them? -- OvBacon(Talk) 20:34, June 27, 2011 (UTC)

Please put the remastered template noted above immediately above the license (after the description), as opposed to putting it a few lines after the category. Thank you. -- sulfur 14:13, June 28, 2011 (UTC)
Note. Update. Please use {{TOS-R}} or {{TNG-R}} instead. -- sulfur (talk) 10:21, March 25, 2015 (UTC)

Augments and guards

Hi, I've been following your edits on unnamed tantalus colony personnel and ISS Enterprise crewmembers, and I'm wondering if you're suggesting that these two are the same actor? If so, I really must disagree.

Likewise for this and this. They are not the same actor.

I realise it's pretty hard to talk about characters and actors with no names, so it's possible I've misunderstood whom you've meant. --Myko 18:35, July 1, 2011 (UTC)

Cite TOS production timelines

Hi, Ltarex. I notice you've been adding to the production timelines of TOS episode articles. Could you please add citations for them, both for the ones you have added and any that you will add? --Defiant 14:09, August 1, 2011 (UTC)

Hi. I used several sources: 1. clapperboard shots, 2. reference books (such as Inside Star Trek: The Real Story), 3. call sheets and schedules, 4. cast and crew recollections and my own questions to a director of the show, and mostly a lot of logic, common sense and a bit of guessing. The first half of the first season is nearly 100% correct, such as the first half of the third season. Second season dates are somewhat less factual and more of mine guessing. And of course there are a lot of episodes I couldn't find or guess their shooting dates. What makes it hard is the fact that many episodes of TOS (althought scheduled to be filmed in 6 days) often went overschedule, resulting in 7 (or even 8) days of filming. It's easier from the second half of season 2 onwards, as the new Paramount regime forced the production staff to finish episodes on time, so there were only a few of them which went overdue. --Ltarex 20:14, August 1, 2011 (CET)

Well, please cite whatever source(s) you have used in each specific case. Such as, if you use production sources such as clapperboard shots/call sheets/schedules/interviews with members of the production company, cite where the sources are from (this even includes your own replies from the director you contacted), and page numbers from reference books should also always be cited. One of the aspects that MA notes is if there are any discolorations between official sources, but this task becomes exceedingly difficult if no source is cited. I hope you understand. --Defiant 19:22, August 1, 2011 (UTC)

"Inter Arma..." FA Nomination

Hello Ltarex! I was hoping you might be able to spare a few minutes to read through "Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges" and perhaps consider voting for it as an FA? Regardless, any comments you may have on the article would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! :) --| TrekFan Open a channel 19:23, August 26, 2011 (UTC)

Hi! Thank you for asking my opinion. I'll take a look at the page and will likely make my suggestions. -- Ltarex 19:10, August 27, 2011 (CET)

Thanks, I appreciate any comments you might have, even if you decide to vote against it. :) --| TrekFan Open a channel 12:51, August 30, 2011 (UTC)

New Proposal

Hello there. I wish to invite you to contribute and/or vote in this discussion on a new way of electing and retaining admins on Memory Alpha. Should you not wish to vote, your thoughts and opinions on this matter would be greatly appreciated in the "discussion" section. Kind regards, TrekFan. --| TrekFan Open a channel 11:33, September 15, 2011 (UTC)

B Tank image

You uploaded an image of the B tank, describing it, licensing it (etc), but neglected to mention a source for the image. Where is this image from? -- sulfur 12:48, October 1, 2011 (UTC)

Sorry. Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (Special Edition) DVD special features. ("Future's Past" documentary featurette). -- Ltarex 14:53, October 1, 2011 (CET)

Can you please add the specific information to the image then? Thanks. -- sulfur 13:36, October 1, 2011 (UTC)

Matte painting

Hey. I thought this link could be interesting for you. The section about Star Trek is at the end of the article. Tom 20:38, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, you're most kind. I think Defiant might have like that link too, he used to edit the matte painting article a lot too. -- Ltarex 22:57, October 24, 2011 (CET)

Latest edit

Hey. I've changed one of your edits and want to tell you why. Dennis Madalone was Morn in "Looking for....". Mark Allen Shepherd did not play Morn as he did not appear in this episode. So Madalone had the part and was not his stunt double. Tom 23:17, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I did not knew that. It's been about 5 or 6 years since I've last seen that episode. However, here on MA, Shepherd was credited to play Morn in "Looking for...", so I based my info on that. Thanks for the correction. -- Ltarex 11:30, October 29, 2011 (CET)

Unnamed lists

Please note that when you change numbers and headers on various unnamed lists, you are also breaking a large number of incoming links, especially from the images used, actors or actresses, and above all, the episode pages. Please take the care to fix these incoming links if you feel a need to change the headers (especially the numbers!). Thanks. -- sulfur 16:21, November 14, 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, but I don't really understand this. English is not my first language and I'm also not a computer expert. Sorry. -- Ltarex 17:44, November 14, 2011 (CET)

When you add a few new unnamed persons and put them as the first Nurses (for example) and then renumber all of the other "Nurse" entries, you break every incoming reference to "Nurse #2", as the old "Nurse #2" is now "Nurse #5". So, in that case, it was the article for the actress, the image on the page, and the episode page that linked there. Your casual changing of the section titles is breaking a lot of references around the site. So, please be careful when you start changing things like that. Very careful. -- sulfur 17:13, November 14, 2011 (UTC)

Paramount lks

Please don't link things directly to "Paramount". That isn't an article. Use "Paramount Pictures" (since that's what the company has long since morphed into) for your links instead. Thanks. -- sulfur 18:56, December 23, 2011 (UTC)

Filming days

I appreciate the changes you've made about the filming days of the TNG episodes. What are your sources? I ask because I've just noticed an error and will correct it when I am finished watching "Unification I" and "Unification II". Tom 19:09, December 27, 2011 (UTC)

Correct it whenever you wish. I just tried to help you with you're work. Most of my sources are the same as yours, call sheets or filming schedules, but unfortunately I have a limited number of those, so many times I have to use sheer logic connecting the days. Since you've listed a day of filming on 18 September for "Unification II", I thought it went over schedule a half day (or was scheduled for seven and half days from the start) and in the remainder of the day they began filming "Unification I". Sorry, if that's not correct, surely, correct it. Thanks.

On the other hand, I added many filming dates based on your background information regarding a number of episodes. Thanks for that. -- Ltarex 20:31, December 27, 2011 (UTC)

No problem at all. As I said I appreciate your edits and help. The problem with some filming days is simple: Some episodes are filmed seven days, some eight, and some only six. And then are some days off filming (Labor days, company holiday). I wish it would be simple to add seven days of filming to every episode. Tom 19:47, December 27, 2011 (UTC)

The Savage Curtain (episode)

Further to my reply (on my talk page) thanking you for your corrections, I have massaged your English a little. A point I thought to add in the final paragraph, after your note on how real Lincoln and Surak seemed, is Spock's reply that the reality was a given because the images were created from their own minds. I do not know whether this is an ad-lib by Blish, and tried to view the episode on-line, using the link in the article. But CBS now offers only 20 episodes, and this is not one of them. Spike-from-NH 14:54, December 30, 2011 (UTC)

Hi. Here you can find the transcripts of all TOS episodes, so you can work from here. I used to check out this site if I need verification on some spoken information from the series. By the way, English is not my first language, so I used to make mistakes here and there. -- Ltarex 18:01, December 30, 2011 (UTC)

What a find! I will enjoy reading those transcripts. I don't feel so bad about post-editing you.

Here is a free lesson, on your final sentence: "used to" meaning "accustomed to" is the idiom you wanted, but it is used in a different way: "I am used to making". What you have written, by comparison, is the imperfect tense that suggests you don't make mistakes any more, as you used to. Cheers! Spike-from-NH 18:54, December 30, 2011 (UTC)

Agony Booth

The first comment you excerpted from on And the Children Shall Lead (episode), on the shallowness of the script, makes a good point. (A separate aspect of the script that annoyed me is the part where, when a character's evil becomes evident, he also becomes pimply-faced.)

But I read the entire review by "Albert" and it sheds little light on the program but only on Albert's eagerness to cut things down for the fun of it. On the other parts you excerpt: the review of Marvin Chomsky's career also seems to prove nothing except how clever "Albert" thinks he is. The mention of William Shatner's exaggerated acting is true, but too notoriously well-known to be worth mentioning. It leaves me wondering whether is the most representative measure of fan reception to be the only one we quote. Spike-from-NH 18:24, December 31, 2011 (UTC)

I enjoy their reviews, and they are certainly Star Trek fans, they even named their site after "Mirror, Mirror". If you know any other sources for criticism, praise or any other comment by movie critics, people involved in Trek, etc., feel free to add it. I'd like to improve the TOS episode articles as much as possible. I'm off now. Happy New Year! -- Ltarex 19:30, December 31, 2011

Sorry, am not an expert on Star Trek episodes or their reviewers, just a copy editor who likes TOS. (As a US Supreme Court judge once famously said of pornography: "I can't define it but I know it when I see it.") All I'm saying is that your last two excerpts from that reviewer weren't as notable as the first. And as I note on my talk page, I've done everything here that seemed urgent, though with your link to the episode transcripts, I saw that our summary of The Cage (episode) omitted important points from the script: Pike's opinion on "women on the bridge" compared to encountering the same women as potential breeding stock; the fact that the Talosians didn't beam them down but extracted them from a rescue party; the fact that they were the source of the excess lasers in the cage; and Pike's marvelous deduction that the failure of the lasers was an illusion. If you know of other summaries that need to follow the script more closely, you may direct me there. Spike-from-NH 23:20, January 1, 2012 (UTC)

PS--Having visited your user page: As a fellow originalist, I recommend to you the foreign sport of baseball; and as a connoisseur of women, I recommend that Yeoman Colt has "no brick out of place." Spike-from-NH 21:17, January 2, 2012 (UTC)

Reverted edit

Hey. I've just reverted an edit of yours and want to tell you why. According to the category description she is part of Category:Story editors. Tom 19:18, January 3, 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Oh, I did not see that. But then, why isn't him in the category? -- Ltarex 21:20, January 3, 2012 (UTC)
He should've been. He is now. -- sulfur 20:27, January 3, 2012 (UTC)
Back to the topic. I still insist that these two occupations shouldn't be merged into one category, because they are very different. A story editor is a writer, who's hired as "staff writer" to re-write the scripts submitted by other writers, to fit the show's format, and correct other mistakes. They sit behind their typewriters during the pre-production period (and usually they also used to write their own scripts). A script supervisor is the guy/gal who works during the shooting itself, making sure that the script is followed, and no continuity errors are made ("are you sure you've held that phaser in your right hand in scene 34A?"). He/she doesn't make any writing or creative work, other than making script notes. In the past, they were also called "script girls" because most of them were women. Here in Europe, they're sometimes called "log keepers", because they keep a log about the continuity. -- Ltarex 12:39, January 3, 2012 (UTC)

Image categories

Please note that production images should not be put into "in-universe" categories. For example, if you have an image of a director (like your most recent upload), he should not be put into the "Humans" category. In fact, he is "production staff", so would go into Category:Memory Alpha images (production staff). Check out the production image category for the full list of production POV categories. -- sulfur 19:08, January 5, 2012 (UTC)

Xindi incident

Can you take a look at this article for the reconfirmation? At least two more support votes are needed on this one due to its history, though any vote would be welcome. - Archduk3 20:00, January 13, 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I'm sorry, but my knowledge of Star Trek: Enterprise is very minimal, and the third season is the one I'm the least familiar with. I've last seen it ca. six years ago. And anyways, I think this whole Xindi concept was ludicrous. -- Ltarex 21:26, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

It's cool, just trying to drum up some support and all. Thanks for replying. :) - Archduk3 23:01, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

Image categories (again)

There is no "Memory Alpha images (Humanoids)" category. First off, we use small letters unless referring to a specific species. Secondly, for these, please simply use "Memory Alpha images (individuals)" for the time being. -- sulfur 17:53, January 29, 2012 (UTC)

First website

If you could comment at Talk:Internet it would be appreciated. Thanks --31dot 16:46, January 30, 2012 (UTC)

Movie transcripts

A while ago, you directed me to transcripts of the TOS episodes, to help me clean up some of the plot summaries. Are there similar transcripts of the Star Trek movies?

(And for anyone)--Is there consensus that some of these plot summaries are also detailed enough to write either a screenplay or a police report and that I ought to work on them? Spike-from-NH 13:17, March 4, 2012 (UTC)

Star Trek transcripts.
Summaries should generally only be written based on the episode itself, as transcripts do not contain visual information by-and-large. Transcripts are an aid, not the source. - Archduk3 20:46, March 4, 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the Google search; I'd use, as I did with the TOS transcripts. I have seen all the movies and own half of them on DVD, and think I could thereby keep the plot summary faithful. Nevertheless, I won't proceed without further discussion. A lot of love has gone into the movie articles and I am reluctant to hack at them, although I still believe the plot summaries are way too detailed. Spike-from-NH 00:52, March 7, 2012 (UTC)

Edit summary commentary

I would suggest that commentary in the edit summary should be minimal, if any at all. The edit summary is not for expressing our criticisms or opinions of the subject.--31dot 11:54, March 8, 2012 (UTC)

Budd Albright

Could you take a look here? You originally added the birthdate, which was updated today. What was the source for such? -- sulfur 18:44, May 25, 2012 (UTC)

Picard paintings

Hi there. First of all, let me say, I've noticed your work on the paintings page recently and as someone who's obsessed with all the small details in trek I absolutely love it.

However, I happened to notice the two paintings of Picard that you've uploaded just a bit ago; one of those, according to the art of star trek, isn't Picard but rather then an ancestor of him. (also fyi a scan from the book is already uploaded here). I've just checked the book myself, it doesn't show the other painting, but given the clothes, I'm guessing that it might be an ancestor as well.

Keep up the good work though! -- Capricorn 10:58, May 27, 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the info! I've checked the category "Images (Star Trek Generations)" before uploading, but didn't find the painting, so I thought it wasn't uploaded yet. Sorry. Just correct it to "Picard's ancestor". Actually these two paintings of Patrick Stewart are kinda funny. :-) -- Ltarex 13:05, May 27, 2012 (CET)

I'd probably have overlooked the image too if I didn't already knew it existed. ;-) -- Capricorn 11:57, May 27, 2012 (UTC)

Painting uploads

Category:Memory Alpha images (art). Small letters. Not "(Art)". -- sulfur (talk) 16:56, August 13, 2012 (UTC)

Production order

Hey. I just saw your recent edits regarding the production order of the episodes. I only have one question: When someone is checking the page TNG Season 1 now he maybe confused why Denise Crosby for example is listed "Encounter at Farpoint"-"Symbiosis" although she appeared in "Skin of Evil". The list at the top of the page is showing the order how they were aired. Do we need a note at the beginning of the Cast/Crew section? Tom (talk) 21:29, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your thoughtful insight. I was thinking on this myself. Actually I gave a lot of thought for TNG's first season and it's production/airdate order. I think, because of TOS is listed (correctly) in the production order at MA, TNG shall be too, for the sake of encyclopedic order and continuity. But of course, in case of TNG it doesn't really matter, as it does with TOS. I agree with you regarding the note on Tasha. --Ltarex, 23:52, September 17, 2012 (CET)

Links to disambiguation pages

When adding links to pages, please ensure that you are linking to the correct pages. You added a large number of links to the Away teams article and several of them were to the incorrect pages, specifically disambiguation pages.

As such, please verify your links so that someone else does not have to come and clean them up afterward. Thanks. -- sulfur (talk) 18:29, February 4, 2013 (UTC)


Hey. Regarding your comment here I have to agree that an interview on is not really newsworthy in my opinion. There are a lot of interviews and they can be added to the articles about the persons. But I disagree with the question about the closing of the studios. The Culver Studios are a longtime and well known filming location and it looks like they will be destroyed. There is a very early Star Trek connection so it is like positing an obituary. Tom (talk) 22:47, March 5, 2014 (UTC)

Featured article reviews

Hey. Would be great if you could spend some minutes and read the articles before making a vote on the Featured article review nominations. Any vote is really appreciated. Thanks. Tom (talk) 09:49, April 15, 2014 (UTC)

Star Trek maps project

Hi Ltarex. I'm Brandon, Senior Community Manager at Wikia. We're working on a new Star Trek project as part of the Wikia Fan Studio. To give a bit of context, Fan Studio is a program where fans on Wikia can be connected with brands from the entertainment and video gaming industries. Fans get to interact with brands and share opinions that could impact final products and releases, or whatever it may be that a partner brand is working on. This project doesn't have a partner brand involved, but it will let you be part of Fan Studio and other future projects.

This Star Trek project is based around Wikia Maps, and participants will be mapping different parts of the Star Trek universe. Participants will get to help decide what we should map as well. It could be the layout of the Enterprise, or Voyager's journey through the Delta Quadrant, or even more light-hearted subjects like Captain Kirk's romantic liaisons throughout the galaxy. Whatever the participants end up deciding. The maps that the project participants create will live on Trek Initiative, plus any other community that wants to can embed them.

As an active Memory Alpha contributor, we think you'd be great for this project. Would you like to join? Let me know on my talk page. Thanks! - Brandon Rhea(talk) 07:22, November 16, 2014 (UTC)

Links to "Paramount"

Please note that "Paramount" is a disambiguation page. When discussing the "Paramount lot" and stages, etc, for those that are not already created due to Star Trek filming there, please use "Paramount Pictures" rather than just "Paramount". Thank you. -- sulfur (talk) 18:25, December 31, 2014 (UTC)

This. Again. Yet again. -- sulfur (talk) 13:15, July 8, 2015 (UTC)

Unnamed Enterprise personnel

I'm not entirely sure why you moved this guy from sciences to operations when he's wearing a blue shirt, but you screwed up the location and format on the operations page, and please also make sure that you update and correct the incoming redirects that link to these people so that links to the person (from episode, image, etc) go to the correct locations.

When I began this project a few weeks ago, ensuring correct links on these various pages was one of the primary goals of this. In much the same way as if you move an article, please update links for these things. Thanks. -- sulfur (talk) 14:31, November 8, 2015 (UTC)

Jesus AND Lazarus?

Does the source you cite reconcile how they would have said he claimed to be Jesus and Lazarus? Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead. So the Lazarus bit couldn't have also been in the first draft, unless they had a brain fail. --LauraCC (talk) 20:50, February 21, 2017 (UTC)

Yep, interesting point. A similar 'brain fail' actually did happen: in the original draft, they had Flint being both Beethoven and Marat, whose two lives have overlapped. Kellam de Forest Research indicated this error to the producers, and hence, Marat was eliminated and Beethoven stayed (later to be changed to Brahms). Marc Cushman's book cites the original Broadcast Standards memos as sources, which indicate they had Jesus among Flint's aliases in the original script, to be removed in behest of B.S. It doesn't clarify if Lazarus was added after that, but I'd say it's highly possible. -- talk), 22:24 February 21, 2017 (CET)

Yeah, well I could see that if the two weren't famous for co-existing, even interacting in recorded history. BTW, I started an "Unreferenced material" section for that episode and added Jesus to it. --LauraCC (talk) 21:26, February 21, 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)

Citing Trekdocs

If you're using TrekDocs' Twitter feed as a source, can you please link to the individual tweet? At the moment, you're linking to the whole account feed and not the specific document, which is like linking to our front page instead of an individual article. The link is not useful as a source that way. Also, please use the {{Twitter}} template. Thank you. -- Michael Warren | Talk 15:48, June 3, 2018 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for bringing this up. Actually, I wanted / tried to link the specific tweets, however, as I'm not much of a tech / IT / coding expert, I simply couldn't find the way how to do it. If you tell me, how I can link to the specific document (also how I can use the template you've just showed me), I'll do it, of course. -- Lt. Arex | 17:56, June 3, 2018 (CET)

I can see from recent edits you've figured out the first part (here's a help page just in case). For the second part, if you click on the template name above, it will give you some info on use. For specific tweets, use the formatting in the second example, and put everything after "" into the template after the |, and that will do it. You can see an example in this edit I made. -- Michael Warren | Talk 18:22, June 3, 2018 (UTC)


A while back you made this edit. Could you tell me if it's from a call sheet that actually links the actor - with the character - with the scene? I recently came across a call sheet for the scene in question and, while the date corresponds, a different actor than Harv Selsby is named as portraying the character currently linked to Selsby. I'm fairly certain I'm responsible for putting the name with the face as it is currently presented, and your addition linked above more-or-less confirms some aspect of it, however, my new evidence assures me that I was wrong (which I totally accept because all those Smurfs looked the same) and anyway I was going to fix it, but looking at your contribution makes me wonder the angle your source provides. Thanks --Alan (talk) 11:55, September 24, 2018 (UTC)

Explore Talent

Hi. Sorry for the confusion, but to be honest, ExploreTalent is not an accurate source. I've observed that the age of the actors is the same for several years and doesn't change. So we shouldn't add this as a source because it is not trustful. -- Tom (talk) 13:00, March 24, 2019 (UTC)


RE: "as it was revealed, in Brother and Sound of Thunder, it was actually her daughter in the suit" Per MA:SPOILER, please don't announce huge plot revealing information in the edit summaries. They do, after all, appear in the publically viewed recent changes pages. --Alan (talk) 13:53, April 19, 2019 (UTC)

VOY episode order appearance

Please stop rearranging VOY appearances out of order. For example, according to you: "Investigations" (2x20) is before "Lifesigns" (2x19). This is not true both in episode order and airing order. --Alan (talk) 14:30, December 3, 2019 (UTC)

"Investigations" was filmed before "Lifesigns", it preceedes it in production order (not by airdate order or in-universe order). In similar production viewpoint lists, episodes are usually arranged in production order in every other series (for example, "Where No Man Has Gone Before" is before "The Man Trap", or "Unification II" is before "Unification I"), why is Voyager different in any way? There should be a consensus on this, otherwise, it's not uniformized.
Of course, it's a completely different matter in-universe, in which case, "Lifesigns" obviously preceedes "Investigations". But when it comes to a performer, who appeared in both episodes, he or she filmed "Investigations" first, and then "Lifesigns", so that's the actual order in which he/she appeared in Voyager (or any other series).
Also, there are examples when in-universe order and production order are the same, while in-universe order and airdate order are different! Like: "Emanations" and "Twisted" are both set in 2371, yet they were aired later than "Initiations", which is set in 2372. This is far not as simple as you think. --Ltarex (talk) 15:54, December 3, 2019 (UTC)
P.S.: Others (like Tom above) have perviously agreed with me to arrange performer appearances lists (not in-universe articles) in production order. Otherwise, I wouldn't have done it.

Unnamed characters

When an unnamed character appears in episodes not listed on their unnamed page, can you also make sure to add a link to them in that relevant episode page too? Just so help the linking around, especially for when the performer is identified to ensure that they're listed in all the correct places too. Thanks. -- sulfur (talk) 13:31, May 17, 2020 (UTC)

Karl Bruck

I'm not sure if this helps in what you are looking for, but here is information from Bruck's naturalization records:

  • Name: Karl Leopold Bruck
  • Race: Hebrew
  • Nationality: German
  • Birthplace: Vienna, Germany

His last residence at the time of his emigration (27 Nov 1939) was Vienna, Germany. --Alan (talk) 19:00, May 29, 2020 (UTC)

More...his petition for naturalization does state Vienna, Austria. --Alan (talk) 19:02, May 29, 2020 (UTC)

Hello! Thank you for your help! I think, I know the answer for this one. In 1938, Hitler annexed Austria to Nazi Germany, so officially, Vienna was part of Germany in the year he immigrated to the USA, and I guess, the American officials simply scribed "German" on his papers, despite him being Austrian. While Bruck, I guess, was patriotic and anti-Nazi enough to write Austria instead of Germany (but that's only a conjecture on my part). Actually, I'm just debating myself about the same thing regarding Bibi Besch, who was born in Vienna, in 1940. Technically, she was born in Germany (the Third Reich), but still, she was Austrian. --Ltarex (talk) 21:12, May 29, 2020 (CET)
WP has Bibi born in 1942... but also refer to her home country as Austria. I think that following their lead on the country is a good thing. -- sulfur (talk) 19:22, May 29, 2020 (UTC)
WP is often misleading, quite lazy and not trustworthy in that regard. They don't really follow a pattern. Sometimes, they refer to an individual's place of birth simply by the town and country's current name, while in other cases they use the historic name at the time of the individual's birth. As a Hungarian, I'm truly aware and bothered by this. In this particular case, Bibi Besch is listed simply as "Vienna, Austria", while for example, local politician Alexander Van der Bellen, who was born in the same place in the same era, is listed as being born in "Greater-Vienna, Alpine and Danube Reichsgaue, Nazi Germany". -- Ltarex (talk) 21:34, May 29, 2020 (CET)

According to passenger manifest for Bibi's arrival into the US, her nationality was Austria, race was Austrian, country of birth was Austria, and her last permanent residence was Altmuenster Austria, this was written from a 1946 perspective. --Alan (talk) 19:55, May 29, 2020 (UTC)

Yeah. Nazi Germany ceased to exist in May, 1945. So, by 1946, her country was the independent state of Austria again (under American, British and Soviet occupation). European history can be quite complicated. :D --Ltarex (talk) 12:23, May 30, 2020 (CET)


This is the portion you missed btw... Discovery crewman 005‎. -- sulfur (talk) 10:31, June 15, 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure where your understanding of anchors starts and ends, but regarding the mystery of these, here is a quick and dirty rundown on a basic character link:
  • Create a redirect link (a "false character link" like the above mentioned "Discovery crewman 005") for each individual character created.
  • That redirect link will contain the information for the page that that character is listed on. In this case:
#redirect [[Unnamed USS Discovery personnel#Crewman 005]]
  • ...where the #Crewman 005 is going to be the anchor point.
  • So on the character's entry on the Unnamed USS Discovery personnel page you will add the anchor point {{anchor|Crewman 005}} in the section title == Crewman (2256){{anchor|Crewman 005}}== and then whenever you click on whatever Discovery crewman 005‎ is disguised as, it should take you directly to that anchor point.
There are some nuances I'm sure I didn't mention, but this should help in understanding the basics. --Alan (talk) 13:42, June 15, 2020 (UTC)

Image citations

Hi Ltarex, on File:Stunt doubles Project Daedalus.jpg, for source=, can you link to the original source rather than a user name? If Julie St-Louis is the Owner/Creator, I'm guessing it's from her Twitter or Instagram. - AJ Halliwell (talk) 14:31, June 19, 2020 (UTC)

Hello. The source is literally her. It's not from her Instagram or Twitter. She sent me the photo by e-mail, gave me permission to use it, and also asked me if we could include it in her MA entry. For the source in the image description, I copied the template from an image User:ThomasHL uploaded, sent her by Leslie Hoffman, which includes both the name of the owner and the uploader. I guess the same situation applies here. -- Ltarex (talk) 16:43, June 19, 2020 (CET)

Thanks for the background; I'm not sure MA has a policy to cover personal contact with a production member. I'll put a bit of that into the image's source info to make sure we're checking the boxes. - AJ Halliwell (talk) 15:08, June 19, 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. Meanwhile I take a look at her Instagram, she might've uploaded this image there back in early 2019, when the episode aired. -- Ltarex (talk) 17:16, June 19, 2020 (CET)

cite fix

Could you please fix this? You added it but as noted in the cite request, there isn't a specific tweet to use as a source. --Alan (talk) 15:41, July 17, 2020 (UTC)

Sure. I fixed it. --Ltarex (talk) 15:09, July 19, 2020 (CET)

Thanks!--Alan (talk) 15:11, July 19, 2020 (UTC)

Enterprise personnel lists and redirects

When you split the Carey Foster characters and shifted them around, you broke a number of the incoming links to them.

Your work on the operations page doubled up an anchor that already existed.

In addition, please make sure that you update the redirect appropriately and do NOT just jump onto another redirect that already exists. If you're not sure how to do it, post on the talk page and ask. I just had to spend 20 minutes cleaning up the work you had done in order to make the links work properly. -- sulfur (talk) 13:00, August 1, 2020 (UTC)

Hey, my apologies. I'm an arts major and I'm completey dumb in coding and stuff. Despite my best efforts, I still couldn't figure out properly how these redirects work. It seems like nuclear physics to me. -- Ltarex (talk) 17:05, August 1, 2020 (CET)


We don't use "image paramount" on images anymore, we've changed it to {{image star trek}}. --Alan (talk) 23:15, October 17, 2020 (UTC)

Visual editor

In case you didn't notice, you removed a lot of information from an article in your last edit. I suggest you change your editing preferences and turn off the visual editor so that you don't have any more accidents.

Click your profile image icon in the upper right of your screen (the tiny tmp crew image), 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'

This should make your editing experience "more normal", like before. Thanks. --Gvsualan (talk) 17:25, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

be specific

Would you mind specifying who Eleanore Vogel is in the image you added, which also appears on her page without specifics. The image itself still says "unknown actress" for both, and also please add her (and any others you add) to the specific series-season-performers page associated with the performer, in her case TOS Season 1 performers. –Gvsualan (talk) 05:06, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Didn't think I needed to ask, but also Joe Garcio, Max Wagner, Walter Bacon – all actors you've found but haven't identified – need to be singled out as well, they're all unidentified on images of two or more people.... –Gvsualan (talk) 17:00, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Indeed, you didn't need to ask. I knew what you meant the first time. But unfortunately I have to work during the day, so I can't do everything at once. I'll get to it in time. :P
P.S. It's my fault I didn't upload individual photos of those people back when I worked on those unnamed humans pages a few years ago. –Ltarex (talk) 19:02, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Mary Wiseman Child Edit

On Nov 20, 2020 you made an addition to Mary Wiseman's page that mentioned she and her husband had a child and I couldn't find any information regarding this. If you have a source that would be lovely and I won't delete that information from the page but if you have a source, I'll leave the information up. Have a good day. -- Huntchaser (talk) 14:50 January 18, 2021 (UTC)


A few things. How or why is "==Összefoglaló==" being unnecessarily added to you uploads? (Which is more of an inquiry into us trying to know how it is happening, like if it's a "bug", why is it only affecting you?) Also, please don't forget to add categories to images, and it's really not necessary to state that an unnamed person is unnamed. It breaks point of view and reads less organically. Thanks –Gvsualan (talk) 09:00, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

This is still happening and it would be really useful to us if you could explain why this is being added. Thanks.... –Gvsualan (talk) 15:44, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, for some reason I didn't get a notification about your previous message on March 25, so I just read it now. I have no idea why is that added to my uploads. It's probably some bug, I'm not putting it there. "Összefoglaló" means "Summary" as in "Edit summary" in Hungarian (my native language), I hope that helps in finding out the cause for this weird error. –Ltarex (talk) 18:06, 26 April 2021 (CET)

Nobody can seem to figure out how it is being added, as it only seems to apply to you, so are there something in your settings that might somehow be forcing your native language into the text, or would be overriding the English? (Which the English addition of "Summary" from file uploads was apparently eliminated on uploads, but somehow you native language is slipping through somehow, hmm...) Thanks. –Gvsualan (talk) 16:28, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

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