This template is within the scope 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 template attached to this page, or visit the
project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
discussion.Star TrekWikipedia:WikiProject Star TrekTemplate:WikiProject Star TrekStar Trek articles
This template is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
I had absolutely nothing to do with the decision, but I think I can explain the logic: The "centuries" (rows, vertical axis) don't honestly represent when the fictional stories take place, which is why they don't always reflect time travel. (They show time travel twice as of 2024-06-08: Star Trek: Generations and Star Trek: Discovery each shift from one "century" into another.) Rather than reflecting when the story takes place, they reflect the "era", as I will call it, which comes along with a set of characters. This is why TOS and the first seven films (with Kirk and his crew) and also the reboot films (also with Kirk and crew, but in an alternate timeline), these all appear in one "century", one row. Even if the action technically spilled into other centuries, if it was the same ensemble of characters, I think it would belong in the same row and "century". In fact, several episodes of TOS depict time travel, but the series is all in that one "century". The Next Generation has a new "century" largely because it has a new set of characters (Picard and crew), and Star Trek: Generations appears in two "centuries" (two rows) not because it has time travel but because it has two sets of characters, both the TOS and TNG eras are shown in that one film. As I think about it, most of the TV shows feature time travel to other centuries, so it would be very messy to try to include that in this graph. The vertical axis also skips "centuries" that have no Star Trek content - because it's actually an axis of eras, and sets of characters. I haven't watched Discovery so I can't really speak to it's split from one "century" into another, my observation about characters may not apply if they use largely the same characters in both eras. However, it is likely the only time travel that doesn't complete within a single film or two-part episode.
Fluoborate (
talk)
07:55, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Weird. It's tv series exactly as every one else, one of the best. 2x01 is definitely one of the best Star Trek episodes. And why doesn't allow, it's 2018-2020.
IKhitron (
talk)
17:05, 20 September 2022 (UTC)reply
It's only a companion series, not standalone, it has 2 "seasons" with 10 shorts. As for the template, I'm not talking about 2018-2020, I'm talking about 2230-2385-far future, and it's not even consecutive!
– VilnisrT |
C18:21, 20 September 2022 (UTC)reply
Definitely disagree about the show nature. Strange New Worlds has the same episodes number for now, and even less seasons. About the far future, it does not matter the graph shows our time. I understand I can't change your mind, but maybe somebody else will see this conversation.
IKhitron (
talk)
18:36, 20 September 2022 (UTC)reply
About show nature, read Short Trek intro. As about template, you should look better there is not only production year, but also time span when the action takes place.
– VilnisrT |
C18:45, 20 September 2022 (UTC)reply
This template is within the scope 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 template attached to this page, or visit the
project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
discussion.Star TrekWikipedia:WikiProject Star TrekTemplate:WikiProject Star TrekStar Trek articles
This template is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
I had absolutely nothing to do with the decision, but I think I can explain the logic: The "centuries" (rows, vertical axis) don't honestly represent when the fictional stories take place, which is why they don't always reflect time travel. (They show time travel twice as of 2024-06-08: Star Trek: Generations and Star Trek: Discovery each shift from one "century" into another.) Rather than reflecting when the story takes place, they reflect the "era", as I will call it, which comes along with a set of characters. This is why TOS and the first seven films (with Kirk and his crew) and also the reboot films (also with Kirk and crew, but in an alternate timeline), these all appear in one "century", one row. Even if the action technically spilled into other centuries, if it was the same ensemble of characters, I think it would belong in the same row and "century". In fact, several episodes of TOS depict time travel, but the series is all in that one "century". The Next Generation has a new "century" largely because it has a new set of characters (Picard and crew), and Star Trek: Generations appears in two "centuries" (two rows) not because it has time travel but because it has two sets of characters, both the TOS and TNG eras are shown in that one film. As I think about it, most of the TV shows feature time travel to other centuries, so it would be very messy to try to include that in this graph. The vertical axis also skips "centuries" that have no Star Trek content - because it's actually an axis of eras, and sets of characters. I haven't watched Discovery so I can't really speak to it's split from one "century" into another, my observation about characters may not apply if they use largely the same characters in both eras. However, it is likely the only time travel that doesn't complete within a single film or two-part episode.
Fluoborate (
talk)
07:55, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Weird. It's tv series exactly as every one else, one of the best. 2x01 is definitely one of the best Star Trek episodes. And why doesn't allow, it's 2018-2020.
IKhitron (
talk)
17:05, 20 September 2022 (UTC)reply
It's only a companion series, not standalone, it has 2 "seasons" with 10 shorts. As for the template, I'm not talking about 2018-2020, I'm talking about 2230-2385-far future, and it's not even consecutive!
– VilnisrT |
C18:21, 20 September 2022 (UTC)reply
Definitely disagree about the show nature. Strange New Worlds has the same episodes number for now, and even less seasons. About the far future, it does not matter the graph shows our time. I understand I can't change your mind, but maybe somebody else will see this conversation.
IKhitron (
talk)
18:36, 20 September 2022 (UTC)reply
About show nature, read Short Trek intro. As about template, you should look better there is not only production year, but also time span when the action takes place.
– VilnisrT |
C18:45, 20 September 2022 (UTC)reply