Talk:Human (Star Trek)
|This page was nominated for deletion on 10 June 2011 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus.|
|WikiProject Star Trek||(Rated C-class, Mid-importance)|
|WikiProject Fictional characters||(Rated C-class)|
"On the plus side, humans were responsible for creating the television series Star Trek which some people regard as the apogee of art, culture, and philosophy."
Ah, but not in the Star Trek Universe they didn't! Therefore this sentence is not relevant to this article. Also it means that humans in the Star Trek universe are probably inferior to those in the real universe. Unless of course this is one of those time loop things, and Star Trek was written by real people from the future... (cue eerie music) DJ Clayworth 16:36, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Prevalence of humanoids explained in The Original Series
The introduction to this article suggests that the overwhelming presence of humanoids in alien civilizations went unacknowledged and unexplained until The Next Generation, but this simply is not the case. This article itself later devotes a paragraph to "The Paradise Syndrome", an episode of Star Trek: The Original Series which attempted to explain the prevalence of humanoids by inventing the Preservers, aliens who seed the galaxy with humans from Earth. UranianPoet 02:42, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Another human civilisation
Something should be written about another human civilisation in Delta quadrant. This civilisation was a subject in one of the episodes of Star Trek Vojager. Also, more should be written about Human/Terran civilisation in alternate Universe. PANONIAN 00:36, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
- I agree about the Delta Quadrant Human colony, we just need someone to research it. Also we could mention the other Human Colonies that were never part of the Federation, Like those Irish people in that TNG episode (man that was patronizing), and those Cloned humans who lived on their own planet, then there was that Group of Humans in Enterprise who were living on an Old-west Planet after being taken there by aliens, there were several other planets like these in the various series. Also perhaps mention the Maquis here, as they were an independent Human state (at-least for a while.)
- We could indeed have a section on the Alternate Universe Humans, and show how they differ etc.
- --Hibernian 07:36, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
Borg opinion of Humanity
If anyone has the speech the Borg Queen gives in Dark Frontier about humans - "below average cranial capacity; limited redundant systems" all that kind of stuff - it might make a nice addition to the article; putting humanity in the context of other Star Trek species. Driller thriller 17:45, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Added new image
I've just added a different image (replacing the one of Picard), that I think is more representative of the diversity of Humans in the ST universe. I made the picture by simply combining four already existing pics, so I'm not sure about it's copyright. All the pics were already on Wikipedia so I assume there is no problem with them, but I put it down as "TV Screenshot", which I'm not sure is correct. Could somebody tell me if the image is acceptable.--Hibernian 01:04, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
When to use "humans"/"Humans"?
Recently edits have been made to both Xindi (Star Trek) and Human (Star Trek) regarding the use of capitalisations when referring to people from Earth. The initial post by User:FreeKnowledgeCreator is available here: Talk:Xindi_(Star_Trek)#Humans.
- I am uncomfortable with the tone that has been used so far. Use of words/phrases such as "ridiculous", "disruptive", "the kind of thing that gives Wikipedia a bad reputation", and "as you would apparently like to do" do not mirror my understanding of Wikipedia:Civility. I would appreciate your consideration of and attention to this matter.
- I disagree regarding discussion locale, since the dispute is not about the Xindi per se, but the specific usage of "Humans" on Star Trek wikipages. I feel led to respond here since this talk page is most directly linked to this issue, and interested editors/observers from this current page may not be aware of discussions held elsewhere. Further 5 of the 6 edits made as part of this issue were made to this page.
- I note that Wikipedia:Consensus states that "Any edit that is not disputed or reverted by another editor can be assumed to have consensus." This page is more than 10.5 years old, and reviewing its edit history from then, shows it to have been relatively stable. That of course does not make it necessarily "correct", but simply reflects the fact that for many of its editors the content is relatively uncontroversial.
- I agree that having a "in-universe perspective" is a problem for most tv/film related topics, since many inexperienced editors tend to directly cut/paste materials from primary sources and fan blogs, or edit pages without that in mind. I think the consensus we seek lies in resolving how to best couch the terminology used to avoid this.
Here are some examples as possible models of usage:
- "Vulcans in Star Trek are often confounded by human emotions"
- "The Borg frequently assimilate humanoid races because..."
- "Warp flight was first developed by human beings when..."
- "The founding races of the Federation were Humans, Vulcans, and Andorians."
- "The Klingon said, "Our warriors have become like Humans... weak, cowardly"".
I think the last two of these link to the issue - when is the in-universe concept of non-Earth alien races/species using the word "Humans" as a collective demonym for all human beings possible. Science fiction challenges people's perspectives of the world and often offers new concepts/perspectives that may not fit standard conventions. As you mention in your initial comment, "Placing "Humans" always in capitals is incorrect.", and I agree — so it seems we just need to identify how the alien term "Humans" can be used in order to best express to the reader this specific science-fiction concept. Jabberjawjapan (talk) 19:44, 21 February 2015 (UTC)