Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Star Trek/Archive 10

Archive 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

List of Star Trek television series

The "Showrunner(s)" column at List of Star Trek television series needs sources for the showrunners for the first five series (from The Original Series through to Voyager); this has been tagged as unsourced since October 2019. -- Alex_21 _TALK 02:00, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Alex21 raised this question before, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Star_Trek/Archive_2#Television_series_showrunners twice already. I previously suggested that it may not make sense to apply the modern term "showrunner" retroactively to an old show, and I would reiterate that concern. A showrunner is a specific type of "Executive producer" and using the more generic heading for the table column and some explanatory text (explaining to readers and editors why only some but not all producers are listed) might be another way to resolve the matter. Also it seems as if Alex21 was the person who added the table.[1] -- 109.79.167.154 (talk) 20:21, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

I would agree using showrunner where sources don't specifically call them that is a problem for older series. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 20:27, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

I've only just come across these responses, my bad. If you have an issue with the term, it is what the infoboxes and articles have all have listed them as for years; search for the term "showrunner" in the articles for TNG, DS9 and VOY (including ENT, but those entries are sourced). Regardless, they still require sources, hence the reach-out for assistance here. -- Alex_21 _TALK 02:11, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

WP:V Any material that needs a source but does not have one may be removed. Whoever tagged it {{citation needed}} seemed to have an issue with it. (Other articles doing it for years doesn't make it right, that's an WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument, and retroactively applying the modern term showrunner to the original Star Trek is always going to be incongruous at best.) It would be a waste of time to ask people to look for reliable sources that are highly unlikely to even exist, so I suggested another way to fix the underlying problem. If you don't like the suggestion you could always try WP:IAR and get WP:LOCALCONSENSUS on the article talk page to throw out the citation needed request. Regardless User:Alex 21 added the table in 2019 and per WP:BURDEN "The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material".

TLDR: rename the column heading from Showrunners to Executive producers. -- 109.79.173.96 (talk) 04:26, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

The citation needed tag specifically says it is for the data in the table, not the heading. That doesn't mean the heading shouldn't be changed though, per previous comments I agree that showrunner doesn't really apply to the older series. But, just changing it to "Executive producers" is not ideal, we don't want every EP for every series being listed. It should just be the lead EPs for each show/season, which I think we have. So sources a needed to support them, a better heading that isn't "showrunner" or "executive producer" is also needed. - adamstom97 (talk) 05:26, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

WP:TV have been asked before about adding a specific field for showrunner in the Infobox and in the cases I looked at they were against it.[2][3] My suggestion didn't come out of nowhere, I previously read either those discussions or another one just like it. It is a slightly different situation but I think the same logic applies here. (In theory the table heading could be both Executive producers <br>(Showrunners) but that would be too ugly, and I hate to even mention it.) In my earlier suggestion I said "and some explanatory text", be it in {{Explanatory footnote}}s or notes below the table or hidden comments or all of the above. Showrunner is a great term, I've nothing against it, it is a very useful informal description, but reframing the past by current standards creates unnecessary problems. (Tangent: I thoroughly recommend the documentary Showrunners: The Art of Running a TV Show, the accompanying book Showrunners is great too.) -- 109.79.173.96 (talk) 06:24, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Again, no one is suggesting that "showrunner" be used. I literally just said that we needed a better heading that isn't "showrunner" or "executive producer". The reason we put showrunners in the executive producer param in the infobox is because they almost always are executive producers, but those params include every executive producer who is not a showrunner as well. We don't want them being added to this table. We could try something like "Lead executive producer" with a note explaining that this means the showrunner for series that have one. - adamstom97 (talk) 06:34, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

"Executive producer" is the only technically correct credit available. No other logical choice exists. To fully meet the requirements of the core policy of Verifiability it has to be Executive producer. I don't think discouraging other editors from adding all executive producers to the table is going to be a real problem, but as I already said it can be addressed by some form of explanatory text and User:Adamstom.97 said a note explaining that this means the showrunner for series that have one which sounds a whole lot like agreeing with my earlier point that explanatory text would be necessary. Please go ahead and add whatever kind of comment or footnote you think would work best. -- 109.79.160.13 (talk) 00:30, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Broken template

A major issue. The Template:StarTrek.com link, used in 706 wiki articles, no longer works. The underlying website, www.startrek.com, has been replaced with ca.startrek.com. Also appears that the template parameter "Episode", which is predicated on "Number used in the URL to identify the Star Trek episode", is now stymied by the new website using a text string to identify the episode. Hope someone on the extensive WikiProject Star Trek team can fix this. Thank you. Jmg38 (talk) 19:43, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Searching, I note that this 2019 request points out that the StarTrek.com page itself keeps changing, using intl.startrek.com at that time. Perhaps time to delete this template and systematically delete its entry at the 706 articles? I do not know, but if the source keeps changing on you... Jmg38 (talk) 20:07, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

startrek.com still exists, it just changes to intl.startrek.com for people outside the US. - adamstom97 (talk) 20:21, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

The template also fails when browsing domestically. At Tuvix it links to https://www.startrek.com/startrek/view/library/episodes/VOY/detail/68898.html, whereas the Tuvix page at startrek.com now lives at https://www.startrek.com/database_article/tuvix-episode. (I've replacing the link at Tuvix for now) — Fourthords | =Λ= | 00:27, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

I would recommend just replacing it. They've gone through numerous website redesigns over the last few years, and they always break the links and change the format, so having a template is of reduced utility. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 18:44, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

I figured that sooner or later someone would make whatever requests were necessary to get a robot or something to fix or replace the template wholesale across the entire Star Trek project. Or should we start manually replacing the dead templates with simple non-template links that work? -- 109.79.167.195 (talk) 03:15, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Skydance.

Hey, everyone from the Star Trek pages, i’m just come and visit and see if anyone who worked on Into Darkness and Beyond want to work on the WikiProject Skydance Media. Skydance is recently developing Star Trek 4 but we have enough time before it happen, so feel free to join in and help Skydance the best it can. BMA-Nation2020 (talk) 06:42, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

{{StarTrek.com link}}

Please fix or delete. See Special:Diff/1132011610. Thank you, - FlightTime (open channel) 21:29, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

@Jmg38: Heads-up ping only. - FlightTime (open channel) 21:31, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

See also Broken Template (August 2022) -- 109.76.143.175 (talk) 04:08, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Template has been nominated for deletion March 2023 -- 109.78.196.224 (talk) 03:36, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Project-independent quality assessments

Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class= parameter to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.

No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.

However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:33, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Jake Sisko rewrite

I've started a rewrite of the article on Jake Sisko per my comment on the talk page there, if anybody wants to weigh in.

Live long and prosper, voorts (talk/contributions) 16:44, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Subspace Rhapsody

I feel like this draft has potential, and could use some help bringing together sources on the history, production, and reception of this episode. Cheers! BD2412 T 16:39, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

I think this can happily exist in main space now? I can take a look for {{refideas}} but it's got a bunch of notable critical reviews, and it'll naturally get more eyes out of draftspace. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 19:14, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Morgan Jones as Col. Jack Nesvig

Help requested at Talk:Assignment: Earth#Possible citogenesis. Andrewa (talk) 05:01, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Enterprise Building (China)

My new China-themed article. Sadly, at 175 words, it's not long enough for a DYK and I cannot find much more in English sources. Can anyone find an anything else? PS. A free image would be nice too, but I am not holding out hope. I guess we can use something with fair use... _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:04, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

Proposal regarding season article naming

There is a proposal to change the naming conventions of TV season articles from the current practice of XXX (season 1) to XXX, season 1 or XXX season 1. As such a change would affect a substantial number of articles, you are invited to participate in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television) § Move TV seasons from parenthetical disambiguation to comma disambiguation. Thank you. InfiniteNexus (talk) 04:21, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

Update: Please see Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television) § Follow-up RfC on TV season article titles. Thanks. InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:18, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Talk:Dyson_sphere#Dyson spheres in fiction

After a protracted argument on the Dyson sphere talk page that seemed to be going nowhere, I decided to consolidate and restate the basic issues concerning this section in general, and one particular instance that has proven especially vexing, as I see them. I hope that members of this and other related WikiProjects might weigh in and give their opinions. P Aculeius (talk) 18:10, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Requested move

I have started a discussion at Talk:Star Trek: Section 31#Requested move 30 March 2024 that may be of interest to members of this project. - adamstom97 (talk) 20:50, 30 March 2024 (UTC)