If you'd like to learn more about working with the nuts and bolts of Memory Beta, here are a few links that you might want to check out:
- Manual of Style: Please be sure to read this before contributing, so you know how to accurately cite your sources, and search the site to make sure the article you want to make doesn't already exist.
- Policies and Guidelines: For a list of the policies and guidelines that we adhere to on Memory Beta.
- Wanted pages: For a list of pages we want most, although any contributions you make are greatly appreciated!
One other suggestion: If you're going to make comments on talk pages or make other sorts of comments, please be sure to sign them with four tildes (~~~~) to paste in your user name and the date/time of the comment.
If you have any questions, please feel free to post them in a member's talk page or the community portal. Thanks, and once again, welcome to Memory Beta!
Just curious, what Star Trek book mentions President McKinley? -- Captain MKB 23:32, May 8, 2010 (UTC)
- I don't know. The McKinley Station article cited "et al." for "an early 20th century US President". --Archimedean 23:41, May 8, 2010 (UTC)
Just to let you know, we aren't writing articles about people who haven't been mentioned in Star Trek, so there shouldn't be any links to McKinley.
The 'et al' refers to the numerous sources that have mentioned the station, not the person. -- Captain MKB 23:59, May 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, but one of those sources presumably mentions that the station is named for an early 20th Century US President. --Archimedean 00:22, May 9, 2010 (UTC)
- A Google Books search doesn't turn up any results for McKinley Station or Earth Station McKinley and president or 20th Century. There was a real-life McKinley Station in Alaska, though. Mention of President McKinley should probably be reduced to a note. If the original article had been correct, though, wouldn't that count as a mention of President McKinley? --Archimedean 00:26, May 9, 2010 (UTC)
- Oh, and thanks for letting me know. I've found that to be a general rule on entertainment wikis, but I still appreciate the heads-up. --Archimedean 00:28, May 9, 2010 (UTC)
- No problem -- i've researched McKinley before for the purpose of deciding whether or not to include him in our list. none of the sources I found had any reference to the man, just the station, just as you found. to further your knowledge, we've found that Reagan, Clinton and Dubya Bush have been mentioned, but Obama and GHW Bush have not. -- Captain MKB 02:56, May 9, 2010 (UTC)
- It's not, but I agree that it was probably too closely phrased, outside the first paragraph. I'd thought I was putting the information in my own words after reading the Memory Alpha article - I haven't seen ENT episode: "The Forgotten" - but it looks like I often wrote what I read. I've tried to distance the text from Memory Alpha's article. I don't suppose you could take a pass at it? --Archimedean 14:42, May 9, 2010 (UTC)
- I've looked and seen that you did make an attempt to alter the text to avoid word-for-word copying, and I appreciate that. I apologize for disrupting your work, it's a common problem that people do word-for-word copies between this site and others.
Hi, I noticed a deficient copyright attribution on the Leslie Wong image. I'd be glad to help you correct the format of the image's attribution, if you could just share the means by which you obtained the image prior to uploading it? -- Captain MKB 17:12, May 10, 2010 (UTC)
- It was posted to artist J.K. Woodward's blog, here. What additional information should I have included? --Archimedean 19:27, May 10, 2010 (UTC)
- Well, for one thing, a statement of copyright. We do copy images from book sources here, but only if we can contend that it is 'fair use' to use the image. "Fair use" is usually defined as present a low-resolution digital representation that does not duplicate a substantial proportion of the work it is taken from. For example, we'll include a 72 dpi image of a singlee comic panel, but we won't reproduce an entire page, nor even a series of text pieces.
- We do this to maintain that we are not violating the publication's copyright. Images must be noted that they are under copyright from Paramount (for episodes) or to a licensee (DC Comics, FASA Corporation, Pocket Books, IDW Publishing, etc.)
- The copyright on images from the web is somewhat different, since many are unique and thus would be completely redistributed if we posted them here. Thusly, we do not post images unless we can claim a valid use of their copyrights.
- We can clear this up simply though: When you were last in communication with J.K. Woodward, what specifics did were detailed when Woodward spoke to you and gave you permission to post the picture? -- Captain MKB 19:50, May 10, 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry, I've been busy IRL. I've attempted to contact Mr. Woodward, but haven't received any response. (I'm not sure my messages reached him.) I see you've removed the image in the meantime; I suppose it isn't worth pursuing the issue between now and the no-longer distant release of the issue itself. --Archimedean 00:50, June 8, 2010 (UTC)
- Just wait until the image is published, and please don't violate copyrights in the meantime. The images belong to IDW publishing (for published images) and the artist (for those that aren't published) ... please don't assume you have any right to release images you don't own the copyright to. -- Captain MKB 01:18, June 8, 2010 (UTC)
- The situation is somewhat more complex than that (while respecting copyright), but I agree that it's not worth arguing the issue between now and publications. --Archimedean 02:36, June 8, 2010 (UTC)
- We avoid much complexity by claiming 'fair use' on images that have already been published, since we reproduce only a portion of a commercial work, but with things that haven't been released... well, I hope you realize that companies and artists may be protective of artwork that hasn't yet been published and that you are using a website that does not want to antagonize copyright owners by possibly violating that protection. -- Captain MKB 22:02, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
Just wondering, do you have an alternate view of Colt's status? I saw you removed her membership in the enlisted sf personnel category. Her rank in "The Cage" was no stripe, which would seem to be subordinate to the chief petty officer's broken stripe, and illustrates her enlisted status. Even though a licensed work shows her attending the Academy, canon would seem to have her being enlisted personnel in the time of "The Cage". -- Captain MKB 22:02, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
- Not necessarily. I've brought the issue of blank sleeve rank up at Talk:Federation Starfleet ranks (2240s-2260s)
- Colt may be enlisted, but I don't know of definitive evidence that says she is. I think there's a much better case for her rank being ensign in "The Cage" and lieutenant in later Early Voyages issues. --Archimedean 22:35, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
- I've posted a response there. Incidentally, since you are suggesting a major change to the article and the way it is interpreted, I'd appreciate if you held off making these changes until more people than just you or I have discussed it. -- Captain MKB 23:43, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
- Certainly. --Archimedean 00:30, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
- Do you mind if I restore my edits in the meantime? They are consistent with both systems. What I changed: Cadet uniforms are sourced separately for each department, jacket sleeves are different for officers (stripe) and enlisted personnel (no stripe), and the new officer jacket sleeve image is used. --Archimedean 00:37, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
- I think waiting will be just fine.
- My edits aren't related to the system question being discussed. I'm not clear what the problem with them is (or why they were reverted in the first place). --Archimedean 01:59, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
- They were reverted as I had asked you if your viewpoint on the enlisted/ensign issue was necessarily the path to take, and the edit, along those lines, introduced a new jacket sleeve that you hadn't yet posted an explanation for yet (the no-stripe jacket)...
- I think it might be good to list all of our sources and ideas for how the system works before we make the major changes to the article. -- Captain MKB 02:18, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
- I can see that logic. Sure, let's wait. No harm. --Archimedean 02:32, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
Again, I have to ask, what's the deal with putting the Exeter under the Enterprise patch in the article assignment patch.
Just to let you know, my having to ask after every edit you make is starting to feel to me like you are being disruptive. Could you maybe make some attempt to follow our policy, and either list a source or fill out the "Summary" box when you make an edit? It's a little annoying to have to start a new talk page conversation every time you visit here because you haven't the courtesy to explain yourself properly as our policy requires. If you have questions about how to cite, please ask first. -- Captain MKB 01:28, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
- The USS Exeter's patch appeared in Captain's Log: Pike. It was worn by Captain Colt, Fleet Captain Pike (who I would guess wore it for other reasons) and the ship's crew.
- I'm not trying to be disruptive. I apologize if I'm confusing. Except where sources are not usually given, I always include sources. I also track down sources that seem to be missing.
- Last time, you got ahead of me. I edited J. Mia Colt on my way to the talk page at "Ranks etc." where I explained why we didn't know whether she was enlisted. I didn't explain the edit because it was essentially a category edit, and those aren't usually commented on.
- This time, I didn't comment or provide a source for two reasons. First, the assignment patch page doesn't include sources for any image. Second, I thought that the edit itself was self-explanatory, so far as the page was concerned: I added the USS Exeter patch. It's no different from your revision that added the Yorktown patch in July; our citations are the same. --Archimedean 01:50, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
- Well, I made some efforts to link my patch from and to pages that list a source for the patch. I'd say the edit summary field would be your best bet as the Pike comic is so new that many haven't heard of it yet - just put "from new Captains Log: Pike comic" in the summary field and it will be 100% clearer to those who haven't read the comic. Conversely, I didn't do the Yorktown patch until Schism had been out for months, so many of the other contributors were aware of its reasons for being here. -- Captain MKB 01:55, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
A great way to provide a concrete source for a uniform reference is to upload a screencap.
You keep linking to screncaps hosted on websites. I keep trying to tell you, the websites you are using (or abusing, I guess) -- they all disallow hotlinking. I can't see the images. I have seen exactly ZERO images you've hotlinked to. Get it?
I've seen that you know how to upload an image. Why not crop and upload some screencaps so that we have some way to understand what your agenda is towards changing these uniform articles? Do you understand that I still can't see offsite images you hotlink to? -- Captain MKB 02:23, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry, I thought my explanation about copying and pasting the URLs to see the screencaps was clear. (Even so, I seriously almost added a note to the last set. I wish I had.) Uploading cropped images sounds like a good idea; it should spare frustration for us both. --Archimedean 02:32, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
Please keep in mind that a site admin should be finalizing image approvals. I don't think you should move articles into the approved or rejected logs yourself. -- Captain MKB 17:15, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
- Oh, sorry. Should I contact you or another admin if I notice that a vote needs to be tallied? Neither of those votes have changed in many more than seven days. --Archimedean 17:18, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
- By the way, why put them back? I shouldn't have moved them, but shouldn't they have been moved? --Archimedean 17:21, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
- I moved them back because haven't read through them completely to know that the moves you made were the correct ones. Even if the votes seem definitive to you, the final decision should be made to agree with the site's policy on canon/licensed fact versus fan fiction. If you'd like an admin to do that, that's fine, but I myself wasn't planning to do that today - again this is one of those cases where you definitely should have asked first before assuming you can go ahead and make such major changes. -- Captain MKB 17:26, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
- I saw that the last move had been made by a non-admin, so I thought it was a community responsibility, not an admin issue. I might have asked, otherwise. --Archimedean 17:51, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
- Why don't you just let me know what you are planning to do next, and make this easier. Please. -- Captain MKB 18:00, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
- I think I owe you an apology. I didn't see this message a month ago. If I had, I would've kept you apprised, and not come accross as so uncooperative and unresponsive as I did. I hope we can find a way to work together better. --Archimedean 19:59, October 16, 2010 (UTC)
For pages that qualify as immadiate deletions without requiring a community consesnsus (such as typos and malformed redirects), please use Memory Beta:Pages for immediate deletion, and not starting a full deletion discussion. -- Captain MKB 17:53, February 19, 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you. I thought there was such a page, but couldn't find it. --Archimedean 17:53, February 19, 2011 (UTC)
Hi. I see that you are working on the Class F shuttlecraft page and saw that you included the Hoftstadter from A Choice of Catastrophes as a Class F when she was described in the novel as a G class shuttlecraft. Just thought I'd give you a heads up. --The Doctor 19:46, September 28, 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you. I appreciate the heads-up. --Archimedean 20:13, September 28, 2011 (UTC)