Template talk:Timeline of Star Trek franchise

This template puts Star Trek Generations in both 2200s and 2300s, so it would seem logical to put Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home in both 2200s and 1900s and to put Star Trek: First Contact in both 2300s and 2000s especially since most of the Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home takes place in 1900s and most of the Star Trek: First Contact takes place in 2000s. --93.139.112.116 (talk) 22:43, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

I had absolutely nothing to do with the decision, but I think I can explain the logic: The "centuries" (rows, vertical axis) don't honestly represent when the fictional stories take place, which is why they don't always reflect time travel. (They show time travel twice as of 2024-06-08: Star Trek: Generations and Star Trek: Discovery each shift from one "century" into another.) Rather than reflecting when the story takes place, they reflect the "era", as I will call it, which comes along with a set of characters. This is why TOS and the first seven films (with Kirk and his crew) and also the reboot films (also with Kirk and crew, but in an alternate timeline), these all appear in one "century", one row. Even if the action technically spilled into other centuries, if it was the same ensemble of characters, I think it would belong in the same row and "century". In fact, several episodes of TOS depict time travel, but the series is all in that one "century". The Next Generation has a new "century" largely because it has a new set of characters (Picard and crew), and Star Trek: Generations appears in two "centuries" (two rows) not because it has time travel but because it has two sets of characters, both the TOS and TNG eras are shown in that one film. As I think about it, most of the TV shows feature time travel to other centuries, so it would be very messy to try to include that in this graph. The vertical axis also skips "centuries" that have no Star Trek content - because it's actually an axis of eras, and sets of characters. I haven't watched Discovery so I can't really speak to it's split from one "century" into another, my observation about characters may not apply if they use largely the same characters in both eras. However, it is likely the only time travel that doesn't complete within a single film or two-part episode. Fluoborate (talk) 07:55, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

This is not an obvious explanation. Simplicity is necessary. The template should just show what time is shown in which films.Voproshatel (talk) 17:57, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

This is a good and important addition. It could improve the template.Voproshatel (talk) 17:08, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Short Treks

Hi. What about Short Treks? IKhitron (talk) 19:59, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

As it's not full scale series, it's not included here! Beside, it's time span doesn't allow to include it into this template. – Vilnisr ^{T | C} 15:32, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Weird. It's tv series exactly as every one else, one of the best. 2x01 is definitely one of the best Star Trek episodes. And why doesn't allow, it's 2018-2020. IKhitron (talk) 17:05, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

It's only a companion series, not standalone, it has 2 "seasons" with 10 shorts. As for the template, I'm not talking about 2018-2020, I'm talking about 2230-2385-far future, and it's not even consecutive! – Vilnisr ^{T | C} 18:21, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Definitely disagree about the show nature. Strange New Worlds has the same episodes number for now, and even less seasons. About the far future, it does not matter the graph shows our time. I understand I can't change your mind, but maybe somebody else will see this conversation. IKhitron (talk) 18:36, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

About show nature, read Short Trek intro. As about template, you should look better there is not only production year, but also time span when the action takes place. – Vilnisr ^{T | C} 18:45, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Temporal Cold War

Star Trek Enterprise should be partially at the additional 2700s and 2900s. Voproshatel (talk) 17:03, 15 June 2024 (UTC)