Star Trek Expanded Universe:Community Portal/Archive 2

ARCHIVED ON NOVEMBER 6TH, 2006

Just a suggestion - I think its time for another community portal archive --Luke80 19:48, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Cleaning up + Question
The page was getting a bit big, so I've archived the original contents. In addition, does anyone think I should add the real-world equivalents of the ranks listed here for the sake of completeness? I think adding US and UK military ranks would be a good idea. --Kevin W. 05:51, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Anyone? --Kevin W. 05:09, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Seems like a capital idea to me -- if you've browsed Memory Alpha, you'll see that i've tried to summarize all those ranks that appear in canon trek, the rest -- well they seem like fair game here. i'm sure they could be tagged on to a fanfic scenario in the near future, just to give them a home. -- Captain M.K.B. 05:18, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Stylesheet neglect
I notice that many of the sidebars and other tables on the site are extensively coded -- every line has a center-align tag, a hexidecimal color format, etc.

Wouldn't it be easier to assign each different type of table a "table class" in the site's master style sheet, that way each individual use of a sidebar or browser table wouldn't get bogged down by line after line of excess code and color specifications? -- Captain M.K.B. 19:07, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
 * This is being worked on. In the beginning the long codes were needed.  We (the new sysops) hope to have this corrected in the near future. --Sneg 19:48, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Finally coming back to this: Different users may have different monobook preferences. The only way to implement this laterally that I've seen is via User:Angela or another bureaucrat. I made a request over a month ago, and haven't heard back on it yet. That said, the existing code is the only way to display them properly. --Sasoriza 16:43, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

"Made-up-on-the-spot" articles
The Main Page says:


 * The wiki will allow fanon, so if you want to create a character or a place, simply create a page on it and put in as much detail as possible. Enjoy the site!

I've noticed some discussion on and off about whether or not people can come in and just "make up" an article without it being from a fan series or whatnot. Personally, I think that's perfectly fine. I think anyone should be allowed to "make up" anything Trek-related and post it here, though, of course, the articles should be well-written and make "sense."

Things like "Picard's illegitimate child with Q who also happens to be a Jedi Master and was really a Xindi Time Lord" would obviously not cut it, but I can see some Trekker out there just wanting to create a legitimate character, starship or alien race for the fun of it and put it up here, and I wouldn't want that person to be hassled over "references" and the like.

Perhaps for these types of articles, there should be a category like "Fanon wiki creations" or something to that effect.

What do you think? --TimPendragon 19:24, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, we can change that phrase if the community feels the need to. I agree, I would really hate to see something really crazy like that created (A Sith Lord who is now a Starfleet Admiral who has a Star Destroyer that has a Stargate on it because his Time Lord First Officer brought it from a Wizard's School).  But isn't everything here we do a "Fanon wiki creation"?  Just that we use these in our fictions.  (I know the Tales of the Seventh Fleet guys aren't opposed to trying to pay nods to other people's fiction to make this one big "reality", as it were.) --Sneg 19:32, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I think that if people intend to make something up on the spot, they should be prepared to mark it with some sort of tag that says so -- if its not from a website or movie we can go check, then tag it with some sort of "original research" note (possibly through a template) so we will be able to see how many of the site's articles originate in this manner. -- Captain M.K.B. 23:33, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
 * That's pretty much what I was thinking. How can we implement it? --TimPendragon 04:35, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

A perfect example of this kind of article seems to be USS Montgomery (NCC-74819). Thoughts? --TimPendragon 06:17, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Indeed. I think people should be free to make up their own characters and ships and frontiers, so long as it is sensible and follows basic Star Trek canon. --Luke80 11:02, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

how's this. -- Captain M.K.B. 14:48, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

As touched on in the discussion re: User:Homesun, here is another example of why this rule is a bad idea: Destiny Of Freedom (PNR episode) and all other Star Trek: Pioneer-related inclusions of my Star Trek: 3000 source-material. The Pioneer articles sound suspiciously to me as if they've been made up for this wiki--someone who thinks, 'Hey, I can pretend I really have a series called this, and published on this wiki, it looks legit--cool!'. When taking from someone else's concept, even if by route of this wiki, it can't be called "original". The basic idea, of a captain from the past ending up in the future, is not an original one, but my treatment of it is, and User:The NCC Factor is treading dangerously close to plagiarism by incorporating it into Pioneer continuity. (If it ever ends up on a website, he's in trouble.) It says he's a teen on his user page--it sounds like it. This "problem" seems to be one borne of teenagers, who haven't learned any better yet. It seems to me, more and more, that Luke80's "rule" should be abolished, and any material presented on this wiki should have source(s) elsewhere, in order to avoid future entanglements of this sort. (It would also help to cut down on the troubles posed by Jamie A./Zman/Homesun types.) Thoughts? --Sasoriza 00:00, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Instead of abolishing the "rule," I propose that it be rephrased to include a form of "peer review," and that the articles must both be in the proper format and language and make "Trek-sense." Instructions about communication with the admins and other users would also be appropriate --TimPendragon 23:22, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I would agree, except that rule seems (to me) to be the very root of the problem (and quite possibly put in place by Luke so he can do that very thing). As long as anyone can make up anything they want, we'll run into this problem again & again. Keeping up with the kiddies could take up almost all of our time--valuable time that could be better spent on article-writing and other things. Eliminate it, and it narrows the field considerably. Wikipedia makes it work, so why not? Even if sources can't all be cited, just having that in place can weed out these less-desirable aspects which are giving us headaches. "Fanon" doesn't mean "an excuse to pump out whatever, by Star Trek fans"--it should cover what is actually fanon, fan continuity: what can't be covered elsewhere in places such as Memory Alpha or Beta, and include what fans accept as explanations regarding official (aired) characters, stories, etc. That's what I expected from STEU when I first came here.


 * I favor Tim's suggestion, but eliminating that rule altogether seems an even better alternative. If someone has actually done the work (fan films/audio or fan fiction) elsewhere, then it shouldn't be a problem. The only reason I can see this being a problem is if there exists no (other) sources for the material presented here. If that's the case, then anything presented here is really just a cover for making this wiki the repository for whatever fan "fiction" (emphasis on fiction) anyone dreams up... and that's not what a wiki is about.


 * On somewhat of a flip-note, how much communication with admins is necessary in order to comply with standards? Someone can follow the rules, make decent and sensible contributions, and never say a word to an admin. This almost seems to be two different discussions: The issue of "make up what you want", and the perils of (not) communicating with the admins, which seems to be more merely a matter of admin frustration (again, as in Homesun). --Sasoriza 00:04, 4 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Okay, you convinced me. I do think it's more trouble that it's worth.


 * You bring up another interesting point - "fan fiction" vs. "fanon". If I understand things correctly, Luke80 started the wiki so he could do the articles for his fanfic. Most of us here are fanfic/fan film authors of some kind, so it makes sense that a big part of the articles are going to be fanfic related.


 * But "fanon" doesn't necessarily mean fan fiction. What I think of when I see the term "fanon" are debates like "Was Spock the first Vulcan (or the first alien) in Starfleet?" That's never been definitively dealt with in canon - and the novels differ on it - but it was a long-held fan idea that yes, Spock was the first Vulcan in the Federation Starfleet. I also think of all of the "fanon" concepts that got blown out the window when Enterprise came along and retconned things, with seeming disregard for accepted Trek convention and reasonable extrapolations based on canon implications. That's what I relate to the term "fanon."


 * I would love to see articles exploring those topics in additon to the various fanfic based things. --TimPendragon 00:15, 4 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Re: Spock/Vulcans/etc. - Ditto. Same here. That's the kind of material that should go into a Spock article. The same precedent should be extended into all other official property-related articles.


 * I think perhaps I should clarify myself on my second paragraph, further up: Obviously I'm not against fanfic; my Arcadia articles are all derived from fanfic in that universe. I just meant, that anything presented here should have such a source, elsewhere. None of it was made up on the spot for this wiki; it's already been written and one can go see the proof with their own eyes. (Which, incidentally, reminds me, I should scan a page from one of my old Star Trek: 3000 issues, to back up that article.) That's the kind of "outsourcing" I'm talking about. Thus, storylines set in the oodles of RPGs out there would qualify as well (unless we start narrowing our definition of "fanfic"... but, in all fairness to those who've spent hours, days, weeks, and years of their lives to such venues, I think they should have a wiki for that content, and this should be it). --Sasoriza 00:25, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Still, though, there are some things that I doubt can be sourced well. Sims like Kal-Dixas, which have long-since gone defunct, with websites either in shambles or taken down entirely. There was a huge sim group I was part of back in 1997 and 1998 called the "Starfleet Sim Group" or SSG, and I can find no record of them online anymore. In my recent online travels, I did discover The Simming Encyclopedia, though the wiki needs a lot of help.
 * In another vein, most of my Pendragon stories have yet to appear online. I've been working on the series since 1999 (and its origins go back to at least '96), but only one completed story has appeared online (and I'm in the process of revising that now - I wrote it when I was sixteen, and it needs to be redone). Two half-completed stories appeared on the Trekcreative Yahoo group, but there is no website for Pendragon as yet. None of the articles I've done were made up ad hoc for the wiki, they all came from the character profiles, the "Pendragon series bible, 24 hardcopy notebooks and 3 gigabytes of other data I have on my hard drive. Does it fail to meet your criteria? --TimPendragon

Well heck, what are you waiting for? :P I didn't think they were (made up for this wiki); that is, I didn't get that impression. I'd guess you have to ask yourself that question... and then get those suckers out there so we can read 'em!

I understand your point about defunct sims, and that's when it becomes difficult to cite the source. However, often with such material one can see the difference in the details, as opposed to ad hoc material which seems to contain recurring themes (at least to a seasoned eye). Hmmm... I dunno. Of course, this is just my take on things. I guess this would fall under the 'more detailed you make it, the better' stipulation of Luke's rule. If it can't be proven, should it be excluded? (Rhetorical question--not one I'm prepared to answer tonight. Gotta be up for work at 4 A.M.) --Sasoriza 01:31, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * All of the stuff I've been adding for Star Trek: Remington recently hasn't been published yet, mainly because I haven't had as much time to write as I've wanted, but most of it is in the series bible and it will be published eventually. The way I see it, there needs to be a certain limit, but we can't go criticizing everyone for putting something on here before it's published. --Kevin W. 18:30, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Pioneer was certainly not made up on the spot for this wiki. A lot of the ideas, characters and some backstory goes back to around 2004 when I first began. I have also suddenly become quite busy and haven't had the time I'd like to actually write the episodes. However, it will be published eventually. Also to Sasoriza, I am truely very sorry for copying the concept of Star Trek: 3000 and I will omit any similarities from my stories. --The NCC Factor 18:58, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

When I created the wiki - I did indeed intend to use it to input information from Star Trek: Unity. The stuff I used to have on the main page... ''The wiki will allow fanon, so if you want to create a character or a place, simply create a page on it and put in as much detail as possible. Enjoy the site!'' ... was not a specific guideline for the site, and I think with more people now using the wiki and some users such as Homesun and Jamie adding utter rubbish, that a specific policy should be created and all fan information should come from some sort of source and not just be made up on the spot. Thats my view... I leave it for discussion. --Luke80 19:42, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Photo Manipulation Request
I have a request for anyone that is brilliant with photoshop. I am currently reworking the Commanding Officers of the Starships Enterprise for Memory Beta, and I need a photo-manipulation with Data was an early 25th century uniform that was seen in the future segment of "Endgame".

This is because, Data is noted as being commanding officer of the Enterprise-F in an alternate 2408. I know that there are some photo-manip experts on here, and just thought I'd ask. Any help would be appreciated :-)--The Doctor 15:09, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Just for the record, the 2408 timeline where Commodore Data commanded the 1701-F in the novel "Imzadi" had Riker, Data, and Captain Wesley wearing green, black and silver uniforms. Did you mean this uniform, or is the illustration definitely going to be from the "Endgame" timeline uniforms? -- Captain M.K.B. 15:13, 10 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I didn't know that the uniforms were different. I'm just reworking an article that someone had done badly.  If the uniforms are that different, I suppose it's just best to leave it then, as I imagine it would be difficult to create a uniform that different.  Thanks for the information :-)--The Doctor 15:23, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * If you check the picture of Riker on the books cover, you can see that its not and "All Good Things/Endgame" uniform collar, or color shade. However, it might still be possible to photomanip Data into that? -- Captain M.K.B. 15:34, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Try posting the request at The STPMA Forums. Michael, Quo or one of the others there would probably be more than happy to give it a shot. --TimPendragon 16:55, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * See how my version came out: http://startrek.wikia.com/wiki/Image:Commodore_data.jpg -- Captain M.K.B. 18:26, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Ranks
(copied from Talk:Jonathan Archer) Where is the "rule" written that we have to list all a character's ranks? It seems quite redundant. If I were to do that for Timothy Sinclair, since he is "seen" in Star Trek: Pendragon in every rank up from Cadet to Captain, the sidebar would get exceptionally cluttered. It is not necessary.--TimPendragon 18:49, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Hmm. I've got a better idea. Don't add them to the template. Add a section (like Richard Boswell) showing all of his ranks and only add the most recent rank in the template. --Kevin W. 18:51, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * That would definitely be more preferable to putting them all in the sidebar. It would just overwhelm the thing. Not everyone on here is as rank-happy as you are, Kevin ;-) --TimPendragon 18:55, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree with you Tim. Unless people want to put a "service jacket" (not sure what the proper term is) of listing ranks and dates - that's fine but not in the sidebar. Not to mention - what about someone like James T.? What rank do you list? Highest obtained? Last obtained and if last obtained what is your point of reference. Hey for all we know there maybe another Trek movie where they promote him back into the Admirality. :-) --Sneg 18:57, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * And in a case like Archer, and most characters, if they reach Captain, it's likely that they were a Commander at some point, so listing both is redundant. And if you read most articles, they'll tell you when a character held a certain rank. Listing 'em all just isn't necessary. Especially in the case of canon characters. --TimPendragon 19:01, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * When it comes to canon characters, I think the rule of thumb should be on-screen ranks. We've only seen Archer wearing CDR and CAPT, and Kirk, on-screen, has only worn CAPT and RADM. --Kevin W. 21:56, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * You may have a point with Kirk, because he spent significant onscreen time as both Captain and Admiral. Archer was seen as a Commander in a flashback in one episode, and it has little bearing on the character. Should we list Picard's lieutenant rank as seen in "Tapestry"? People writing stories about Picard and Archer know these things, displaying the extra rank on the page is pointless, except to show off your rank images. --TimPendragon 22:21, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Alternate timelines don't count. I think we should show all of the regular timeline ones, though. It's not too hard. Kirk's is probably the longest of them all. He's worn two different ranks throughout three different rank eras. Archer has worn two ranks, Picard has worn one, Sisko two, Janeway two. It shouldn't be too hard. I'll do it myself to save you guys the work. --Kevin W. 22:31, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Alternate timelines don't count. I think we should show them all. It's not too hard. Kirk's is probably the longest of them all. He's worn two different ranks throughout three different rank eras. Archer has worn two ranks, Picard has worn one, Sisko two, Janeway two. It shouldn't be too hard. I'll do it myself to save you guys the work. --Kevin W. 22:31, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * When I referred to "Tapestry", I should have said Ensign, thinking about the post-Academy flashbacks for Picard. What about Riker? He was Captain (2366 style) for all of an episode before going back to Commander - do you plan on showing that? Bottom line, you're missing the point, I think. It's not necessary, it's potentially confusing, and it's redundant. I, for one, don't want to see more than the most significant rank listed on a page, especially the sidebar. Doing it for your Remington characters is one thing, if you're that much of a rank-bunny, but I really don't want to see them on canon characters (or Pendragon ones). --TimPendragon 22:41, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * At most, most characters will have maybe one or two rank images. Three is a rarity and any higher is a special case. Riker would have 3: 2366 CDR, 2366 CAPT and 2373 CAPT. Sisko has the same ones. It's not too much. --Kevin W. 23:36, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Now, is this so bad? --Kevin W. 16:52, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Looks better that having a ton of ranks in the sidebar, IMO. Good job.  --Sneg 19:37, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Wanted pages
The cache for the "Wanted Pages" and other such "Special Pages" haven't been updated in over a week. I thought that was supposed to happen automatically? --TimPendragon 01:34, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * It should (sometimes it takes a few minutes) but I'll look into it. --Sneg 01:54, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Looks like when a "wanted page" is updated the system puts a line through it (crosses it out) and it looks like it last updated about a week ago. Not sure how often it refreshes.  --Sneg 06:48, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Used to refresh every couple days, but it's been over a week now. --TimPendragon 15:55, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Homesun
Since Homesun seems to be either completely unaware of the Talk pages, or simply doesn't care to respond, I emailed him through the wiki several days ago. There's been no response. His articles are very poorly formatted, the grammar and spelling are horrendous, he refuses to put categories in his articles, and there are a host of other problems. As for the content of the articles, they are often ill-thought out, go against proper Trek-common sense, and (not to put too fine a point on it), sound like the ramblings of a twelve year old "fanboy". All attempts to communicate with him have failed, and I'm not sure what can be done. Maybe we should leave messages for him on the articles he's editing themselves, and see if that gets his attention. But the bottom line is, something has to be done. I want the wiki to remain open to anyone who wants to create articles, regardless of whether they are from an existing series or "made on the spot," but they have to meet a certain quality, and Homesun's don't. Any thoughts? --TimPendragon 19:17, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm of the same mind. There's a matter of sounding "fannish", which might grate on the nerves of some but is still acceptable, and then being outright silly--like the "Hobbies" section on Asha. Yeesh. I hate to block or ban anyone, but we DO have a quality standard, and if someone isn't meeting that standard, then they aren't meeting it. It's that simple. There's no excuse for poor quality and ignorance. The way I look at it is: If you can believe finding this on Wikipedia, then it's acceptable here. If not... well, to be blunt (not that I want to sound harsh, but): Live and learn, or get out. I don't care how old or young someone is. If they aren't old enough and mature enough to understand the rules, then they shouldn't be contributing. --Sasoriza 20:23, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Here's a development: I just received a reply to my email regarding his articles. The entire text of Homesun's reply is as follows:
 * Hello.

That's it. Just "hello." Nothing else. It seems as if he is indeed incapable of communicating. --TimPendragon 20:34, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, he's edited his User page since I left my note there for him, and he hasn't responded to any of the talk page messages yet. Sigh--TimPendragon 20:41, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

So, should we ban him? I'm all in favor of it. --Kevin W. 20:58, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
 * That seems to be your answer for everything, Kevin. --TimPendragon 21:04, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
 * How else can we deal with him? He doesn't respond to us and he doesn't seem to want to fix his articles. He's just like Captain Zman and Jaime A. --Kevin W. 21:08, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I know, I know. It just seems that whenever there's a problem you tend to "set phasers to ban" as a gut reaction. In this case, it's probably the only thing we can do, but let's see what Sneg and Luke80 have to say (if Luke even cares about this place anymore). --TimPendragon 21:12, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I've got an idea I would like to try first. Give me a day or two to set it up.  Tim, have you replyed to the "hello"?  --Sneg 01:12, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Nope.--TimPendragon 01:12, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Hopefully my notes will have garnered his attention. --Sneg 12:51, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * He just removed one and continued editing... It doesn't appear to be working. --TimPendragon 19:21, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I say we give him one more day. If he doesn't respond, then we'll put his ban up to a vote. --Kevin W. 19:24, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

I think this impinges on a larger issue--namely, Luke80 implementing & okaying the stipulation that "if you want to create something here, simply put it up". That's akin to opening the floodgates for anyone who wants to create anything they can imagine, from scratch, no matter how ridiculous it may be. It would be ideal if everyone was sensible & realistic about it, but it just doesn't always happen that way. I get the distinct impression Homesun is following Luke80's precedent, taking the instruction to heart (as did Jamie A. and Zman). Should someone be banned or persecuted for doing what one of the bureaucrats says is okay? Not that I'm defending such ridiculous content--rather, I think that very rule is causing the trouble. Like the saying goes: If not part of the solution, then part of the problem.... Personally, I feel any content that's going to be published on this or any wiki should have some basis elsewhere. For example, Sneg's "Justice" works because it's a fan film series. On my own behalf, nothing concerning Arcadia has not already seen the light of the (internet) day already--none of it has been created from scratch just for this wiki; it's all been written and published online, elsewhere. I think Luke80's rule is a bad idea. Once, on Arcadia, I said "create whoever you want to create, we'll allow any kind of character"--and you should have seen what came out of the woodwork. Wasn't pretty. People warned me that it would happen, but I felt bold enough to give it a chance. Now, that rule has long since been abolished. Which just goes to show, like I said above about opening the floodgates.... --Sasoriza 21:19, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, it's obvious he doesn't or won't play well with others..... Let's hope he emails someone soon about getting him on the right path.  Personally I would hold off any "banning" until the weekend.  Never know what time zone people are in.  :-)  --Sneg 21:33, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Luke80 just deleted the "Species and cultures (Space Trek)" page where Sneg and I left messages for Homesun. Sometimes I just don't think Luke pays enough attention to know what's going on around here. Sneg, can you please try to explain what's going on to him? --TimPendragon 16:35, 1 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, Luke80 has increased the admin hypocrisy level, just a tad -- he deleted one of Homesun's list articles that i had been trying to rename and re-envision to fit in the system in place here -- his reason: "rubbish".


 * I have to start my old argument up again: you invite the internet population to contribute here, with an open ended statement about making up your own fan fiction and listing it here, then you ban, delete and to top things off, ridicule -- is anything i have done lately "rubbish"?. -- Captain M.K.B. 16:37, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * At the time Luke deleted it, it only contained Sneg's message for Homesun and mine. Since he had removed those messages before, Kevin protected the page. Apparently, that's what Luke thought was "rubbish" - which is his customary phrase when deleting something. --TimPendragon 16:40, 1 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I dread suggesting this, because everyone here hates Memory Alpha so much, but perhaps it's time we caught up with most of Wikia and adopted a deletion policy, which prescribes when and when not to delete an article, and appropriate suggestions for cooperative language while doing so.


 * Otherwise, we could remain at this ten-year-old maturity level ("I'm deleting your fan fiction because it isn't as good as mine" and "I'm deleting your contribution because that page belongs to me").
 * IIRC, there is a deletion policy, but it tends to be ignored by Luke, who I believe thinks of this as purely "his" wiki. --TimPendragon 17:01, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * The article has been restored to my last edit. --Kevin W. 17:51, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

He's at it again. Look at Deneb II and Deneb III. I've put them up for deletion, unless someone wants to turn them into appropriate articles making use of the proper format and encyclopediac language.

Homesun has ignored all our attempts to communicate. This has got to end. --TimPendragon 23:20, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Maybe he's sitting back getting a good laugh out of this--pushing, seeing how far he can go, how much we'll talk about him while he continues pushing buttons. I'm starting to agree with Kevin about banning him. --Sasoriza 23:22, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * We were right to make every possible attempt to communicate, but he's unwilling to respond. There's no other choice. --TimPendragon 23:25, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Playing devil's advocate: One thing to keep in mind, though, is why a wiki is open for public editing. His articles may be poorly formatted, full of misspellings, lacking capitalization, etc., but open access allows others to clean it up, if the content is solid. Obviously he needs more than a list for an "article", and stuff like Asha... well... is like dragging nails across chalkboard (IMO of course), but there's another way of looking at it: Can it be strengthened? He seems enthusiastic; I'll hand that to him (or her, as the case may be). (And for young'uns, trial and error is often the way to learning.) There seems just enough of a basis in some of the work to merit inclusion. Granted, trying to keep up with Homesun types might be a full-time job, but that's the beauty of a wiki--anyone can do it. Split up between others lightens the workload for all. --Sasoriza 19:32, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * And ordinarily, I would agree with you. We should make every effort to help people improve their skills. But Homesun refuses to communicate. Even "young'uns" can answer emails, and figure out how to respond to Talk page comments here. If he will not communicate, he will not learn. See my comments below. --TimPendragon 19:39, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Deletion policy
This seems like a subject for a new thread, so, continuing from above: It's inevitable that we'll adopt (more) policies similar to other wikis. Can't live without rules. A deletion policy should not be thought of as a bad thing, so long as everyone lets (hate to say it) logic, not emotion, guide them. We should definitely discuss this. Thoughts? --Sasoriza 01:15, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Well not that it helps but there is a page already set up Star Trek Expanded Universe Database:Policy - guess we should all discuss what should be considered? --Sneg 13:02, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I started the ball rolling by listing "junk articles". Other thoughts?  --Sneg 13:10, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Hello And Thank You
I just wanted to take a moment and introduce myself and say how happy I am to be able to have this forum to share my ideas with others. I'm still a novice at this, and I hope this is the appropriate forum to post this sort of thing. If not, please direct me to the appropriate venue! :) My articles are based on an RPG I'm planning on putting together. I may not have a website or fanfilm, but I assure you anything I post will be written from a "realistic" standpoint. I was reading some of the previous entries about people writing ridiculous things which have little basis in accepted Star Trek lore, and I agree that this could become a problem. I assure you that you will not have to worry about this with me. Anything I post is reserched against established Star Trek "reality". I try my best not to infringe on accepted canonic truths. Anyway, thanks again for this outlet, and I look forward to being a beneficial contributor. --Estevante2483 04:22, November 4, 2006 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the Community Estevante2483. If there is anything the rest of us can do to help - just ask.  --Sneg 19:02, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Regarding Homesun
We've all bent over backwards to try to communicate with him. Comments on various Talk pages, including his own, have gone unanswered. Likewise, he has not responded to emails. He's even ignored very obvious messages that Sneg and I have left for him on his articles. I know he's seen them, because he's removed them. He even tried to circumvent a temporary warning ban.

He continues to create horribly formatting and nonsensical articles, and absolutely refuses to communicate with anyone. His work is so substandard that it's not even worth editing, and even if we did, he has demonstrated that he would not learn from the process and would only continue creating, well, crap.

You know I think of banning as a last resort. I advocated that we try all means of communication. We've now exhausted them, and he continues to display contempt of this wiki and its users by refusing to communicate. I think we have reached the point where there is no other choice but to permanently ban him. Shall we put it to a vote? --TimPendragon 19:35, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * You do have a point: He hasn't learned, apparently... and he's had ample time. However, what's to keep him from circumventing another ban? --Sasoriza 19:40, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't know if there is a way to do that (not an expert, though), but it's better than nothing. --TimPendragon 19:42, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Look at it this way: At least Zman and Jamie A communicated. Zman was abusive, but he talked, and were it not for his attitude, I'd have been willing to work with him and his material, in order to improve it. But he wasn't willing to learn, or let anyone help him. Homesun likewise is unwilling to learn, and if we just keep cleaning up his articles, he'll take advantage of our willingness to do so.--TimPendragon 19:46, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * (he'll take advantage) That occurred to me, too. And I certainly don't want to run along behind him cleaning up after him. Can't imagine anyone else wants to, either. Plus we do have a quality standard to maintain. That said... I abhor permabanning (after all, I wouldn't want to be permanently banned), but given the facts... I vote in favor. --Sasoriza 19:51, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * After reviewing the cases made by other members and after reviewing his "work", I vote in favour of a permanant ban. --Luke80 20:47, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I am in favor for a ban but not a perma-ban. I would like to think there is still hope for this person.  We've done everything (I think) but find his/her phone number and called him/her.  --Sneg 01:25, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I can hear Tim thinking, 'Let's do that! No, wait... that'd be stalking.' JK. :) --Sasoriza 01:28, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I would agree with Sneg, but it seems this has been tried before, to no effect. He can circumvent blocks... but can't click a link to talk pages? Something's not right with that picture. Furthermore, he consistently ignores advice intended to help, and continues pumping poorly written material which shames the quality standard for which we strive. --Sasoriza 03:12, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Okay then: As you've probably seen, I blocked him yesterday for a(nother) week. It's a stopgap measure, allowing time for more people to weigh in. If he comes back and does it again, or more vote in favor, enough to constitute a majority... then the majority (so far) have spoken. He'll be permanently banned. --Sasoriza 15:16, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Image Problems
Is anybody else having a problem with images not appearing? Some are (like the ranks), but on most, I'm just seeing the filename in place of the actual image. --TimPendragon 05:55, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Not I, said the fly. Sounds like you might need to clear your cache again. --Sasoriza 11:12, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Some times I don't see pictures (like Tabath Brisk) but when I view on a different browser it works. I've just learned to live with it.  --Sneg 14:37, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Speaking of different browsers (slightly OT here)... My IE6 somehow became uninstalled, and I can't seem to reinstall it. Sure, it's crap compared to Firefox (and I don't use XP), but it's still useful for some things. Anyone have advice for what I should do? (Discuss on my talk page.) --Sasoriza 14:43, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

User:SonicJordan
Moving on to the next user.... Talk:Black Eyed Jack and Coletta Jordan lead me to believe that all TINSIS-related material should be (and, according to Tim, should have been by now) deleted... basically, all of User:SonicJordan's contributions. Is this correct? Removing one (BEJ or Coletta), which requires removing links, is like collapsing a house of cards: Remove one, and they all fall. In other words, they all impinge on the TINSIS concept. Just because it's a ripoff of STIII, are we sure we want to do this? --Sasoriza 15:29, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I'll start deleting them. --Kevin W. 17:06, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Be sure to check for what links to them before you do. I believe that's how many of the references remained after the TINSIS articles were supposedly wiped out. --Sasoriza 17:08, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Checked and taken care of. --Kevin W. 17:11, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Ranks
To Sasoriza and Sneg: I'm trying to get rid of all of the unused rank images, ie the ones that were supplanted when the new sets were uploaded. Obviously, there are a lot of images. If you happen upon any, please delete them promptly. Check to make sure they have the one pixel border around them. That's a sure sign that the image needs to be deleted. If it is linked to, replace the image with an updated one. Thanks. --Kevin W. 17:25, 5 November 2006 (UTC)