Talk:Weapons of Star Trek

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
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] Initial unsorted discussion

"Transphasic Chroniton Torpedoes" sounds like pure fanon to me and shouldn't be here unless someone can quote an episode.

What the heck is the source for all this and is it a direct plagiarism? (Asking, not accusing.)

This page seems totally out of place in an encylopaedia - it is not anything real! A page about a television programme is acceptable, as the programme is, itself, real, but a page explaining how a non-existent weapon doesn't work seems pretty silly - there's text to this extent at Physics and Star Trek Tompagenet 00:50 Apr 18, 2003 (UTC)

Is this page a joke? It looks like nearly the Platonic Type of a parody of treknobabble. I tend to agree that this page needs to be removed. It has nothing whatsoever to do with reality -- something which should be the actual focus of an encyclopaedia. What's the process for requesting a page be deleted? --Michael 01:14 10 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Unless this is plagiarised, it should stay. It's a valid article on a science-fiction universe; there are articles on the characters, vessels, and locations of the Star Trek universe. An article on Star Trek's weaponry is just as significant. -- goatasaur

I agree, there are other articles like Mineral (StarCraft) that haven't been commented on, yet they seem to remain. Sci Fi are valid articles. Poor Yorick
Then at the very least the wording should be changed to reflect that this is 100% fiction. The way it is worded at present could, at a simple glance-over, fool a casual reader into thinking this is intended to be serious discussion and make the Wikipedia lose a lot of credibility.
As to why Mineral (StarCraft) hasn't been commented on by me, at any rate, it's simply because I didn't stumble across it before. (Note: My opinion has changed -- checked the postscriptum below.)
I'm going to try my hand at making this article less laughable. (Even correcting basic grammar errors would help somewhat.) --Michael 01:47 10 Jun 2003 (UTC)
P.S. I just checked out the Mineral (StarCraft) article and it is not even remotely similar to the nature of this laughable screed of treknobabble. The Mineral (StarCraft) article reports on something that is real (albeit in software): an element of a game that has noticable, real-world effects when the game is played. For that article to be comparable to this one there would have to be reams and reams and reams of data about its precise chemical structures, socio-economic impact of its use, etc.
I agree, fictional weaponry seem to remain on Wikipedia; Lightsaber, phaser, The Force to name a few. The article, as is, needs work to reach encyclopediac material, but it shouldn't be deleted. Poor Yorick 02:10 10 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I'm a Star Trek fan, and I can attest that most of this is speculation and made up stuff, not coming from Star Trek at all. This should be burnt and rewritten totally. The sections should specify in what episodes we saw something first, what we know about it for certain, when we saw it do new things, etc, and anomalies, rather than this. Morwen 11:48, 5 Oct 2003 (UTC)

[edit] TR-116

Source: http://www.phasers.net/2370/tr-116.htm

What about the TR-116 projectile rifle designed by Starfleet that appeared on DS9? That counts as a weapon for the "Weapons of Star Trek" page.

--Blue387 21:57, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Star Trek: Nemesis

Could somebody please include something about the weapon used in Star Trek: Nemesis? // Liftarn

You mean the Subspace weapons? --Cool CatTalk|@ 10:15, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
It was called a Thaleron (sp?) weapon, wasn't it? 194.128.66.118 16:19, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Phase pistols

I had always assumed "phase pistols"/"phase weapons" to be the same thing as "phasers", but just an older name for them - that is to say, that the phase weapon became known by the less cumbersome name of "phaser" by the time of the Star Trek original series. By this stage, naturally, it would have been developed and become more advanced; compare a matchlock gun to a modern handgun or the like.

Not so. There is an episode of the Next Generation where Worf comments that there were no phasers in the 22nd century. This would
mean that phase weapons are not phasers. They may be precursors based on similar technology though, like comparing a flintlock
to a machine gun.

But wait, don't they use phasers on the show, "Enterprise", which is set in the 22nd century?

No, they're said 'phase pistols'. 82.31.7.129 17:07, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Klingon weapons

This article is missing out on klingon melee weapons - in particular the bat'leth and the dk'tahg.

[edit] Treknobabble

Ok, it is treknobabble, but i find the disclaimer completelly unnecessary. Since its the "fiction universe" of Star Trek, and not "our universe", its obvious that these devices are works of fiction. I dont see a disclaimer in Hamlet telling that "ghosts do not exist and therefore Hamlet's father is complete Shakespearebabble". And yes, I am a trekkie :-p

Well, I'm not a trekkie, and I also think the disclaimer is silly. The intro should probably be expanded and clarified, but it's not like we have any other disclaimers for other imagined science. Besides, skimming through the article, I can tell nobody would mistake this for reality. All of the references to the future, Starfleet Command, and the big "Weapons of Star Trek" title kind of give it away.-LtNOWIS 03:09, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
You'd be surised how ignorant people can get. But any truly sentient being should relise anythig seen on Star Trek as fiction. --Cool CatTalk|@ 10:19, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pictures

Should this page have pictures? --Blue387 20:13, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

I think I may assist with that. however how should that be done? Phasers of TOS and TNG are quite deferent. --Cool CatTalk|@ 09:59, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] So'na weaponry

Does anyone have info on the subspace weapons used in the Briar Patch by the So'na? They also would seem to be able to tear a hole in subspace. (ref to Tri-Cobalt Torpedo)

I think you've stated there pretty much all we were told about them. It's worth noting that Voyager's tri-cobalts made a subspace tear accidentally due to using four of them at high setting simultaneously, wheras the So'na weaponry was specifically designed to have this effect (hence being banned under the Khitomer Accords). --Mnem e son 01:08, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Begin rewrite..

Okay. Hopefully sometime today/tommorow i am going to begin rewriting this article, now i do not wish to build upon what is here as to be frank it needs a hell of alot of work doing, i plan on blanking the page and building it up with fresh, cited content, would anyone like to help (-:? thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 16:12, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Yummy

I have to say while it is still pretty small the article is growing to be much better then before.. things are cited, tidy and factual. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 21:52, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Photonic" torpedos?

There's nothing in that cite that indicates such a thing even exists. --Elar a girlTalk|Count 09:22, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

The cite identifies the episode in which they are introduced. The Enterprise series does call them "photonic torpedoes". They appear to be intended to be the same as the "photon torpedoes" on the earlier series. (Enterprise is a prequel, so it often shows the new introduction of technologies taken as standard in the earlier series. Presumably, one is to assume that the name got abbreviated in the years between Enterprise and the original Star Trek series.)--Srleffler 06:08, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
The Klingons possessed photon torpedoes at that time; we should not be speculating as to if they are the same. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 08:05, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Considering that the Enterprise characters also refer to what appear to be phasers as "phase pistols", I think we can safely infer that "photonic torpedoes" are the same as "photon torpedoes". -- Tuvok^Talk|Desk|Contribs 01:15, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
No, we cannot infer anything - it is called original research and speculation - Enterprise clearly makes differentiation between Photons and Photonics. Addendum: The non-canon Star Trek: The Next Generation Technical Manual states that Starfleet began developing Photon torpedoes around 2215, - Enterprise is set in 2152-2155. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 01:38, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Biological agents and Thalaron Radiation

I've removed this text:

The biological agents themselves are made up of billions of organisms which feed upon all other biological matter. It has the same effect on animals, plants and humans rapidly feeding upon all living things they fall upon.

since it's in a section about Thalaron radiation, which is EM and not a biological weapon. This seems like it was just made-up (which I realize is kind of funny to say). x 21:38, 28 February 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Corbomite

Opinions on including corbomite? x 21:46, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../w/e/a/Talk%7EWeapons_of_Star_Trek_3c9d.html"