Memory Beta, non-canon Star Trek Wiki

A friendly reminder regarding spoilers! At present the expanded Trek universe is in a period of major upheaval with the continuations of Discovery and Prodigy, the advent of new eras in gaming with the Star Trek Adventures RPG, Star Trek: Infinite and Star Trek Online, as well as other post-57th Anniversary publications such as the ongoing IDW Star Trek comic and spin-off Star Trek: Defiant. Therefore, please be courteous to other users who may not be aware of current developments by using the {{spoiler}}, {{spoilers}} OR {{majorspoiler}} tags when adding new information from sources less than six months old (even if it is minor info). Also, please do not include details in the summary bar when editing pages and do not anticipate making additions relating to sources not yet in release. THANK YOU

READ MORE

Memory Beta, non-canon Star Trek Wiki
Advertisement

I'm wondering several things:

1) Considering the different sizes of ships, would it be more appropriate to describe it as not so much a classification as a design lineage or design type? Because that's the main link between the small versions and the large ones; if they had different designs, you wouldn't even think to group them together.

2) Would the K'vort Cha class count as a BoP? I'm thinking it's a borderline case (see the Dominion Wars Art Director's Notes on the ship for a better view).

3) Have to add the FASA versions (3 of them: two correspond to the B'rel and K'vort, but there's another one between them).--Emperorkalan 17:02, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

1) Hmm maybe, the earlier smaller ones are a classification I think but later on in the lineage they branch out more, so it might be better to say they began as a classification and then got all popular and went and did anything with them.
2) It looks like one, and has a similar name to one, but isn't actually identified as one anywhere, whilst on the same site the B'rel class is identified in it's title as a Bird-of-Prey.
3) Go for it :). --8of5 17:09, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

duplicated information[]

Is it necesary to have a paragraph for every type here? isn't all the information about each type contained in its own page? -- Captain MKB 15:35, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Sure, you could make this little more than a disambiguation page. But I think that would be less useful to a user looking for some basic information on Klingon Birds-of-Prey in general rather than any specific class. --8of5 15:38, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Well, that was going to be the point of the table I created -- to list datas on each type, possibly even work in a picture from the lower sections, enabling me to delete all the rest of the duplicated info. You've taken the initiative and broken that table up into assorted pieces, which I feel dilutes its purpose. I know you are trying to collaborate with me, but it feels like you've removed the purpose of that edit. -- Captain MKB 16:01, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
There we go, the table restored to a single undiluted listing along side a single undiluted text outlining Klingon Birds-of-Prey in general. Let us have our cake and eat it. --8of5 03:04, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Advertisement