Talk:Pathfinder (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] Is It Canon?
Is the use of pathfinder as a designation for the first ship accurate, has it ever been used in any episode of Star Trek in this context? 81.171.247.82 13:15, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
I'm afraid it's not canon. The only mention of this naming concept is the "Defiant Pathfinder", of which is what one of the Defiant class concept art ships was named (of which would inspire the Nova class starship, as mentioned in the article). Unfortunately, I believe this article is the source of a widespread misconception over the use off the term 'pathfinder' as a ship prototype. A Google search only brings up ships actually named (as opposed to termed) as Pathfinder, including both U.S. and British naval vessels of that name, research aircraft and the OV-098 test article. I have doubts that it if formally used as a naval development term, and I've never heard it used in Star Trek, outside of the name of a Voyager episode, and the afore mentioned concept art. User:Kt'Hyla 06/11/20
I've altered the article to reflect what I've found in my research, however I'm curious as to whether anyone has a canon source that shows the use of the label "pathfinder" to denote a class prototype. I'd recommend that the title also be changed to say "Defiant Pathfinder", provide a separate entry isn't made for that. User:Kt'Hyla 06/11/20
Aha! I've finally found an early reference to 'pathfinder' in the ST:TNG Tech Manual, where the USS Galaxy prototype is referred to as a pathfinder. However, the terms appears to be a descriptor rather than a designation, so the original definition posted in this article earlier doesn't appear to be entirely correct. I've updated the entry to reflect this, and moved the use of the term to the top. In light of this, I don't believe the article will need to be renamed, since the term, canon or not, appears to be gaining popularity. User:Kt'Hyla 06/11/21
