Talk:Columbia (Star Trek)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part 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.

Star Trek Portal

[edit] ST:TMP

Should there be a mention here of the USS Columbia from ST:TMP? Wl219 05:20, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Loss of the Columbia

The fate of the NX-Class Columbia has just recently been... sealed... so to speak, by the official Star Trek site. According to the subtext for an image in Paramount's new "Ships of the Line" book, "The mystery of the missing Columbia NX-02 lasted for two centuries, until it was discovered in the early days of the Dominion War." So it went missing and was discovered in the Gamma Quadrant, given the picture they provided with the text.

Picture along with the text: [1] Crashed Columbia Image: [2] Ex-Nintendo Employee 13:35, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I noticed that SOMEBODY reverted it. GOD, what part of "See talk" does this individual not understand? The link was given so that the user could access it via startrek.com, it's the third gallery paragraph, WHICH WAS ALREADY STATED. The way the gallery was set up doesn't lend itself to direct hotlinking very well, which is why he ended up on the first page. I just wish these people would spend more than ten seconds checking out a source BEFORE they decide to go and undo someone else's hard work. Ex-Nintendo Employee 02:44, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

One should not have to look at the talk page to find information on a source. If it bothers you that it jacks up the browser, then footnote the link with a warning. Sheesh. Get over youself. --EEMeltonIV 02:54, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

The only thing that "bothers" me is your distinct rudeness and lack of tact concerning the fact that you're not willing to spend more than ten seconds at a source. It's not a "calendar", its a massive book of Star Trek artwork commissioned by Paramount and published by Pocket Books; the fact that it had an inspiration from the annual "ships of the line" calendar has no bearing on its validity. It is an official source- StarTrek.com - and your condescending tone speaks volumes. "Get over yourself indeed". Ex-Nintendo Employee 02:58, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Oh, yes, all kinds of "hard work" into the link. Ten seconds not necessary to switch the "expanded" parameter from "false" to "true" to get the gallery window to appear full screen. You're welcome. --EEMeltonIV 03:18, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Notwithstanding my limited experience with HTML script, it's more effort than you've put into it, given that you keep calling a calendar. It's an art book whose only connection to the SOTL calendar is that it was INSPIRED by it- the book contains over 175 pages of artwork and text by Okuda, Drexler, Dochterman and Probert. [3] Furthermore, to claim it's non-canon requires evidence, given that it was commissioned by Paramount themselves. Ex-Nintendo Employee 04:40, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

See the canon (Star Trek) article for the difference between canon and official, licensed, etc. --EEMeltonIV 10:43, 27 September 2006 (UTC)