From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Star Trek (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Star Trek, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to all Star Trek-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Fictional characters (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.

Mental Abilities[edit]

Do the Romulans lack the Vulcan mental abilities because they didn't hone this power? Or are they biologically incapable, suggesting that they're a different evolutionary branch? This clarification would be helpful for the article. (talk) 07:31, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Although never stated, it is implied that the Vulcans' practical application of their telepathic abilities are a result (or side effect) of their logical and disciplined mental states. In other words, Vulcans need to be "cold" and logical in order to develop and use their mental abilities. Romulans, on the other hand, rejected Serak's philosophy and, as a consequence, are unable to develop these mental abilities. (talk) 17:47, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Mental Resonance[edit]

It was implicitly stated several times (by "Spock")in the original TV series that Vulcans had full, intense telepathic and meantal "projective" abilities, that eventually drove them to the edge of madness, as they were able to read each other minds, and were also able to mentally attack each other! Spock also stated only the "discipline" of "Logic" was able to "regulate", and therefore adequately suppress their extra-mental powers as well a their emotions, one being of factor to the other! Vulcans can variably "read" both 'emotions' (which implies that they can efficiently interpret them,) as well as "surface" and sublime thoughts,) except that full-on telepathy requires willfully-and with great personal effort and cost-a lowering of inherent "flattened" emotions...or, rather, "heightening" them; but it also seems that they must necessarily employ tactile, physical contact at the temples of the cranium closet to the frontal lobes of the brain. this implies that not all mental defenses are "exposed" (lowered) in this manner; The Vulcan's Telepathic veracity is linked to their emotions! It would seem that since the Romulans haven't exhibited explicitly any telepathic ability, they may have found themselves to do the exact opposite of the Vulcans: Either they evolved to discard their telepathy, or their base emotions serves to "numb", or suppress this ability; (or, found a way of discarding this "power" altogether). They may even be impervious to "outside" telepathy altogether, and therefore become "inscrutable" to other aliens in this regard, especially Vulcnas!!! -- (talk) 06:29, 7 February 2016 (UTC)Veryverser


I think that the Federation could be argued to be the Soviet Russians, they have no cash and work for personal growth and the benfit of society. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mozza1979 (talkcontribs) 15:48, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

No, the Feds are the cold war equivalent of the US & NATO. Gene was a Humanist before converting to full Athiest late in life and although he himself pursued personal wealth, he felt that the pursuit of wealth was what was holding Humanity back and by the real 1980s he decided money was no longer used. This fits in with the Star Trek Universe in general because with replicator technology, anyone can have anything they can think of and program into the machine. (If joe schmoe wants a Ferrari, he just orders one same as a cup of earl gray tea.) What Kirk meant in ST4 was they dont use cash money, paper, coin, or credit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:16, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Probably one of the weakest aspects of the Federation was ol' Gene's attempts to make it into a cashless utopia. Obviously, if everyone could have anything they want, you'd have thousands of one-person starships flying around as no one would want to be just an ensign or heaven forbid a lowly crewman (I mean who would willingly put on a red shirt and go down to a planet just to get skewered by an 10 foot tall yeti, disolved by a horta, or get their legs blown off by an exploding piece of painted styrofoam, er remarkably low density rock). And the pudgy Canadian captain is the one who gets all of the beautiful space tramps.

Again, let's try to keep discussion limited to the article itself. There are thousands of forums for general Star Trek discussion. -- Fyrefly (talk) 16:51, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Romulan/Chinese parallels[edit]

Um, I think it's pretty obvious that the Romulans were the ones we were supposed to associate with Russia. Go back to the very first ever appearance of Romulans, episode #9 of TOS, "Balance of Terror." They have red color schemes and call each other "Comrade." User:Yesspaz

"were written to resemble the opinion of the Americans of that time towards the Chinese government." I don't think I've ever heard this said before, can you exemplify this? How were the TOS Romulans similar to the Chinese? Pomegranate

Talk:Star Trek has a discussion going about alien species' relation to Terran societies, which may be germane here. The closest connection I'd seen between Romulus and China was the writers' use of Chinese names, such as Shinzon, which I hear is Mandarin for "heart". Anville 22:03, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)
"Heart" in Mandarin is xinzang (pronounced somewhat like "Shin-zong"). Close, but may be coincidentally, since as far as I remember (years of ST-watching), ST draws very little from Chinese culture. It in fact draws much more from the neighbouring Japanese and Korean cultures.
I never heard the Romanulans compared to the Chinese. One of the other ST articles on WP also compared the TOS Klingon to the Chinese. Neither comparison makes sense to me. >:-) --Menchi 03:00, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I remember John Logan (writer of NEMESIS) explaining somewhere the connection between the Chinese and the Romulans, but I can't find it. I specifically remember him mentioning something similar to the comments above for his naming Shinzon.--StAkAr Karnak 20:54, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This is all very interesting, but this is only a theory (I haven't seen a single quotation from Roddenberry so far) that has nothing to do with an encyclopaedia. Next time, try to be relevant. Good day.--Stormy Ordos 09:50, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

I think it's more likely to be the Romans. Romulus and Remus are just a couple of reasons why. Dave (talk) 03:52, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

The Romulans became a Chinese parallel in the Next Generation era, during TOS in the 60s they were a Roman parallel. There simply wasnt any development done to the Romulans in TOS which is why after the failure of the Ferengi to catch on, the Romulans became the TNG villains, as the Klingons were very developed through TOS and the original movies. Ron Moore or someone decided the Romulans were a mystery that needed to be explored. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:21, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Chinese, East Asians, Romulans, and the Cold War[edit]

Put it this way: the Original Series Star Trek is in some ways supposed to be modeled after the Cold War. The Klingons are supposed to be the Cold War equivalent of the Russians. The Americans (and its allies) are supposed to be the equivalent of the Federation. The Romulans are the equivalent to the Chinese Communists. The Vulcans represent the Cold War US allies in East Asia including Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and South Vietnam. Many Americans still cannot tell the difference between Japanese, Koreans, Chinese, Vietnamnese, and Chinese Minnan (Taiwanese). Just look at all those Hollywood movies and TV shows: Chinese being cast as Japanese; Japanese being cast as Chinese; Koreans being cast as Taiwanese! Even the Chinese movie Promise has Japanese and Korean actors playing Chinese. In the Original Series, an Enterprise crew member began to show prejudice against Spock when he discovered that Vulcans and Romulans apparently look alike and started to think that Spock had to be Romulan.

We Asians generally are able to distinguish ourselves, but 25% of the time we might mistake a Chinese to be a Japanese or Korean or vice versa. This might be the equivalent of Spock being viewed without suspicion in the Next Generation Romulus even though he did not sport the standard Romulan forehead ridge. (Personally, I hated the Romulan forehead ridge because it created a very confusing continuity problem between the Original Series and the Next Generation.)

The point here is that from the Original Series point of view, the best way to distingush a Romulan from a Vulcan is from the person's emotions, attitude, and behavior; otherwise, from an untrained eye they look alike. The same could be said for the different East Asian races/ political communities.

Vulcan had an isolationist movement that wanted nothing to do with the Federation. Many East Asian countries traditionally allied to the US do have movements against American involvment in their region.

Star Trek: The Undiscovered Country represented the end of the Cold War between the United States and Russia. Only the United States and China has some subtle form of rivalry and competition. The Chinese current nationalistic emphasis on the greatness of its civilization resembles the Romulan belief that it innovated everything in the universe. The fact that the Romulans never attack first but test the opponents resolve is equivalent to Chinese generals asking the US generals if they are willing to defend Taiwan if the Chinese dropped a neutron bomb in Los Angeles. Allentchang 17:01, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Here are a variety of articles found in the Internet about this subject, including one directly from the Star Trek website. Because of this, I've decided to restore the Romulan/Chinese analogy.

Quotation from the article :

'The Romulans were created by Paul Schneider, saying "it was a matter of developing a good Romanesque set of admirable antagonists . . . an extension of the Roman civilization to the point of space travel."'

Which makes me wonder how on earth some people could have thought (just because John Logan said so) that there was a connection between the Romulans and the Asian cultures (which brings another interesting point : Asians are NOT extraterrestrials; but obviously the author of this notice seems to think of his "people" as a special kind of humans that have nothing to do with the others).

The above argument is pure speculation. The Romulans were based on the Romans until late into the TNG Era, as in 1991 the USSR was disolved, and the Romulans became a Chinese stand in until the Cardassians were developed. In 1966, no one, not even Gene or D C Fontana thought the Romulans were Chinese. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:24, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Naming/society wise, the Romulans were inspired by the Romans, however their place in the interstellar community was inspired by the China's role in the Cold War. As was intended by Gene, who cast the Klingon in the mold of Russia's role in the Cold War. This is all fairly well established. (talk) 17:53, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Names in Star Trek and Connections to Real-World[edit]

It is very shaky ground to take a single (or a few) names in Star Trek and try to link them to real-world nations. This is because there are so many examples of names in Star Trek that closely resemble real world names, but that could not reasonably establish a connection.

For example, if Shinzon (sounds like Chinese for "heart") indicates that the Romulans are Star Trek's equivalent of Chinese, would General Chang (whose name sounds like the English for a common Chinese surname) establish that the Klingons are also Chinese?


1. Captain Tong - Klingon K'tinga sleeper ship captain from TNG. Tong is a Vietnamese/Chinese surname.

2. IKS Ning'tao and IKS Ch'tang (two Klingon Birds of Prey) - sounds Chinese

3. Prakesh (a Cardassian Galor-class cruiser) - an Asian Indian surname

4. Kumari (Andorian cruiser class) - possibly Indian also? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 02:10, August 21, 2007 (UTC)

Clear example of reading too much into a children's saturday morning cartoon. Humans can only say or hear so many different combinations of sounds. That's real life. The Cardassians were named after a friend of the producers, after all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:27, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Exactly right. "Chang" might be Chinese, but it SOUNDS Klingon, that's why he was named that. Has nothing to do with the Chinese. (talk) 17:55, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Romulan/Roman connection[edit]

I'm not sure whether "unintentional" is the right word to describe to similarity between the Romulan and Roman Empires. As I've noted in the article, the government has similar titles: Proconsul, Praetor, Senator. So there is obviously some intent to draw on the image of Roman-style imperialism. Perhaps "analogous similarity" or something would be more apropriate. Your call, whoever wrote it originally... Pomegranate

Actually, the Star Trek web site had once postulated a theory about this. In Who Mourns for Adonais? the ancient Greek and Roman gods were revealed to be aliens that had visited Earth thousands of years ago. The theory was that these aliens visited a number of other worlds as well, including Vulcan, and perhaps Romulus as well. And I believe that would explain a great deal about why you have a planet and a race named after the god Vulcan, a society built upon the Roman Empire, and why the two homeworlds of the Romulans are named after the brothers held to be the founders of Rome

JesseG 02:52, May 5, 2005 (UTC)

Black Romulans?[edit]

Another contributor claims to have seen a Black Romulan on an episode of DS9. Can anybody confirm this? Are we sure that it was a Romulan and not a Vulcan? The only kind of Romulans I've ever seen are the typical "Eurasian" looking kind. Your thoughts and memories please. 25 February 2005

The Black Romulan I saw was in the DS9 episode, "The Visionary" and was named Ruwon. According to Feitclub there was another Black Romulan in the TNG episode, "The Pegasus." -- Old Right 19:01, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Actor Michael Mack (IMDb) played Commander Sirol (Entry at Memory Alpha). I tried to find a photo online but I failed. Trust me, he's Black. --Feitclub 06:04, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)

Romulan emblem[edit]

Has it ever been established which part of the Romulan emblem represents which planet? Is Romulus green and Remus blue, or the other way around? JIP | Talk 19:22, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

After watching Nemesis, I think it's safe to say Remus is anything but blue or green.
Nemesis was written by Berman and Braga (neither of them ST experts-- or masters of continuity) while the emblem was designed way back during the second season of TNG, when Remus was still undefined. Noclevername 03:57, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
Nemesis was actually written by John Logan - (talk) 04:43, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Green is used for ch'Rihan (Romulus) and Blue for ch'Havran (Remus). It is best to put any references from Nemesis out of your mind since the Remans in that movie have nothing to do with the 'real' Remans.

I don't know who wrote the above statement, but the only "real" Remans are the ones who appeared in Star Trek: Nemesis. Remans did not exist before that movie. And to clear up their first confusing sentence as well. Green is used for Romulus and blue for Remus. (talk) 17:58, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Split article[edit]

This article should be separated into the Star Trek race page for Romulans and the Star Trek governments page for Romulan Star Empire.... 18:02, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Vulcan/Romulan split

The Vulcans and the Romulans split around 400 A.D, this would suggest they have warp technology around that time, so shouldn't the Romulan technology be a lot more advanced than Human's?

They may have used slower than light sleeper ships, generation ships, etc. Besides, Romulus is a very conservative culture; they don't change anything unless they have to, probably including technology. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Noclevername (talkcontribs) 04:01, 20 December 2006 (UTC).
established in "Fanon" since the 1970s, the Romulans lost their technology in wars, and their empire is lacking 'something' undefined but critical to building and maintaining matter-antimatter warp engines, leading to their using both atomic weapons to fight the Earth Romulan War, and the development of the Quantum Singularity drive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:30, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Physical Strength[edit]

Does the vulcan physical strength stem from the planet having a stronger gravity than Earth? I seem to recall this being stated in TOS. If Romulus has a more similar gravity to Earth then over two thousand years their strength would have naturally deteriorated out of lack of use. Rayfire 19:27, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

That's what I thought. But I remember episodes with humans landing and walking on Vulcan and they were fine. Maybe I missed the part where they were injected with something or had to stay in some pressurized cabin to get used to the planet or something.

-G —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 06:18, 29 January 2007 (UTC).

Humans = 1 Klingons = .9 (Untrained) Vulcan and Rihannsu = 3 Evolved physiology does not atrophy, and it would take millenia for the Rihannsu to lose their "Vulcanoid" muscle advantage. There is also the fact that all of the races have long since removed themselves from physical evolution (this happens when a race starts using its intelligence to build habitats).

It's Romulan. The term "Rihannsu" is pretty much fanfiction. Its fine if you enjoyed those stories, but don't forget that the proper term is "Romulan". (talk) 18:00, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Are there any sources that say Romulans have superior strength? Over on the Memory Alpha article "unlike their biological cousins, Romulans did not possess greater physical strength than that of a Human". Neither article has a source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:13, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Star Trek Nemesis is not Canon[edit]

The policy of Paramount and the Trek producers is that all films and episodes that are produced are considered canon with no exception. It is not the policy of this encyclopedia to alter the facts of definitions on biased personal disagreements with a particular movie.

Yeah and the historically accurate Spartans were straight men. In other words, when something goes against everything that is known about a race it can be dismissed as non-canon, policies of Paramount and its Producers don't change the fact that the movie did not represent the Romulans accurately (nevermind the Rihannsu). Using Nemesis as canon will always get you into trouble. ~S*D

I don't see anything in Nemesis that's not canon (except Deck 29 and the name Shinzon maybe). You could perhaps tell us what isn't Romulan with these Romulans...--Stormy Ordos 09:57, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Well get the DVD, put it in, note the time. When you are finished, note the time again. The period in between does not reflect the Romulan people, never mind the Rihannsu. The story, premise and execution wouldn't work for a children's book. It simply is fiction from a fictional universe. S*D

This is S*D's opinion, not actually backed up by anything in Star Trek canon. So he doesn't like Nemesis—fine, he's entitled to that point of view. But there was nothing about the film that contradicted established "facts" about the Romulans (not including anything "established" in novels), and it certainly is canon.--Antodav2007 (talk) 02:44, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
The question of canonicity is irrelevant to the article; it may be worth noting that Paramount considers only television series and movies to be "official", but, from the perspective of writing an encyclopedia article about something in a fictional universe, everything that may be considered notable should be addressed. Whether it's canon or not, whether it's unofficial or not, whether it's consistent or not, whether it's a moronic retcon or not (see: why TOS Klingons look different from the rest) does not matter for its inclusion in WP. At all. -- 20:13, 30 October 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk)
Star Trek 5 is not "canon" nor are the animated episodes other than the one about Spock, so Nemesis could be considered non-canon as well. What we need is a new "Star Trek Space 'Pope'" like Gene was before he died to issue a "Papal Bull" and settle the matter. But since JJ Abrams did that by destroying the Romulan homeworlds (no mention of Remus in Trek09 at all!) I'd say the question is moot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:35, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
All Star Trek TV episodes and movies are considered canon - even if they sometimes appear to contradict themselves. Novels, comics and the animated series are considered non-canon. This is well established. Ergo, Star Trek Nemesis IS Canon. (talk) 18:03, 12 September 2015 (UTC)


The article states that the Romulan commander from the Enterprise Incident was able to "commune either telepathically or empathically" when she touched Spock's fingers. Huh? Where did that come from? I think I'll delete that, as it's pure speculation. Noclevername 04:15, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

The Vulcans are touch telepaths as established by DC Fontana and Nimoy during the run of TOS. That's why Spock doesnt like to be touched. Not that he's anti-social, he's not. He just knows what you know by touching you. While it's never explicitly stated on screen, Romulans could have the same ability. The question is: Is Touch Telepathy a latent talent, like fingerpainting? OR is it something that needs to be developed, like grand master oil painting? if it's latent, some Romulans will be able to do it. if it needs to be developed, especially through the teachings of Surak, then perhaps only one Romulan in a generation will be able to do it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:40, 21 December 2010 (UTC)


The novel trilogy Star Trek Voyage: Dark Matters features a triumvirate ruling the Romulan Empire: an Empress, a Praetor and a Proconsul. The article does not mention an Emperor or an Empress. Has one ever appeared in canon, or was this invented in the novel trilogy? JIP | Talk 13:26, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Q mentions an Empress in "The Q and the Grey", apparently. Morwen - Talk 13:30, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

There was the Ruling Queen, who was responsible for the death of S'task. And the only Empress was the great Rihanha (Ael i-Mhiessan t'Rllaillieu) who liberated the Rihannsu from the enemies of mnhei'sahe. These events were chronicled in the Empty Chair by Diane Duane~S*D

Removed Sela from the list of Praetors, as in Star Trek Online she is not a Praetor, but a self styled empress. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:18, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Gray Heart[edit]

Is the Romulan heart literally gray? I heard Garak say that: "[On Romulus]You'll find the predominate color to be gray- the buildings, the clothes, the people. Did you know that the Romulan heart itself is gray?" but I didn't think it was literal-he was making fun of them.--Filippo Argenti 02:24, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Pro-"Rihannsu" bias?[edit]

This quote from the Books section about the non-canon Rihannsu novels of Dian Duane, as well as a listing of military ranks seems problematic in the Military section: "These books, like most of the other Trek novels, are not canon. Though they are highly respected and preferred when referring to the Romulans (Rihannsu)." -- 12:11, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

The military ranks as given in the second part are correct (arrain, Riov, khre'Riov etc), Canon never came up with a coherent system. S*D

TNG/DS9 era pictures?[edit]

Both of the pictures are of TOS-era Romulans. Can we add/replace one with the new Romulan look from the later series? It would seem to compliment the text better since most of the Romulan aesthetics discussed in the article are not illustrated by the pictures. (DrZarkov 22:04, 15 May 2007 (UTC))

These will be provided by the Rihannsu who are now monitoring this page. It bears saying that any (continued) unauthorized tampering with this page will result in a military response. ~S*D

What is this about Romulan marijuana in Popular Cultur section?[edit]

What the heck is this about in the "In Popular Culture" section that there is a type of marijuana called Romulan. That has nothing to do with the Star Trek Romulans nor does it have any relevance to them. Maybe it was named after them but it still have no relevance. It is very out of place. It should be moved to the marijuana article. Azn Clayjar 04:14, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Merge in Romulus and Remus[edit]


It is a very short, in-universe article that would add more material to this one and make it more complete. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 23:56, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Done, but I'm not sure about the redirect I have in place at the old article, would somebody mind checking it for me? Alastairward (talk) 19:58, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
It's perfect, good job :) Judgesurreal777 (talk) 21:46, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Merge in Tal Shiar and Reman[edit]

They have zero notability on their own, and would make this article more comprehensive, and eliminate two stubs, so a win-win all around. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 22:59, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Please do not bring Canon/Non-Canon fights to this page[edit]

It's time to add a section on Nero in the new Star Trek movie.

Please do not bring Canon/Non-Canon fights to this page[edit]


I am writing to implore people to not bring the Canonical battles to wiki. This is *NOT* a Star Trek forum, but a place for people to find information, in this case about the Romulan people. ALL information should be contained in an encyclopedia and should not be removed, edited or otherwise abused.

Thanks in advance for your cooperation.

Jolan'tru and Mnhei'sahe!

Yours in Ongoing Rihannsu Plasma, Star*Dagger, khre'Riov, Blackwing —Preceding unsigned comment added by Star*Dagger (talkcontribs) 13:43, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Kobiyashi Maru[edit]

This segment of the article, while interesting (and eerily similar to a short story idea I once had but never wrote), is not canon:

A year later Admiral Valdore attempted once again to cause conflict in the region. This time using "Telecapture", designed to take over and control enemy ships. Using three Klingon vessels, Valdore attacked Coalition of Planets allies hoping to weaken or destroy two enemies of the Romulan Star Empire by provoking a war. Captain Archer was eventually able to provide evidence of this Romulan deception. This was followed by yet another unsuccessful attempt to break apart the alliance which involved using telecaptured Vulcan cruisers against Proxima Centauri (a recent coalition member). The event that finally sparked the Coalition's declaration of war against the Romulans was the destruction of the Earth freighter Kobayashi Maru.

I understand this is from one of the novels, which are as we all know not considered canon. The article contains plenty of other non-canon information from novels, which is fine, but this paragraph is not clearly identified as being from a novel, which would lead one to think that this occurred in an Enterprise episode. I am clarifying this with a header and brief explanation.--Antodav2007 (talk) 02:59, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

"Smarter and better looking"[edit]

The material in this edit is trivial at best. I think we can do without it. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 21:33, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree. It's not canon, it's not particularly accurate, etc.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:12, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Destruction of Romulus[edit]

Romulus is destroyed in the 2009 Star Trek movie at somtimke in the 24th century. I think this should be mentioned in the article. --MrBurns (talk) 20:06, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

From what I remember the year of the destruction of Romulus is 2379. --MrBurns (talk) 20:10, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
The Countdown comic says it was 2387. Spock says that "in 129 years time" Romulus will be destroyed. That makes it 2258. Dave (talk) 22:35, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
The movie is set in 2258 also because kirk was born 2233, which is also the year of the destruction of the USS Kelvin in the timeline of the movie, which is an altrernate tmeline of the star trek universe. And there are 25 years between the destruction of the USS Kelvin and the destruction of the Vulcan in this timeline. --MrBurns (talk) 14:22, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
Actually, the main plot of Star Trek (2009) is set in 2258, because James T. Kirk was born 2233 and it is mentioned, that there are 25 years between the date of the destruction of the USS Kelvin and the destruction of Vulkan (which are both events, which only take place in the alternate timline, which is used in this movie). --MrBurns (talk) 20:17, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Basic temporal physics y'all: the alternate timeline does not even begin to exist until AFTER the catalyst event which is the destruction of Romulus. Even the movie established (through "flashback" sequence) that Nero 'watched' his wife die, then went effectively insane, THEN chased Spock through the singularity to emerge on top of Kelvin. I simply can not fathom how such erroneousness as "Romulus was destroyed in the alternate timeline" could be perpetuated on Wiki.

For the record: the status of the "Alternate" Universe Romulus is conjecture. The established timeline of the Trek we all grew up with is now commonly referred to as the "Prime" Universe. (and, yes, the destruction happened in the Prime 2387)

(how do I get my wiki log in reset? anyone know?) User:VulpineLady (talk) 02:38, 11 July 2010 (UTC)


I found the following set of statements in the Isolation section rather questionable...

“In 2311, an event known as the Tomed Incident occurred between the Romulans and the Federation, costing thousands of lives…” “For the next fifty years, the Neutral Zone was quiet. There was no direct contact between the Federation and the Empire, nor were there any further Romulan incursions.” “In 2344, four Romulan Warbirds attacked the Klingon outpost at Narendra III. The USS Enterprise (NCC-1701-C) responded to the outpost's distress call…”

Even if it is how it was delivered in continuity it still doesn't make a whole lot of sense. I think there should be some qualifier in the sentence that declares that there was no contact for fifty years when there was clearly contact in 2311 and 2344. Satyrquaze (talk) 17:06, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

An explanation is Needed Please[edit]

The article needs to explain why in the new JJ Abrams film, Romulans are just as strong as the Vulcans, when, traditionally in the Star Trek cannon, unless I haven't been paying attention or just plain dumb, far as I know, the Romulans, physical strength wise, were only on the same level as humans. Then all of a sudden in the Abrams film, a Romulan picks up Kirk by the neck as if though he were a little kid. Please expand the article to cover that major hole, or someone please answer the question. I posted this thing on the Vulcan article discussion page too; the subject is related so I thought it appropriate. Please expand the article. (talk) 21:20, 20 May 2009 (UTC)stardingo747

That sounds quite speculative and possibly trivial. Alastairward (talk) 23:26, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Its not speculation; in one of the scenes towards the end of the movie Kirk is being picked up by the neck, by one of Nero's Romulan henchmen. Now, unless the film specifically said, said Romulan was in fact half-Vulcan then, I really don't see why its trivial. It is a MAJOR change from the Star Trek cannon because, far as I know, Romulans were NOT that strong prior to that movie! (talk) 01:29, 21 May 2009 (UTC)stardingo747
Yeah, that's all original research on a piece of in-universe trivia -- of marginal importance even by Memory Alpha's standards. --EEMIV (talk) 02:56, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
If its only of marginal importance, then you don't mind explaining it then. Minor though that plot point may have been, its a MAJOR departure because I insist, throughout Star Trek history the Romulans were NEVER THAT STRONG. Its POSSIBLE, that the Romulan who picked up Kirk by the nech was half Vulcan, but that is unsubstantiated speculation. Anyway to obtain material from an Abrams interview? Whether it was deliberate, or a major plot hole, it needs to be known because it IS a major departure from Star Trek traditional cannon. I'm sure that them being superhumanly strong makes them more threatening villains (the Romulans), if that is the case even as a casual Star Trek fan I would like to know Abrams reasons for the departure. (talk) 04:11, 21 May 2009 (UTC)stardingo747
I don't see a connection between something being marginal and it therefore being worth explaining. If this departure is at all significant, a reliable, third-party source will off an out-of-universe perspective on it, and then we can cite it. Lacking that, though, it is plot summary and speculative original research. --EEMIV (talk) 10:31, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
It is a major departure from Star Trek cannon and it is worth of note. (talk) 18:42, 21 May 2009 (UTC)stardingo747
Again, if that is indeed the case, a reliable third-party source must first "note it" -- then, we can include and cite it at Wikipedia. That is the Order of things. Reliable sources are life! --EEMIV (talk) 18:56, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
The movie itself is the source, and, recognized as a source or not, sooner or later someone else will bring up the subject. I'm just a casual fan mind, and I noticed; what's it going to be like with more hardcore people? (talk) 19:02, 21 May 2009 (UTC)stardingo747
The movie is a primary source -- Wikipedia generally requires citations to secondary sources (aka third-party sources). From the movie, all we see is one character do one thing -- "describing" that (i.e. relating the events in that scene in such excruciating detail) is minutiae and plot summary, both of which Wikipedia tries to avoid (see WP:IINFO, WP:PLOT). If it is supposed to reflect a change in Star Trek canon vis-a-vis all Romulans' physical strength, that extrapolation or inference must come from a third-party source; articulating such an inference without a source is original research and strictly verboten at Wikipedia. Merely asserting here that it's important and matters and is a HUGE change in canon will not lead to your observation's inclusion; if you feel strongly about this, perhaps you can search through the many movie reviews and interviews with the producers (interviews being one of the few primary sources that generally are okay for these kinds of claims) that cover this topic. And if you don't feel strongly about it...well, time to move on. --EEMIV (talk) 19:16, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Fine Then........[edit]

Regarding the "Explanation Needed" Don't cite it, research it, or post it on the article, nevertheless please stop being such a nazi and leave it open to discussion and let other trekers decide for themselves by allowing them to pay attention to something being pointed out. Where's the harm in that? I am well aware of the fact that discussion pages are only for topics relevant to the article, nevertheless, people should be free to discuss the subject period, as a general discussion, so long as it is kept at a reasonable length.

Whether you chose to allow said freedom is up to you of course; who the hell wants to read a soap box mini-novel? Hey, I understand the need to edit the content in discussion pages, but please keep it within reason, while encouraging others to do the same. I have a very strict "do not touch" policy regarding the article itself; the only time I will modify an article, is if I spot grammatical errors, however the content itself I won't modify. Wikipedia was started in the spirit of freedom, and I find the gestapo-like behavior of some editors to be distasteful. Again I see nothing wrong with general discussion of a topic, so long as it is kept within reasonable length, say, one or two paragraphs. (talk) 19:00, 21 May 2009 (UTC)stardingo747

The problem with "general discussion" is that Wikipedia isn't a message board/forum. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:17, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Size of Empire vs resources[edit]

It is established in "fanon" through the books and games written in the 70s that although the RSE is large, it's lacking in resources. This was intended to explain why they were the last major Star Trek empire to develop warp drive. Apparently they lack "something" critical to creating a warp drive. They did trade for Klingon Ships in season 2 after experiencing a Federation heavy cruiser (the Big E). While it is never stated on screen, it seems established in the Star Trek Universe that the Romulans still lack "something" as they are the only Star Trek Empire to use quantum singularities instead of dilithium controlled anti-matter engines.

hope this helps some... —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:10, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Which section of the article are you suggesting an edit for? -- Fyrefly (talk) 15:15, 21 December 2010 (UTC)


This article includes the paragraph: "The Romulan government resembles the Roman Republic before it became the Roman Empire. The Romulan government consists of several parts: the Romulan Senate, the main governing and legislative body in a large chamber on Romulus. The Senate is headed by the Praetor, followed by the Proconsul. The Senate does not sit on the third day of the Romulan week. The Romulan Senate also has the Continuing Committee, which is composed of senators and the chairman of the Tal Shiar and confirms the new praetor." The fourth sentence appears to be the key of this paragraph - not. Indeed, it would be like writing a paragraph about the U.S. Congress, the strucuture of the senate and house, the role of the speaker and president of the senate, etc. and then inserting randomly that navy bean soup is served every day in the Senate dining room.

The random detail has been removed. -- Fyrefly (talk) 16:57, 7 February 2011 (UTC)


The Biology section has a tag from 2009 that much of the material is original reasearch, other citation needed tags, and alot of info that is simply trivial (such as the section on the appearance of the Romulans in the recent reboot movie). Looking at objectively, it appears that most of it is based upon material from various episodes/movies, but is not cited as such and should really be chopped down. I hate those people who come on the Talk section and say This Sucks! with no suggestion of a fix, but I'm new to the page and don't want to step on any toes so I'm wondering about opinions. I'd be happy to offer up a suggested edit, but as I've said above, I'm not sure people will be too please because I'm betting it'll be pretty slim. Thanks - Ckruschke (talk) 19:22, 22 February 2012 (UTC)Ckruschke

Less detail[edit]

Really, this article has way too many details. It needs cutting down. It also might be a good idea to expand this into several other articles. I can't do that much right now. I took out the Romulan military lecture on rank, which was boring and irrevelant, and cuisine, which really was irrelevant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:51, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

I appreciate you finally utilizing the talk page - though it took no less than two other editors reverting you to get that to happen. As you appear to be new to Wikipedia, you will find that if you are reverted, its best to bring your concerns regarding that revert to here, the talk page. If you don't, we have no way to understand what's going on with your edit.
I agree that the article has too many uncited details. As this is an encyclopedia, we operate with the premise that the information found here can always be found elsewhere. If there are sources on subjects like Romulan military rankings or cuisine, it should stay. If not, it should go after a reasonable time of being tagged as needing citation; that usually means for about a month (unless it is a BLP, in which case it cannot go in at all without being reliably cited).
As for boring, I have found that what is boring to one editor might be of particular interest to another editor. One never knows, which is why its an encyclopedia, and not a website about a specific subject, right? - Jack Sebastian (talk) 16:01, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Alternate Reality section[edit]

Should we move or remove the section "Romulans in the Alternate Reality"? After all, Star Trek only features Romulans who were from the Prime Reality. Little to nothing was seen about the actual Romulans of the Alternate Reality. Transphasic (talk) 01:57, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Article blanking[edit]

I note that there is an essay WP:Blanking sections sometimes violates policies. I would think that the arguments it contains would be even more applicable when its an entire article that is being blanked. What's the point of AFD if any editor is free to blank an article? This article exists on Wikipedia in 23 other languages, which seems like a lot of consensus to be going against. The mighty pig (talk) 01:39, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Agree - this should have been talked about so I restored the original full page. No other "Star Trek Race" page has been similarly deleted or had reduction in content, so why are we doing it on this page? Needs to be brought to Talk. Ckruschke (talk) 14:48, 14 November 2013 (UTC)Ckruschke

....A Bit of Fresh Air Required...[edit]

Wow! there's an awful lot of discussion here, and an awful lot of content in the actual article.

Now, I'm going to do something a bit unkind and controversial: I'm going to suggest that "Romulans" and the "Romulan Star Empire" are not real. I realise that some of the more ardent Trekkies will be sharpening their bat'leths and baying for my blood for saying so, but the fact remains that I'm right.

This whole article should - if I'm brutally honest - be scrapped, or at least SEVERELY pared back and merged into some kind of all-encompassing article about "Star Trek". It really does not reflect credit on Wikipedia as a ( - supposed - ) organ of serious factual content that there should be such an "in-depth" article about what is ( - essentially - ) nonsense. Leave it to "Memory Alpha" and other such Wikis.

I'm sorry if I've made anyone cry by shattering any delusions, but I suspect I've done you a favour in a way you probably don't yet appreciate. (talk) 22:43, 11 September 2016 (UTC)