Template talk:Star Trek character
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 |
Contents |
[edit] Usage
[edit] Code
{{Star Trek character|if=|Title = Jean-Luc Picard
|bgcolor = #ccccff
|Image = picard1.jpg
|Caption = Capt. Jean-Luc Picard
|Species = [[human]]
|Gender = male
|Hair color = grey ([[baldness|balding]])
|Eye color = bluish-brownish grey
|Planet = [[Earth]]
|Affiliation = [[Starfleet]]
|Posting = [[USS Enterprise (NCC-1701-D)|''Enterprise''-D]],<br>Celtrus III,<br>[[USS Enterprise (NCC-1701-E)|''Enterprise''-E]]
|Position = [[commanding officer]],<br>special operations
|Rank = [[Captain (Star Trek)|Captain]]
|Insignia = [[Image:Star Trek TNG OF5b.png]] *DEPRECATED; DO NOT USE*
|Serial = SP-937-215
|Portrayed = [[Patrick Stewart]]
}}
[edit] Result
| Jean-Luc Picard | |
|---|---|
| Species: | human |
| Gender: | male |
| Hair color: | grey (balding) |
| Eye color: | bluish-brownish grey |
| Home planet: | Earth |
| Affiliation: | Starfleet |
| Posting: | Enterprise-D, Celtrus III, |
| Position: | commanding officer, special operations |
| Rank: | Captain |
| Serial number: | SP-937-215 |
| Portrayed by: | Patrick Stewart |
[edit] Note
- For postings, positions, and ranks, a pilot project is underway (beginning with TNG characters) to include only those major depictions during the timeframes of the live-action productions. For example, Picard's commands during the various series/movies include the Enterprise-D, Enterprise-E, and special operations on Celtrus III (when he was captured and tortured by the Cardassians). His command of the Stargazer predates TNG, so it should not be included. Moreover, please refrain from adding one-offs, minor/ad hoc commands, alternative realities, or supposition. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 02:22, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
- Picard's position on the StarGazer is canonical and important to at least 2 episodes plots, so why not include it. I think if it's referenced within the shows that it should be included. --frendy 05:02, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
- Agreed with frendy --EEMeltonIV 07:30, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Age
I doubt whether "Age" is every going to be used as it varies from season to season. Perhaps "Date of Birth" would be better as this is constant for every character. Philip Stevens 16:43, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
- Makes sense to me! Note that there are few canon references to these factoids (and we should endeavour to use canon references when possible); however, semi-canon references are in abundance at the Star Trek website. For symmetry, how about date of death too? Or maybe we should leave such details to the article text? E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 17:12, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Color of the title bar
Why does Jean-Luc Picard has a gold bg for the title and Q red? Should we use a color format as below?
- Federation: Blue
- Klingon: Red
- Romulans: Green
- Ferengi: Gold
- Cardasians: Purple
- Civilians/others: Gray
- Colors are from Birth of the Federation game
Any opinions? --Cool CatTalk|@ 15:56, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
I was about to suggest something like that! We have the ability to add colour, so why shouldn't we? The scheme proposed is fine with me. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 16:18, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Protrayed by:?
Hi! While there's nothing inherently wrong with being more specific ("Actor:"/"Actress:"), I see nothing wrong with having the field header of "Portrayed by:". Thoughts? E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 16:29, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
- The more spesisic, the nicer. --Cool CatTalk|@ 22:37, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
- No real argument and this isn't really problematic for me; it just might be slightly inconsistent with attempts for gender-neutral language (read neutral point-of-view); whether this is a necessity is another question, though. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 22:50, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
- Err... The people in question are either male or female. There is no real contravercy. It isnt problematic either way. I just like to be spessific and am fascinated in pointing out the obvious, unlike Q. --Cool CatTalk|@ 08:48, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- He he; as I said: their gender is not the issue, use of gender-neutral language might be. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 14:02, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- Err... The people in question are either male or female. There is no real contravercy. It isnt problematic either way. I just like to be spessific and am fascinated in pointing out the obvious, unlike Q. --Cool CatTalk|@ 08:48, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- No real argument and this isn't really problematic for me; it just might be slightly inconsistent with attempts for gender-neutral language (read neutral point-of-view); whether this is a necessity is another question, though. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 22:50, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Rank Insignia?
Is this part really necessary? Seems superfluous, what with the actual "rank" field -- if anyone's actually interested in seeing the insignia, they can go to the appropriate article. Entries for characters who've gone through multiple ranks, e.g. Sulu and Chekov, look a bit oddball with those multiple images. --EEMeltonIV
- Agreed. The title of the rank held is sufficient, no one needs to see the pictures.--frendy 04:59, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Combine posting and position?
Rather than two separate boxes, I'd suggest combining them. This will alleviate potential confusion (esp. among non-Trek fans) as to which position a character held on which ship. e.g. William Riker: we know he served aboard the Pegasus, Potemkin, Hood, two Enterprises, the Titan (am I forgetting one?). Between those ships, he was the helmsman, first officer and commanding officer. Looking at them in separate rows, there's no way to see which position he held at which postings. If we combined them to a joint "Postings" (or perhaps "Assignments" would be better?), it could read something like "USS Pegasus helmsman" or "USS Enterprise-D first officer". Thoughts? --EEMeltonIV 23:14, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
- And even better (ha), how about also parenthetically give the character's rank for that assignment -- e.g. "USS Pegasus helmsman (ens.)" or "USS Enterprise-D first officer (cmdr.)" --EEMeltonIV 23:18, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Height, hair color, and eye color?
Are these necessary -- or, more importantly, significant? Why not also include weight, number of fingers, dangling or attached lobes, etc.? --EEMeltonIV 01:15, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
- Wouldn't consider them needed, interesting maybe for non-watchers.. but not needed.. WP:WAF (which is a guideline anyway and is intended to make writing about fictional things difficult - hence why I dislike it.) does state as well "As with all infoboxes, trivial details should be avoided. An infobox for a real-life actor would not contain items such as favorite food, eye color, and hobbies; these details do not aid the reader in understanding the important characteristics of the subject." MatthewFenton (talk • contribs • count • email) 22:42, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
