I just saw a page created concerning the USS Kelvin from the new "Star Trek" film, and I began to wonder how we are gonna fit in the 'new' timeline of Trek on this wiki. Although I expect 99% of any new fan fiction will be set in the main/normal universe, it is possible that a user may create fic set in the new universe, so how are we gonna keep them seperate? Do something similar to Memory Alpha and have seperate pages? Or maybe a tag at the top of an article? Comments and suggestions, please. =] Luke80 09:26, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
- A discussion on this has taken place somewhere, and I think the consensus at the moment was to just stick to one article and just add the alternate reality information at the bottom of the article in a similar fashion to what is done with dividing separate continuities. --The Doctor 09:34, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
- The discussion was over on Talk:James T. Kirk (alternate reality). This new timeline should just be mentioned on the main article pages. This is really no different to the Pendragon timeline or whenever we have various sources with conflicting information, we split it into its own section on the page.
- Personally I don't like the "alternate timeline" extension, which seems to be from MA, it is just too general. Plus just because MA is using it doesn't mean we have to. – JayLR 15:17, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
- For Memory Alpha, it makes sense, since that's the only way it was referred to in the movie, but for us, yeah, it's not specific enough. Over on Memory Beta, I jokingly suggested "Neroverse" or "Abramsverse," but like I said, only joking. Something more along those lines would be better suited for our needs, though. "Red matter timeline"? Nah... Nero-Kelvin timeline? --TimPendragon Adm • Hail 15:40, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
- I think "Nero timeline" or "Nero-created timeline" or something similar would be the best. The KISS principle should be kept in mind, but I think a short, concise but aptly descriptive name or phrase would be best. "Red matter timeline": no thank you! If someone has a really good idea, that would be great to hear.
- I am with what seems like the majority here; we don't need separate pages like MA has, as our pages already mostly deal with alternate realities within the page. --usscantabrian 20:21, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
- I was thinking about calling the "original" ST universe "Universe G" and the universe created for the new movie "Universe J" :) -route56 21:48, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
- I've actually started calling them "Will" and "Tom" in conversation. Think fast. :-) --TimPendragon Adm • Hail 20:41, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
- What about "Porthos reality" and "Porthos MIA reality"? Okay, now I'm being silly. And, we don't know that it is Porthos (and most probably can't be)... :) --usscantabrian 21:12, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
- Memory Alpha and Memory Beta are both using the terms "(alternate reality)". Roger Murtaugh 16:09, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for joining in the conversation, Roger. Problem is, we have several alternate realities in fan fiction, including the Mirror universe, Pendragon timeline and so on. We need something specific to name this timeline, not something so generic as "alternate reality," and this is what we are trying to work out here. --usscantabrian 20:07, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Memory Alpha and Memory Beta are both using the terms "(alternate reality)". Roger Murtaugh 16:09, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- What about "Porthos reality" and "Porthos MIA reality"? Okay, now I'm being silly. And, we don't know that it is Porthos (and most probably can't be)... :) --usscantabrian 21:12, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
- I've actually started calling them "Will" and "Tom" in conversation. Think fast. :-) --TimPendragon Adm • Hail 20:41, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
- I was thinking about calling the "original" ST universe "Universe G" and the universe created for the new movie "Universe J" :) -route56 21:48, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
- For Memory Alpha, it makes sense, since that's the only way it was referred to in the movie, but for us, yeah, it's not specific enough. Over on Memory Beta, I jokingly suggested "Neroverse" or "Abramsverse," but like I said, only joking. Something more along those lines would be better suited for our needs, though. "Red matter timeline"? Nah... Nero-Kelvin timeline? --TimPendragon Adm • Hail 15:40, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
I don't mind "Nero timeline" or "Nero's timeline", which is similar to Scott's "Nero-created timeline" but less. We're not MA or MB, our mission isn't just to gather canon or non-canon material, we are after fanon and I think that using a fanon moniker would be far more appropriate. As Scott said, if anyone has any serious ideas speak up! – JayLR 18:28, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- The only problem I see with "Nero timeline" is it indicates (to me at least) that Nero always lived in that timeline, i.e. it's his original timeline, where as "Nero-created timeline" (which I don't like!) at least indicates that he created it.
- I'm probably just being a grammar Nazi! LOL --usscantabrian 20:07, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- How do you feel about Nero's Timeline, Scott? – JayLR 15:43, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
- That could work... It still indicates it's his timeline, but I think it implies ownership of it (as in he created it), so that could be a possibility. Doesn't seem anyone has any other ideas, so should we run with that? --usscantabrian 21:49, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
- Let's give it until the end of next week (Sunday, 7th of June) before we set anything in stone just in case there are some last minute ideas. – JayLR 11:38, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
- That could work... It still indicates it's his timeline, but I think it implies ownership of it (as in he created it), so that could be a possibility. Doesn't seem anyone has any other ideas, so should we run with that? --usscantabrian 21:49, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
- Whilst I'm not too fond of any of those name ideas (I'd personally go with MA's choice), Red matter timeline or Nero-Kelvin timeline looks best, and I've added 2009-reality timeline. Luke80 13:05, November 28, 2009 (UTC)
- How do you feel about Nero's Timeline, Scott? – JayLR 15:43, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
One that I used in the Christopher Pike article was "Narada-affected timeline." Truth be told, though, I would prefer "Alternate Original Series," which is what's being used over at ASC, and Ad Astra. Nerys Ghemor 16:52, November 28, 2009 (UTC)
How about Diverged Prime Universe,i like that name.--TyphussJediVader 17:41, January 5, 2010 (UTC)
I am a bit late to the party, but here’s my two millicredits: For the purposes of this encyclopaedia, I think we should treat it as no more canonical than any other fan film (so it is not "prime" or "original", or "THE alternate timeline"). It therefore makes sense to label it with the name of the work it originates in, Star Trek (2009), not any of the fictional events within it (which eliminates "Nero", "Red matter timeline" etc.). JJ Abrams might or might not be directing future episodes, so it might be premature to name it after him. The term I see used in the outside world and on other sites is "Star Trek (2009) reality" or just "Star Trek 2009" for short. --Leckford 12:50, January 29, 2012 (UTC)
Possible Star Trek timeline names[]
Just pulled out the names mentioned above for easy reference. Any additional suggestions should be added to this list. – JayLR 11:58, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
- Abramsverse
- Neroverse
- Red matter timeline
- Nero-Kelvin timeline
- Nero timeline
- Nero-created timeline
- Nero's timeline
- 2009-reality timeline
- Narada-affected timeline
- Alternate Original Series
- Diverged Prime Universe
- Star Trek 2009 reality