Form of AddressEdit
What's the source for "Shir President?" -- Sci 00:24 14 DEC 2007 UTC
- Well, "shir" would probably be specified as a proper multigender respective appellation as applied to a Hermat, from Peter David's New Frontier -- I'm assuming that this could be assumed to be the proper address for a multigender president, although I can't recall a source where there actually was a multigender president. -- Captain MKB 01:35, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
So, SCI has reverted a recent edit -- I'm questioning the wisdom of the whole 'incumbent' field in the sidebar -- Sci is obviously operating with a different interpretation of the term as the rest of the wiki.
Aennik Okeg is the President after Bacco, according to Path to 2409 -- how is this so easily disregarded so that Bacco is so easily considered the only President to be considered incumbent. Unless we are operating on personal preferences and wishes, in which case should the incumbent US President be listed as Al Gore?
Also, why is Vanderbilt being excluded? Because there is a source but it isn't one that is well-liked? -- Captain MKB 04:12, March 7, 2010 (UTC)
- 1. Dude, why do you try to label a clear marking of contradictory continuities as "exclusion?" What if the sequel to ST-09 established a totally new Federation President holding office during the year that, say, Errand of Fury established Kenneth Wescott to be President -- would you say we shouldn't add this new President and mark him as the incumbent in the Abrams films continuity? Marking contradictory continuities is not a judgmental thing, it's simply an acknowledgment that they are contradictory versions of the Star Trek Universe.
- 2. The STO universe is radically different from the novel continuity, and it is impossible to reconcile them. Period. You can't say that a continuity where the Borg Invasion never took place could ever be reconciled with one where it did; that would be like trying to say that a timeline where World War II never took place could be reconciled with one where it did. Right now, Bacco is the incumbent in the novels, and her fate in them is unrevealed. In the novels, she's dealing with the Typhon Pact; she never dealt with the Typhon Pact in the STO continuity, because the Typhon Pact never existed there. If you're going to do a good article on Bacco, you have to acknowledge that there are two different versions of her character; if you're going to do a comprehensive article on the Presidency, you have to acknowledge that there are two different incumbents in two different continuities. Otherwise, the articles are both incomplete and misleading (by implying a lack of contradictions where there are many).
On the point of STO: I don’t deny for a second they are incompatible continuities. But, so far as a list of Federation Presidents goes that doesn't matter. We know Bacco was president from '79, in both continuities, and we know she remained so until '92 in the Online materials. What we don’t know is what happens to Bacco after A Singular Destiny; she could remain in office until finally be succeeded by Okey in '92 just like in the Online continuity. Or she could die in the next novel set in 2382. We don't know yet. What we do know is we have sources for Bacco being president, and we have a source that says Okey was president next; until we have something contradicting that information, that is the line of Federation Presidents so far as we have the information for. --8of5 13:02, March 7, 2010 (UTC)
- The word 'incumbent' means that they are the current holder of the office. What time period is this wiki written from? I believe Memory-Alpha writes from "the far future", so the word would have no meaning, and would be technically incorrect. The proper way to denote the one who hasn't been replaced yet might be to just mark the end dates as question marks. Same for a lot of the date ranges used elsewhere. There seems to be the perspective that the different eras of novels are written from different time periods... Very confusing. --Savar 15:22, March 8, 2010 (UTC)
- I agree with the way you voice the uncertainty of our 'current' period -- if we see license media get much farther into the primary TNG timeline's future, we're going to possibly see our wiki's 'current era' moving further and further past the last known references to a 'current' president
- A minor disagreement, with adding question marks for what, in an actual POV reference, would be known quantities. Putting "??" everywhere is not a great style choice, and doesn't look encyclopedic. I prefer to give information in an incomplete fashion -- if Aennik Okeg is President from 2392 to an unknown date, I'd rather put "from 2392" instead of "2392-??" -- it makes the wiki look a bit more competent. -- Captain MKB 15:42, March 8, 2010 (UTC)
Our stated point of view is also some unspecified far future (and considering we have a few stories that go up to billions of years in the future that's quite a distant far future!). So yeah, we should never have any implication of a present day, every happened in the past. --8of5 13:58, March 11, 2010 (UTC)
- I've changed the sidebar template to read 'latest' so we can approach that more in keeping with our POV. Odd that we have a sidebar template that seems to only be relevant to this article, but hopefully things will keep expanding. -- Captain MKB 14:54, March 11, 2010 (UTC)
Edit war of 2010-10-11Edit
If anyone is big enough to stop the edit war, and start a conversation -- here's the place. -- Captain MKB 17:18, October 11, 2010 (UTC)