Talk:Starship Enterprise

Enterprise J?

Can someone please make a section about the Enterprise J (no, I am not making it up, Daniel brought Archer to it through some time travel...) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.138.135.42 (talk) 03:52, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

I think the alternate reality ships from TNG should be added as well Pwojdacz (talk) 05:18, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

I suspect the article would be come to cluttered and it would be best to redirect such titles to the article on the episode in question. SGGH ^ping! 20:41, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Enterprise E, Removed Line

I removed the following text from the description of the Enterprise E:

According to Star Trek: Countdown (2009), Data assumed command of the Enterprise after Captain Picard retired from Starfleet to become the Ambassador to Vulcan.

In the original or primary timeline, Data was destroyed by the destruction of the Scimitar. While it may be explained by Data living on as B-4, the comic, as with other Star Trek texts is not considered canon, which is an additional reason I feel its not appropriate to note here. -- KookyMan (talk) 02:34, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Per wikiproject guidelines, canon status is not a criterion for inclusion/exclusion; merely, the ability to cite the relevant claim -- which is the case with that particular line. I've restored the content. --EEMIV (talk) 13:52, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

While canonicity is not a criterion for inclusion, it is important to note the discrepancy between the canon film Nemesis, and the non-canon Countdown. I have edited this section to point out said discrepancy. It has already been deleted once, and I have re-added it. While non-canon material may be included in an article, canon sources should still take preference. Should this edit be deleted again, I will report the person responsible for vandalism TDiNardo (talk) 04:41, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

The interpretation of a discrepancy is WP:OR and unencyclopedic. --EEMIV (talk) 13:59, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

What is un-encyclopedic is your refusal to acknowledge the discrepancy between a canon source and a non-canon source, your choice to give the non-canon source preference, and your persistent revision of this article when attempts are made to reconcile this discrepancy.. This has been reported to administration as disruptive editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TDiNardo (talk • contribs) 09:02, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ It doesn't make a great deal of sense to place this "contradiction" in the article. In the absence of secondary sources which note the discrepancy, the safe thing to do is to assume that the material in question is trivia and to remove it entirely.

Again, I agree completely. EEMIV, in his ongoing battle to ensure that this article remain as he wants it, however fails to understand that the article either needs to give equal weight to both primary sources, Nemesis AND Countdown (regardless of the fact that Countdown is not canon, this much we're agreed on), or mention neither. But to play a game of preference with two equally noteworthy sources is unacademic, unencyclopedic, and clearly biased. So, here's my solution: both the assertion that Date took command of the Enterprise on Picard's retirement and the assertion the Data died on the Scimitar and therefore could not assume command after Picard are equally trivial in regards to identifying the Enterprise E and should BOTH be removed. TDiNardo (talk) 13:51, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Removed claim that Enterprise E is sole member of its class

I have removed the claim that the Enterprise E has no sister ships in canon sources and therefore is the sole member of its class, for the second time. This statement shows a clear lack of understanding of the procedure for naming of ship classes. Both in Star Trek and in the real world, the name of a class of ships is derived from the name of the first ship of that design. Therefore, regardless of any other ships of the Sovereign class that have been or have not been named in canon sources, it must be assumed that the Sovereign-class Enterprise E must have at least one sister ship, namely the USS Sovereign. TDiNardo (talk) 04:35, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

The interpretation of a "discrepancy" and the "assumption" re. a sister-ship class are both original research and inappropriate for inclusion. --EEMIV (talk) 13:58, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

A ludicrous argument, considering the assumption that the Enterprise E has no sister ship is original research, with no basis other than the lack of explicit mention of one (and lack of evidence for something's existence is not a logically valid proof of its NON-existence), whereas the assumption that she has a sister ship in the USS Sovereign can be reasonably inferred from established facts both within Trek and in the real world. TDiNardo (talk) 09:03, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

If in doubt (as evidenced by a lack of reliable sources stating either that the Enterprise E is or is not the only ship in its class), the corect approach is to omit this "fact" entirely. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 09:40, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

My point exactly. At no point did I attempt to edit the article to say that the Enterprise E isn't the only ship of its class, I merely removed the unsubstantiated claim that it is the only ship of it's class. What EEMIV has failed to realize is that at no point did I claim that the assumption that the Enterprise E has a sister ship in the USS Sovereign was worthy of inclusion in the article, nor did I ever attempt to put said assumption in the article itself, merely pointed it out in the DISCUSSION PAGE. TDiNardo (talk) 13:43, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

There are no canon sources which explicitly feature other Sovereign-class ships. That is why the wording goes as such: "Unlike her predecessors who bore the Enterprise name, Enterprise-E has no confirmed sister ships in canon sources, which would make her the solo member of her class." A similar arguement goes for USS Voyager, as the lead ship of her class, USS Intrepid, has never appeared in any canon sources. Alternatively, we could state that "so far the Enterprise E is the only confirmed member of the Sovereign class in cannon courses". Demon Hill (talk) 16:33, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

The canon or non-canon status of sources doesn't carry much weight at Wikipedia. It is ultimately an utterly trivial in-universe "point" better relegated to the bowels of e.g. the Memory Alpha web site. --EEMIV (talk) 18:09, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

In my opinion this article should make no mention of sister ships for any version of the Enterprise. That is why we have hyperlinks to articles about the individual ship classes when their is related detail. In the realm of official Star Trek fiction there are many Sovereign-class ships. The fact that only one of them has been directly shown on film or TV, and the second fact that CBS currently considers film/TV to be more canonical than book/comics has nothing to do with this article. The list of other Sovereigns belongs at that article, and the whole canon/non-canon distinction should be a section at the Star Trek franchise article. People who want more than that should be following links to Memory Alpha in the External Links section of each article. —MJBurrage^(T•C) 12:34, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Greetings

I accidentally rolled back an edit and then undid it on the article. I am not involving myself in this little quibble. It was an honest slip with huggle. However the edit warring needs to stop. All contributors are expected to contribute in a positive if not mannerly fashion. This back and forth behavior will only result in blocks and page protection. Then no one gets any work done and an admins time is wasted dealing with problems that could have been dealt with reasonably. - 4twenty42o (talk) 19:51, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Enterprise M

In this article Star Trek: Of Gods and Men an Enterprise M is mentioned. Shouldn't it be listed in this article also.76.67.103.107 (talk) 14:18, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Overhaul

I'm working on an overhaul of this at User:EEMIV/Starship Enterprise. Feel free to jump in there or at the talk page. Objective is to ditch the overwhelming in-universe perspective and focus more on production lineage. Depending on the end product, the idea may or may not be for it to be integrated with Spacecraft in Star Trek. --EEMIV (talk) 20:24, 25 January 2012 (UTC)