Talk:Borg (Star Trek)/Archive 3
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
Theories and speculations
These should be the last section (befor external links etc) or a seperate article. Is it really encyclopedic even though it is very interesting. --Cat out 20:08, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
Pronunciations
Some comment is made on the subject of the Borg's varying pronunciation of 'futile'. Given that the variation is simply that between common British usage ('few-tile') and common American usage ('few-tle' - this being the same variance that gives us 'miss-le' as opposed to 'miss-ile'), do we think it's really worth making a fuss about? Different actors, different directors, and so on... It's not really a characteristic of the Borg as such, surely? - Adaru 22:04, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Urban myths about the Borg
This section, though interesting, seems a bit unencyclopedic and non-NPOV. Some rewriting is in order. Algebra 21:54, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
- I just removed a part of it, thinking it was vandalism. I was going to post something here, but then I saw this. Non-POV doesn' seem the correct term for the section. If anything, quite a lot of it looks like a joke. I need to get some sleep, but I guess I could try doing it up all purdy and that when I'm rested. That is, if nobody else gets to it first. --JD[don't talk|email] 23:06, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
- I agree, the "Urban myths about the Borg" section is unencyclopedic and should be removed. Additionally, the section would not even be classified as urban legend. He is simply stating a debate about a fictional species, "How unstoppable are the Borg?" and giving us his interpretation backed with his selection of examples. Another person can easily give an opposite interpetation backed by his or her selection of examples. A long debate could then follow, none of which belongs in this article. --Evmore 07:14, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
Section deleted. Don't get me wrong, it was an interesting read. I'd have no problem if select portions of it were resurrected and interspersed throughout the article, as some of it is actually supported by real facts, but the phrasing of about 80% of the section was bad, its presentation as dispelling "urban legends" was bad, its "OMFG Star Trek is better! [urgay lol]" fanboy-reeking opening statement was bad, and its disregard for the Manual of Style was bad. I've got better things to do than prune someone's fancruft. EVula 15:11, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
POV and OR in lead section
The last paragraph of the lead has several points that appear to be POV and OR, as exemplified by the use of the words some, probably, indication and explaining. CovenantD 15:46, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
Inefficiencies of the hive mind?
I always thought that the borg didn't react until somebody did something hostile was because unless they were actively impeding a Borg's progress, they were deemed "irrelevant" by the Collective. I thought that was why the borg drone in Q, who didn't do anything to the crewmembvers on the bridge, and just got data from their computers. As far as I know, it has nothing to do with "inefficiencies". (Borg are all about being efficient).
Edit: I just realized that this was part of the "Urban myths about the Borg" section. There is no evidence of this. I'm removing it.
Requested move
Borg (fictional aliens) → Borg (Star Trek) – to keep like all other dab'd Star Trek related pages —Newnam(talk) 19:12, 29 July 2006 (UTC) (copied from the entry on the WP:RM page)
Survey
- Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
- Support --EEMeltonIV 20:43, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
- Support —JD[don't talk|email] 20:47, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
- Support per nom, consistency and more obvious. --Dhartung | Talk 07:41, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
- Support, as per nom. – Axman (☏) 09:14, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
- Support - I was about to suggest the move myself when I noticed this survey! (Must be the hive mind!) Marky1981 18:39, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
- Support as per nom. EVula 21:12, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- Support. Resistence is futile. Aye-Aye 22:49, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
- Support per nom. Make it so! — MrDolomite | Talk 22:46, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
Discussion
- I think we have enough support votes to move. Marky1981 21:24, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
- It can't be moved - it needs an admin. That's probably why this vote was started in the first place. —JD[don't talk|email] 21:26, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
I just asked A Man In Black to take a look at this; as an admin, he could move the article for us. EVula 21:31, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
Taken care of. In the future, if I'm not around or something, you can always just tag a redirect you need deleted with {{db|Housekeeping; to make way for a move}}, as long as the history isn't important for something. (In this case, it wasn't.) - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 22:47, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks! EVula 01:04, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Proposed section/article: Borg philosophy
I think a section or maybe even a new article on "Borg Philosopy" or "Philosopy of Borg" respectively is important and long overdue. There already exists a paragraph on the former on the Memory Alpha wiki. I think a fair amount can be stated about this specific topic without indulging in any original research. --Amit 17:30, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
- If it can be done without OR, I'm all for it. EVula 01:06, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
External Links
I have removed external links to discussion forums as they are a violation of WP:EL. -- MakeChooChooGoNow 16:42, 26 August 2006 (UTC)