![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Starfleet International was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 12 January 2011 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Trekkie. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
"it is widely believed that Trekkies experience a high incidence of Asperger's Syndrome."
How long should the list be? Here's a link upon my Trekkie message board pertaining thereto...
* Colin Powell * Dahlai Lama * Tom Hanks * Dr. Mae Jamieson * Neil Armstrong * Jean Simmons (actress) * Paul Sorvino * Mira Sorvino * Berkeley Breathed (cartoonist - Opus, Bloom County) * Bill Amend (cartoonist - Fox Trot) * Seth McFarlane (creator of Family Guy) * Bill Gates * Al Gore * Eddie Murphy * Jason Alexander * Dr. Stephen Hawking * Scott Adams (cartoonist - Dilbert) * Isaac Asimov * Laurell K. Hamilton * Douglas Adams * Carol Moseley Braun * Christan Slater * Whoopi Goldberg * Most, if not all, of NASA * Most, if not all, of Microsoft * George Noory * Art Bell * Marc Scott Zicree * Ben Browder * Rockne S. O'Bannon * Charles M. Schulz * King Abdullah of Jordan * Vin Diesel * John Glenn * Mel Gibson * Sally Ride * Mick Fleetwood * James Worthy * Bebe Neuworth * Kelsey Grammer * Tom Morello * Martin Luther King Jr. * Arthur C. Clarke * Rod Serling * Trey Parker * Matt Stone * Howard Stern * Will Smith * Iggy Pop * Ben Stiller * Conan O'Brien * Kirstie Alley * Tom Bergeron * Beastie Boys * Kevin Newman * Richard Dean Anderson * Drew Carey * Eric McCormack * Weird Al Yankovic * Joss Whedon * Mel Brooks * Robert Atkins * Kathy Lee Gifford * Paul "Big Show" Wight * George Lucas * Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson * Tim Allen * Neal McDonough * Barry Manilow * Robin Williams * Paul McGillion * Jim Meddick (cartoonist - Monty) * Dave Foley * David Hewlett * Number of people at Pixar Animation * late Douglas Adams * Alan Keyes (Repulican Senate candidate, Illinois) * Dennis Haysbert * Brad Paisley * Jim Davidson * Jonathan Ross * The Wiggles * Someone working on the kids' series Big Comfy Couch * Jane Wiedlin (formerly of the GoGo's) * David Reddick (cartoonist) * Kevin Sorbo * Tony Danza * Bryan Singer * David X. Cohen * Alec Newman * Someone in charge at Beavis and Butthead * Jon Stewart * Rick Rashid * Steven Harper
DrWho42 04:26, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
I don't want to be known as a Trekkie OR a Trekker!! I don't care where Lt. Barclay was born or Spock's last name. I just enjoy the great stories in the shows. They are fine drama that happen to take place in the 'sci-fi' future. So---I want to anounce here and now that I AM A TREKFAN!! T`sitra Yel Darb 19:46, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Here's the way I've always described it...I'm not a Trekkie....I'm a Trekker -- meaning I actually have a life outside of ST. (Of course, the fact that I met my wife of, so far, 15 years through a Rrek writing club weakens the argument, but you get the idea! You could tell how our real-world relationship was going by reading how our characters interacted!)
Nobody cares. The discussion board is to discuss the article, not your insecurities about what other people think of you and not your life story. Go find a fan site for that. 129.139.1.69 ( talk) 17:23, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
This already has its own article and therefore does not belong here, except in a 'see also' section. Furthermore, as illustrated above on this talk page, there is no good way to determine how long it should be or who should or should not be included in this list. Therefore I have removed the list. As of 2/20/06, it read like this:
==Well-known Trekkies==
:Main article: List of notable Star Trek fans
Well-known trekkies include: * Bjo Trimble, who helped spearhead the letter writing campaign that convinced NBC to continue Star Trek for a third season * Gabriel Köerner, who was also a profilee on Trekkies; he went on to guest star on The Drew Carey Show and as the "Star Trek Geek" on the game show Beat the Geeks * Bob Rajic, who had cosmetic surgery to look like William Shatner and was the subject of the film Auto Destruct: One Man's Obsession with William Shatner
Celebrity Star Trek fans include: * Isaac Asimov * Tom Bergeron, host of Hollywood Squares and America's Funniest Home Videos, guest star on Enterprise * Phillip J. Fry, fictitious character on Futurama * Bill Gates, who dressed up as Spock one Halloween * Whoopi Goldberg, who played the role of Guinan in Star Trek: The Next Generation * Al Gore, former Vice President of the United States * Kelsey Grammer, who guest starred in the Next Generation epidode " Cause and Effect" and performed an uncredited voiceover in Star Trek: First Contact * Tom Hanks, who was considered for the role of Zefram Cochrane in Star Trek: First Contact, but had to turn it down due to a conflict * Stephen Hawking, who played himself on the Next Generation episode " Descent" * Dennis Haysbert, actor on 24 * Seth MacFarlane, creator of and voices on Family Guy, and two-time guest star on Enterprise * Eddie Murphy, who nearly starred in Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home * Richard Rashid * Ben Stiller, actor, writer, and comedian * Bryan Singer, director of The Usual Suspects, the first two X-Men films and Superman Returns. Singer actually had a brief cameo as a bridge officer in Star Trek: Nemesis.
Instead, let's add a "See also" section and put the reference there. Makaristos 01:24, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
-- It appears even the separate article has been deleted. What gives? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.36.177.44 ( talk • contribs) 04:27, 20 October 2006
okay, tons of stuff in here was obviously made working from a book or article, but that article doesn't have it's place in the references section. Needs to be fixed. Lotusduck 22:39, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
More as a comment in the approach to Trek documentation [and undoubtedly most fictional works documented on Wikipedia], these kinds of statements not only fall under "OR," but it does the term "research" a bad turn:
"They probably own, or perhaps have helped create, the blueprints for various Federation starships, have explanations for all apparent contradictions, such as why in Next Generation episode 5.24, "The Next Phase," in which some characters were incorporeal beings, they could still breathe and were affected by artificial gravity and floors."
And the idea of "notable star trek fans" in an article that mentions at length the pejorative aspect of the phrase seems little more than an attempt at glorification, seeing as I'm sure there are "notable" fans for a lot of the fictional works here on wikipedia and yet those lists do not exist; not to say that the absence in itself does all the telling, but I imagine there'd be quite some resistance if one were to, say, add a list of "notable shakespeare fans," or, perhaps more relevant to "pop" culture, "notable star wars fans," or batman, or [insert whatever the hell]. russ. 12:14, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
I have moved this material here:
For adherents to Star Trek canon, the case that "Trekkie" is the correct term was settled once and for all by Roger Nygard, the director of the 1997 documentary film Trekkies. In a post on the official website for the documentary, Nygard cited Gene Roddenberry's former assistant and Star Trek researcher as the source for the following:
- Gene (Roddenberry) didn't recognize the term "Trekker" however. Somebody once corrected him when he used "Trekkie" on stage. He responded, "Excuse me, did you say 'TrekkER?' The word is 'TrekkIE.' I should know, I created them." [1]
...until such time as a second, separate source can be found for this statement. There have been assertions that this person cited by Mr. Nygard frequently put his own words into Gene Roddenberry's mouth, as it were, especially during Mr. Roddenberry's last years of declining health and memory, using Roddenberry's name to foster his own agenda with regard to Star Trek.
-- Davidkevin 20:02, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
There appears to be vandalism on the page - the exchange between Gene Roddenberry saying "trekkie" and a fan correcting him to "trekker" has been reversed. 19:08, 7 February 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:600:A17F:B4B5:215E:B777:1AFC:7B2 ( talk)
Trekphiler added this:
based on the book by the two women who organized the first Trek con. Unfortunately, I haven't got it in front of me, so I can't cite it. Can somebody credit it? Trekphiler 09:33, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
AMParker: I am working on a linguistics project currently and found this article that may be relevent to the wiki article: Star "Trek Lives: Trekker Slang" by Patricia Byrd. American Speech, Vol. 53, No. 1 (Spring, 1978), pp. 52-58. You can find it in JSTOR but I'll post the link to the article that I have: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0003-1283(197821)53%3A1%3C52%3ASTLTS%3E2.0.CO%3B2-A This talks about trekkie vs. trekker, and may be helpful in this discussion concerning the verifiability problems for the wiki trekkie article.
I've known many fans in over 35 years of convention work and dated a big-time fan in the late '70s (she had put out several fanzines and had put on the first Trek-related convention in her native state). She defined the terms roughly as (I"m paraphrazing, but this is the basic concept):
The often-cited example of a trekkie is the fellow who legally changed his name to 'James T. Kirk'. (This was in the '70s, and I never heard if he actually used 'Tiberius'). I did know a lady who quit her (well-paying) job because she could not get the vacation time she wanted, so she could go to New York for the premiere of Invasion of the Body Snatchers with Leonard Nimoy. CFLeon 09:05, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
Someone who goes on a Hike is a "Hiker" and not a "Hikie" are they not? So it could be said that someone who goes on a trek would be a "trekker" and not a "trekkie" Never the less, it could also be argued that since the fans aren't actually the ones on the "trek" that they could not accurately be called "trekkers" since they are not in fact trekking. The actual treking is done by the fictional individuals on the fictional starship. Therefore, despite my own preference for the word "Trekker", it probably isn't grammatically correct. "Trekkie" would probably be more accurate although another alternative, Trek Fan, might be more pleasing to those of us who despise the media hyped "Trekkie". Dmoorefield68 ( talk) 03:34, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
References
Some major parts of this article seem to be lifted from [1] Particularly the parts on Origins. If someone has the time to weed through the article... RichMac (Talk) 06:47, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Seems to be ref'd as a big fan. Should he be added to list? - SimonLyall ( talk) 10:06, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Absolutely NOT. There is nothing in Star Trek to justify being a mass murderer and hater of his own democratic government. McVeigh was a terrorist! Star Trek was anti-terrorist in nature. I'm removing the McVeigh reference.Dale Husband 04:17, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
If it is documented, then were is the link? Show us a link that provides proof that it is true. Otherwise, what's to keep anyone from claiming that anyone is a Star Trek fan? "Son of Sam, Star Trek fan. The Unibomber, Star Trek fan. Osama bin Laden, Star Trek fan. Where's the proof? Well, it's been documented." See how easy that is?
I believe it is deplorable and reprehensible to include Timothy McVeigh. This is a popular culture entry and there is absolutely no need to include him or to remember him in any other way--unless you knew him personally--than for his murderous and terrorist actions. This is an affront to the people he killed, their families, and to any civil human being. 107.221.229.121 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:15, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Family Guy season seven: Peter takes the family to a Star Trek convention, Stewie kidnaps the cast of TNG using his Transporter made from bluprints aquired at the convention etc. All voiced by the main cast of TNG: Stewart, Frakes, Spiner, Burton, Dorn, Sirtis, McFaden, Weaton, and even Denise Crosby. The fact that the cast were in the FG ep is surley grounds for adding it? Poll? ZellDenver ( talk) 11:36, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
In the Sci-Fi Channel's information program of "SCI-FI BUZZ", host Mike Jerrick interviewed Babara Adams by phone. He asked:
Mike Jerrick: "You weren't kicked off the Whitewater Trial for just wearing your Star Trek uniform?"
B. Adams: "No I was not kicked off for wearing my Star Trek uniform...A TV news reporter from another network kept asking me about my uniform and nothing else about the trial....Although, there was not a violation and any trial disclosure. The trial judge said he was supported of me. Still the rules said no jury member could talk to the media about anything." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spaceman42 ( talk • contribs) 20:41, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
First one user, then several anon IP addresses keep editing in a section on "child porn links to Star Trek fans". The "citations" are bogus at best. Opening discussion after removing the section. If anyone feels strongly about vetting the sources and keeping the material in we would need a neutrality tag on this one.
I didn't revert you; another editor did. Regarding previous reverts by me and others, there is no requirement to discuss reverting editors who remove cited sections without even edit summaries; that's the definition of vandalism. You're the first to bring it up in Talk. Regarding the cites:
I invite other editors to judge for themselves whether the disputed section accurately represents the cites, and whether Liblarva is, in fact, the one who is engaging in "selective quoting as its worst" above. Ylee ( talk) 21:07, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
This seems like a clear case of undue weight being placed on a singular datum from a singular source. I don't see any reason to include this "factoid" in the article until it garners wider support from the media and from the criminal justice community. Powers T 13:36, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
I have asked for feedback at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Star Trek#Content dispute in Trekkie article. Ylee ( talk) 21:47, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
I for one question its notability to the topic of Trekkies. While unique percentage of Toronto pedophiles may be Trekkies, that's notable to the topic of Toronto sex offenders. Is there an unusual occurrence of pedophiles among Trekkies claimed in this study, or an unusual occurrence of Trekkies among pedophiles? -- OuroborosCobra ( talk) 15:58, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
I've finally read the whole discussion and it looks like the local consensus is that the Toronto police unit's observations don't warrant their own section, and really can be sufficiently covered in a sentence or two. Ylee, if you disagree with the consensus or think the groupthink is missing something, your best avenue would probably be to find academic research sources or coverage of this aspect some fans' behavior in other contexts. -- EEMIV ( talk) 17:53, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
First, drop the "IDONTLIKEIT" line. The arguments against you have not been based on personal wishes or dislikes for quite some time now. I am tempted to consider your continued use of that line in ignorance of actual arguments being made against you to be ad hominem.
Second, you claim we cannot treat this as a Toronto-only phenomena, that the absence of further data cannot be treated negatively or positively. You seem to be forgetting the "positive" part of that sentence. We cannot claim that this is only true for Toronto (no one here has, by the way), but you cannot claim that it extends beyond Toronto either. The only thing that can be said is of an occurrence of Trekkies among pedophiles in Toronto. No more, no less. That does not on its own carry weight worth mentioning in an article that is about the world Trekkie population, and not only about Toronto. No one is saying that it is impossible for it to extend beyond Toronto, only that we have no source or information stating that it extends beyond Toronto. We don't even have a source claiming that Trekkies within Toronto are more likely to be pedophiles than the general population, so even among Toronto Trekkies we do not necessarily have weight for inclusion. Your study says something characteristic for Toronto pedophiles, not Toronto Trekkies. There is no information on behaviors characteristic of Trekkies. The burden of proof is on you to defend the significance of this content for the article, and you have failed to do so.
Third, do not take your repeated offers for "compromise" as putting you on higher moral ground. While compromise is often a goal and avenue to reach consensus, compromise should not be used to force inclusion of material that is of undo weight for the article or violates any other policies. Compromise is not always possible within disputes. In this case, you have a nearly unanimous group of other editors saying that your content is of unduly low weight or importance or significance to the topic to merit inclusion in this article. You are the only one still hoping to include it. You are not going to reach consensus for supporting of including your content, particularly if you continue with this kind of attack on other editors with "IDONTLIKEIT" and playing the victim.
Fourth, as the section of WP:UNDUE I quoted states, the solution to weight in article content is not only length. Sometimes it is lack of inclusion of disputed material at all.
Fifth, in the interest of coming to any sort of positive end to this dispute, you need to drop any demands of Liblarva apologizing. Be the bigger person and move on, especially considering that Liblarva hasn't even been involved in this conversation for about four days now. Don't hold a grudge, and don't let events from an editor that is seemingly no longer involved in the dispute cloud your willingness to discuss this with the rest of us. -- OuroborosCobra ( talk) 17:00, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
Well...nice to see at some point in the past 9 years this section was removed. Sounds like irrelevant bogus crap to me. Alexandermoir ( talk) 22:50, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi
I just changed preempted to cancelled (History section, end para. 1)
The body of text states "a Canadian TV station" and had "preempted".
Changed to match the specific TV station report mentioned in the article. Chaosdruid ( talk) 13:58, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Star Trek fandom. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 11:50, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
This entry is confusing Bill Gates for Les Solomon, the one who named the Altair 8800. Someone needs to provide information about Bill Gates himself being a fan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.168.151.40 ( talk) 18:41, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
My two cents. I see there has been conflict over the notable fans sections for many years. Can someone high up just deliver a verdict? I think the section is not only silly and flippant but also poorly written. Whoever sat there and wrote it said everyone “is a huge fan.” That’s sophomoric language for what purports to be an encyclopedia. Alexandermoir ( talk) 22:48, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi all, While I understand the humor of the section "other names," I feel that it is not really relevant to the article. Before I delete it, I would like to reach a consensus. A quick google search revealed no source that seems to pass WP:NOR for the information provided. NANPLover47 ( talk) 04:47, 11 November 2021 (UTC)NANPLover47
Should this be renamed to Star Trek fandom (currently a redirect here)? It seems like a more apt framing of the discussed phenomenon. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:35, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Starfleet International was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 12 January 2011 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Trekkie. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
"it is widely believed that Trekkies experience a high incidence of Asperger's Syndrome."
How long should the list be? Here's a link upon my Trekkie message board pertaining thereto...
* Colin Powell * Dahlai Lama * Tom Hanks * Dr. Mae Jamieson * Neil Armstrong * Jean Simmons (actress) * Paul Sorvino * Mira Sorvino * Berkeley Breathed (cartoonist - Opus, Bloom County) * Bill Amend (cartoonist - Fox Trot) * Seth McFarlane (creator of Family Guy) * Bill Gates * Al Gore * Eddie Murphy * Jason Alexander * Dr. Stephen Hawking * Scott Adams (cartoonist - Dilbert) * Isaac Asimov * Laurell K. Hamilton * Douglas Adams * Carol Moseley Braun * Christan Slater * Whoopi Goldberg * Most, if not all, of NASA * Most, if not all, of Microsoft * George Noory * Art Bell * Marc Scott Zicree * Ben Browder * Rockne S. O'Bannon * Charles M. Schulz * King Abdullah of Jordan * Vin Diesel * John Glenn * Mel Gibson * Sally Ride * Mick Fleetwood * James Worthy * Bebe Neuworth * Kelsey Grammer * Tom Morello * Martin Luther King Jr. * Arthur C. Clarke * Rod Serling * Trey Parker * Matt Stone * Howard Stern * Will Smith * Iggy Pop * Ben Stiller * Conan O'Brien * Kirstie Alley * Tom Bergeron * Beastie Boys * Kevin Newman * Richard Dean Anderson * Drew Carey * Eric McCormack * Weird Al Yankovic * Joss Whedon * Mel Brooks * Robert Atkins * Kathy Lee Gifford * Paul "Big Show" Wight * George Lucas * Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson * Tim Allen * Neal McDonough * Barry Manilow * Robin Williams * Paul McGillion * Jim Meddick (cartoonist - Monty) * Dave Foley * David Hewlett * Number of people at Pixar Animation * late Douglas Adams * Alan Keyes (Repulican Senate candidate, Illinois) * Dennis Haysbert * Brad Paisley * Jim Davidson * Jonathan Ross * The Wiggles * Someone working on the kids' series Big Comfy Couch * Jane Wiedlin (formerly of the GoGo's) * David Reddick (cartoonist) * Kevin Sorbo * Tony Danza * Bryan Singer * David X. Cohen * Alec Newman * Someone in charge at Beavis and Butthead * Jon Stewart * Rick Rashid * Steven Harper
DrWho42 04:26, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
I don't want to be known as a Trekkie OR a Trekker!! I don't care where Lt. Barclay was born or Spock's last name. I just enjoy the great stories in the shows. They are fine drama that happen to take place in the 'sci-fi' future. So---I want to anounce here and now that I AM A TREKFAN!! T`sitra Yel Darb 19:46, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Here's the way I've always described it...I'm not a Trekkie....I'm a Trekker -- meaning I actually have a life outside of ST. (Of course, the fact that I met my wife of, so far, 15 years through a Rrek writing club weakens the argument, but you get the idea! You could tell how our real-world relationship was going by reading how our characters interacted!)
Nobody cares. The discussion board is to discuss the article, not your insecurities about what other people think of you and not your life story. Go find a fan site for that. 129.139.1.69 ( talk) 17:23, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
This already has its own article and therefore does not belong here, except in a 'see also' section. Furthermore, as illustrated above on this talk page, there is no good way to determine how long it should be or who should or should not be included in this list. Therefore I have removed the list. As of 2/20/06, it read like this:
==Well-known Trekkies==
:Main article: List of notable Star Trek fans
Well-known trekkies include: * Bjo Trimble, who helped spearhead the letter writing campaign that convinced NBC to continue Star Trek for a third season * Gabriel Köerner, who was also a profilee on Trekkies; he went on to guest star on The Drew Carey Show and as the "Star Trek Geek" on the game show Beat the Geeks * Bob Rajic, who had cosmetic surgery to look like William Shatner and was the subject of the film Auto Destruct: One Man's Obsession with William Shatner
Celebrity Star Trek fans include: * Isaac Asimov * Tom Bergeron, host of Hollywood Squares and America's Funniest Home Videos, guest star on Enterprise * Phillip J. Fry, fictitious character on Futurama * Bill Gates, who dressed up as Spock one Halloween * Whoopi Goldberg, who played the role of Guinan in Star Trek: The Next Generation * Al Gore, former Vice President of the United States * Kelsey Grammer, who guest starred in the Next Generation epidode " Cause and Effect" and performed an uncredited voiceover in Star Trek: First Contact * Tom Hanks, who was considered for the role of Zefram Cochrane in Star Trek: First Contact, but had to turn it down due to a conflict * Stephen Hawking, who played himself on the Next Generation episode " Descent" * Dennis Haysbert, actor on 24 * Seth MacFarlane, creator of and voices on Family Guy, and two-time guest star on Enterprise * Eddie Murphy, who nearly starred in Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home * Richard Rashid * Ben Stiller, actor, writer, and comedian * Bryan Singer, director of The Usual Suspects, the first two X-Men films and Superman Returns. Singer actually had a brief cameo as a bridge officer in Star Trek: Nemesis.
Instead, let's add a "See also" section and put the reference there. Makaristos 01:24, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
-- It appears even the separate article has been deleted. What gives? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.36.177.44 ( talk • contribs) 04:27, 20 October 2006
okay, tons of stuff in here was obviously made working from a book or article, but that article doesn't have it's place in the references section. Needs to be fixed. Lotusduck 22:39, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
More as a comment in the approach to Trek documentation [and undoubtedly most fictional works documented on Wikipedia], these kinds of statements not only fall under "OR," but it does the term "research" a bad turn:
"They probably own, or perhaps have helped create, the blueprints for various Federation starships, have explanations for all apparent contradictions, such as why in Next Generation episode 5.24, "The Next Phase," in which some characters were incorporeal beings, they could still breathe and were affected by artificial gravity and floors."
And the idea of "notable star trek fans" in an article that mentions at length the pejorative aspect of the phrase seems little more than an attempt at glorification, seeing as I'm sure there are "notable" fans for a lot of the fictional works here on wikipedia and yet those lists do not exist; not to say that the absence in itself does all the telling, but I imagine there'd be quite some resistance if one were to, say, add a list of "notable shakespeare fans," or, perhaps more relevant to "pop" culture, "notable star wars fans," or batman, or [insert whatever the hell]. russ. 12:14, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
I have moved this material here:
For adherents to Star Trek canon, the case that "Trekkie" is the correct term was settled once and for all by Roger Nygard, the director of the 1997 documentary film Trekkies. In a post on the official website for the documentary, Nygard cited Gene Roddenberry's former assistant and Star Trek researcher as the source for the following:
- Gene (Roddenberry) didn't recognize the term "Trekker" however. Somebody once corrected him when he used "Trekkie" on stage. He responded, "Excuse me, did you say 'TrekkER?' The word is 'TrekkIE.' I should know, I created them." [1]
...until such time as a second, separate source can be found for this statement. There have been assertions that this person cited by Mr. Nygard frequently put his own words into Gene Roddenberry's mouth, as it were, especially during Mr. Roddenberry's last years of declining health and memory, using Roddenberry's name to foster his own agenda with regard to Star Trek.
-- Davidkevin 20:02, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
There appears to be vandalism on the page - the exchange between Gene Roddenberry saying "trekkie" and a fan correcting him to "trekker" has been reversed. 19:08, 7 February 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:600:A17F:B4B5:215E:B777:1AFC:7B2 ( talk)
Trekphiler added this:
based on the book by the two women who organized the first Trek con. Unfortunately, I haven't got it in front of me, so I can't cite it. Can somebody credit it? Trekphiler 09:33, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
AMParker: I am working on a linguistics project currently and found this article that may be relevent to the wiki article: Star "Trek Lives: Trekker Slang" by Patricia Byrd. American Speech, Vol. 53, No. 1 (Spring, 1978), pp. 52-58. You can find it in JSTOR but I'll post the link to the article that I have: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0003-1283(197821)53%3A1%3C52%3ASTLTS%3E2.0.CO%3B2-A This talks about trekkie vs. trekker, and may be helpful in this discussion concerning the verifiability problems for the wiki trekkie article.
I've known many fans in over 35 years of convention work and dated a big-time fan in the late '70s (she had put out several fanzines and had put on the first Trek-related convention in her native state). She defined the terms roughly as (I"m paraphrazing, but this is the basic concept):
The often-cited example of a trekkie is the fellow who legally changed his name to 'James T. Kirk'. (This was in the '70s, and I never heard if he actually used 'Tiberius'). I did know a lady who quit her (well-paying) job because she could not get the vacation time she wanted, so she could go to New York for the premiere of Invasion of the Body Snatchers with Leonard Nimoy. CFLeon 09:05, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
Someone who goes on a Hike is a "Hiker" and not a "Hikie" are they not? So it could be said that someone who goes on a trek would be a "trekker" and not a "trekkie" Never the less, it could also be argued that since the fans aren't actually the ones on the "trek" that they could not accurately be called "trekkers" since they are not in fact trekking. The actual treking is done by the fictional individuals on the fictional starship. Therefore, despite my own preference for the word "Trekker", it probably isn't grammatically correct. "Trekkie" would probably be more accurate although another alternative, Trek Fan, might be more pleasing to those of us who despise the media hyped "Trekkie". Dmoorefield68 ( talk) 03:34, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
References
Some major parts of this article seem to be lifted from [1] Particularly the parts on Origins. If someone has the time to weed through the article... RichMac (Talk) 06:47, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Seems to be ref'd as a big fan. Should he be added to list? - SimonLyall ( talk) 10:06, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Absolutely NOT. There is nothing in Star Trek to justify being a mass murderer and hater of his own democratic government. McVeigh was a terrorist! Star Trek was anti-terrorist in nature. I'm removing the McVeigh reference.Dale Husband 04:17, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
If it is documented, then were is the link? Show us a link that provides proof that it is true. Otherwise, what's to keep anyone from claiming that anyone is a Star Trek fan? "Son of Sam, Star Trek fan. The Unibomber, Star Trek fan. Osama bin Laden, Star Trek fan. Where's the proof? Well, it's been documented." See how easy that is?
I believe it is deplorable and reprehensible to include Timothy McVeigh. This is a popular culture entry and there is absolutely no need to include him or to remember him in any other way--unless you knew him personally--than for his murderous and terrorist actions. This is an affront to the people he killed, their families, and to any civil human being. 107.221.229.121 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:15, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Family Guy season seven: Peter takes the family to a Star Trek convention, Stewie kidnaps the cast of TNG using his Transporter made from bluprints aquired at the convention etc. All voiced by the main cast of TNG: Stewart, Frakes, Spiner, Burton, Dorn, Sirtis, McFaden, Weaton, and even Denise Crosby. The fact that the cast were in the FG ep is surley grounds for adding it? Poll? ZellDenver ( talk) 11:36, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
In the Sci-Fi Channel's information program of "SCI-FI BUZZ", host Mike Jerrick interviewed Babara Adams by phone. He asked:
Mike Jerrick: "You weren't kicked off the Whitewater Trial for just wearing your Star Trek uniform?"
B. Adams: "No I was not kicked off for wearing my Star Trek uniform...A TV news reporter from another network kept asking me about my uniform and nothing else about the trial....Although, there was not a violation and any trial disclosure. The trial judge said he was supported of me. Still the rules said no jury member could talk to the media about anything." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spaceman42 ( talk • contribs) 20:41, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
First one user, then several anon IP addresses keep editing in a section on "child porn links to Star Trek fans". The "citations" are bogus at best. Opening discussion after removing the section. If anyone feels strongly about vetting the sources and keeping the material in we would need a neutrality tag on this one.
I didn't revert you; another editor did. Regarding previous reverts by me and others, there is no requirement to discuss reverting editors who remove cited sections without even edit summaries; that's the definition of vandalism. You're the first to bring it up in Talk. Regarding the cites:
I invite other editors to judge for themselves whether the disputed section accurately represents the cites, and whether Liblarva is, in fact, the one who is engaging in "selective quoting as its worst" above. Ylee ( talk) 21:07, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
This seems like a clear case of undue weight being placed on a singular datum from a singular source. I don't see any reason to include this "factoid" in the article until it garners wider support from the media and from the criminal justice community. Powers T 13:36, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
I have asked for feedback at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Star Trek#Content dispute in Trekkie article. Ylee ( talk) 21:47, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
I for one question its notability to the topic of Trekkies. While unique percentage of Toronto pedophiles may be Trekkies, that's notable to the topic of Toronto sex offenders. Is there an unusual occurrence of pedophiles among Trekkies claimed in this study, or an unusual occurrence of Trekkies among pedophiles? -- OuroborosCobra ( talk) 15:58, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
I've finally read the whole discussion and it looks like the local consensus is that the Toronto police unit's observations don't warrant their own section, and really can be sufficiently covered in a sentence or two. Ylee, if you disagree with the consensus or think the groupthink is missing something, your best avenue would probably be to find academic research sources or coverage of this aspect some fans' behavior in other contexts. -- EEMIV ( talk) 17:53, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
First, drop the "IDONTLIKEIT" line. The arguments against you have not been based on personal wishes or dislikes for quite some time now. I am tempted to consider your continued use of that line in ignorance of actual arguments being made against you to be ad hominem.
Second, you claim we cannot treat this as a Toronto-only phenomena, that the absence of further data cannot be treated negatively or positively. You seem to be forgetting the "positive" part of that sentence. We cannot claim that this is only true for Toronto (no one here has, by the way), but you cannot claim that it extends beyond Toronto either. The only thing that can be said is of an occurrence of Trekkies among pedophiles in Toronto. No more, no less. That does not on its own carry weight worth mentioning in an article that is about the world Trekkie population, and not only about Toronto. No one is saying that it is impossible for it to extend beyond Toronto, only that we have no source or information stating that it extends beyond Toronto. We don't even have a source claiming that Trekkies within Toronto are more likely to be pedophiles than the general population, so even among Toronto Trekkies we do not necessarily have weight for inclusion. Your study says something characteristic for Toronto pedophiles, not Toronto Trekkies. There is no information on behaviors characteristic of Trekkies. The burden of proof is on you to defend the significance of this content for the article, and you have failed to do so.
Third, do not take your repeated offers for "compromise" as putting you on higher moral ground. While compromise is often a goal and avenue to reach consensus, compromise should not be used to force inclusion of material that is of undo weight for the article or violates any other policies. Compromise is not always possible within disputes. In this case, you have a nearly unanimous group of other editors saying that your content is of unduly low weight or importance or significance to the topic to merit inclusion in this article. You are the only one still hoping to include it. You are not going to reach consensus for supporting of including your content, particularly if you continue with this kind of attack on other editors with "IDONTLIKEIT" and playing the victim.
Fourth, as the section of WP:UNDUE I quoted states, the solution to weight in article content is not only length. Sometimes it is lack of inclusion of disputed material at all.
Fifth, in the interest of coming to any sort of positive end to this dispute, you need to drop any demands of Liblarva apologizing. Be the bigger person and move on, especially considering that Liblarva hasn't even been involved in this conversation for about four days now. Don't hold a grudge, and don't let events from an editor that is seemingly no longer involved in the dispute cloud your willingness to discuss this with the rest of us. -- OuroborosCobra ( talk) 17:00, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
Well...nice to see at some point in the past 9 years this section was removed. Sounds like irrelevant bogus crap to me. Alexandermoir ( talk) 22:50, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi
I just changed preempted to cancelled (History section, end para. 1)
The body of text states "a Canadian TV station" and had "preempted".
Changed to match the specific TV station report mentioned in the article. Chaosdruid ( talk) 13:58, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Star Trek fandom. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 11:50, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
This entry is confusing Bill Gates for Les Solomon, the one who named the Altair 8800. Someone needs to provide information about Bill Gates himself being a fan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.168.151.40 ( talk) 18:41, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
My two cents. I see there has been conflict over the notable fans sections for many years. Can someone high up just deliver a verdict? I think the section is not only silly and flippant but also poorly written. Whoever sat there and wrote it said everyone “is a huge fan.” That’s sophomoric language for what purports to be an encyclopedia. Alexandermoir ( talk) 22:48, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi all, While I understand the humor of the section "other names," I feel that it is not really relevant to the article. Before I delete it, I would like to reach a consensus. A quick google search revealed no source that seems to pass WP:NOR for the information provided. NANPLover47 ( talk) 04:47, 11 November 2021 (UTC)NANPLover47
Should this be renamed to Star Trek fandom (currently a redirect here)? It seems like a more apt framing of the discussed phenomenon. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:35, 17 July 2022 (UTC)