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 finale of Year Five, the Coda miniseries and the continuations of Discovery, Picard and Lower Decks; and the premieres of Prodigy and Strange New Worlds, the advent of new eras in Star Trek Online gaming, as well as other post-55th Anniversary publications. 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. 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
Memory Beta, non-canon Star Trek Wiki
user talk:captainmike/archive 2007
user talk:captainmike/archive 2008
user talk:captainmike/archive 2009
user talk:captainmike/archive 2010
user talk:captainmike/archive 2011
user talk:captainmike/archive 2012
user talk:captainmike/archive 2013
user talk:captainmike/archive 2014
user talk:captainmike/archive 2015
user talk:captainmike/archive 2016
user talk:captainmike/archive 2017
user talk:captainmike/archive 2018
user talk:captainmike/archive 2019
user talk:captainmike/archive 2020
user talk:captainmike/archive 2021

New Wiki Manager for Memory Beta[]

Hello! I'm Cörey, a Wiki Manager with Fandom's Movies/TV team. I'll be taking over for SilverFlight.

As you may know, your community will be migrated over to the UCP relatively soon. We want to make this transition as smooth as possible so if you have any questions or concerns please feel free to let me know. My talk page is always the easiest way to reach me, however, I usually reply a bit quicker on Discord (penguinstyles#9735), but please contact me however you're most comfortable.

I look forward to working very closely with you!

-- Cörey (talk) 23:20, August 27, 2020 (UTC)

RE:notes on interface update[]

Hey, thanks for letting me know. I'll pass this along and see what can be done. I'm thinking the associated extension may not have been ported over to UCP yet, if that's the case it should be an easy fix.

I'll keep you updated on this. Have you noticed any other issues?

× Cörey (talk) 22:47, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Hey, this should be fixed. You can see how at MediaWiki:Noarticletext :) × Cörey (talk) 23:06, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

RE: Image galleries and odd overlap[]

Hey Mike! Thanks for reaching out. I completely agree — when I first started using the UCP editor I didn't like it. Though I haven't used the original quite as long as you have, I've only been around the site since '09, it took me a couple of weeks of using the editor consistently before I got used to it. This is to be expected and will happen anytime a major change is made to what has mostly been the same for 15 years. The only thing I can say would be to continue using it, hopefully you'll get used to it pretty quickly.

File:RE-Image problem.png
File:RE-Overlap square.png

In regards to your reports about the overlap and gallery styling, my default browser is Chrome, however, I've checked on Firefox as well and everything is looking fine on my side so I'm not entirely sure what the issue is there.. Are you still seeing that overlap with the galleries and my user page? Have you tried refreshing your browser cache to see if that helps?

× Cörey (talk) 23:32, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

You can still use MediaWiki:Recentchangestext by appending its contents to MediaWiki:Recentchanges-summary. 🙂
Sorry for that, when I said to continue using, I had misinterpreted your message. By "that being said, right now, editing and reading feel very.. clunky. things are taking a long time to load." I thought you were saying the new VisualEditor seems "clunky" referring to how it feels versus the old editor, not how quickly it loads, I thought that was a separate concern. Sorry for the confusion there. The editor loading slowly is a known bug and is currently being worked on, though I'm not entirely sure if there's an ETA just yet — I'll ask around and see if there is. Will keep you updated on this.
Don't worry, I wasn't suggesting that you use Chrome instead, I was just mentioning that I do and it was working fine. Weirdly enough though, some of the others on my team are seeing it displayed correctly as well, what version of Firefox are you using? I'm using 81.0.1. Regardless, I'm passing this along to see if we can get it resolved. Will keep you updated on this as well.
The issue with moving the file page is definitely a bug. I'm reaching out to the UCP team now to see if this is currently being worked on. Again, I'll update you on this as soon as I hear back.
Finally, LinkSuggest will be available on UCP, it's just not there yet. But you can definitely look forward to seeing that functionality return soon. Sorry for the inconvenience! 😟
Have you come across any other issues? Definitely let me know! × Cörey (talk) 01:41, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

RE: problems with new platform interface[]

Hey Mike, thanks for reaching out. I'm sorry to hear that you're still unhappy with the migration to the UCP.

Let me be very clear, Engineering is actively working on resolving issues with the new platform in order of highest priority to lowest. It's a long list and sadly it's not something that can be resolved within a couple of days. Please keep in mind that because Fandom has been running off of an outdated version of MediaWiki for so long the process of upgrading our version of MediaWiki is a lot more complicated than any other site upgrading theirs. There are bound to be setbacks.

Try to understand that these are not issues that are only affecting Memory Beta, over 50% of Fandom communities are now running off of the UCP. We understand how much of an impact these issues are having and we appreciate your patience thus far. These are not permanent issues — they're just taking a bit longer to sort out than originally anticipated.

Unfortunately, it is not possible to revert a community back to the legacy platform once it's been migrated, otherwise I would be happy to do so.

I apologize again for the inconvenience and appreciate your patience. Just bear with us for a little longer!

As always, please feel free to let me know of any new issues you stumble across.

I hope you're staying safe and healthy. × Cörey (talk) 06:27, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

RE: DEFAULTSORT[]

Heya! So apparently using categories inside of a PortableInfobox prevents the DEFAULTSORT magic word from working, that's why you're seeing the correct sorting in the RPG books category, but not in the auto-generated Category:2020 productions and publications one. It seems like the issue can be fixed by moving the srcdate category declaration outside of the <infobox theme="book"></infobox> tags.

Would you need help with this?

× Cörey (talk) 03:59, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Nova Class Starship[]

Captain Mike, hello. I attempted to make a few minor corrections to the Nova Class Starship article. For example, the ship is 222 meters in length, has 11 Type-Xb Phaser arrays, and two forward torpedo tubes, all according to Issue 15 by the Official Eaglemoss Star Trek Magazine. The Nova's phasers are all Type Xb, which are slightly more powerful than the Type X on a Galaxy Class, and are always on "hot standby mode" due to a constant EPS charge sent through the capacitors. The Prometheus has Type Xc phasers, which are even more powerful.

Recent issues[]

Hey Mike.

First I want to thank you for your continued patience while these issues are being resolved. We understand that it's taking a bit longer than preferred, but like I said before these issues are temporary and the engineering teams are working as fast as they can to resolve them.

Regarding your reply about {{srcdate}}, I'm not saying that it has to be removed from {{novel}}, rather it simply has to be moved outside of the <infobox theme="book"></infobox> tags. It can stay in {{novel}}, it just can't be included inside of the portable infobox itself. This would not mean a change to every page, just a modification to the way {{novel}} works.

The bug causing infoboxes to not appear on every preview is a known one, and is currently being worked on. I completely understand, it's very annoying for us all.

And I see what you mean with the LinkSuggest dropdown, however, this is purely a CSS issue and is easily remedied. You can add the following CSS snippet to User:Captainmike/wikia.css to fix that. In the meantime, I've submitted a ticket to get this resolved without having to resort to personal CSS.

.oo-ui-popupWidget-popup {
  width: 400px;
}
File:RE-Gallery issue.png

In a Mirror, Darkly

I'm still not seeing the gallery issue you're experiencing, I've asked a couple team members and everything is displaying correctly for them as well so I'm at a loss as to what could be causing this.. Tell me, if you open the page on your phone with the "Request desktop version" option selected, are you still seeing the same behavior? Regardless, I've escalated the ticket I originally created for this to a higher priority, someone will be looking into this.

× Cörey (talk) 02:58, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Recent issues continued[]

You can change your preferred editor in Special:Preferences under the "Editing" tab from "VisualEditor - source mode" to "Source editor". It's not exactly the same as the backup editor that you were seeing after the crash, but it should alleviate some of the issues you're seeing while we wait for them to be fixed.

I understand you're upset about the number of bugs you're experiencing, but please try to steer away from snarky language on my talk page. Comments like "did some idiot just have it load a new version of the editor after it loads this one as a patch?" are not productive to the conversation in the slightest. I don't mean you have to be tight-lipped, but I do expect some semblance of civility.

Regarding the layout issues you're seeing, these weren't coded into the design, it's just something that broke during the migration. Not to worry, issues like these are simple CSS bugs and won't take too long to fix.

I've already ticketed the bug with LinkSuggest opening the dropdown on redlinks, hopefully it'll be resolved soon.

I can assure you we're not trying to destroy any wiki. Once again, these are unintended side effects of the migration to the new platform. Issues are to be expected as we are going from an extremely outdated codebase to, what's effectively, a brand new platform. The majority of the issues you're experiencing have already been ticketed and are currently being worked on. However, you're more than welcome to continue reporting them to me here, you'll likely find a couple more bugs that haven't been reported yet. 😄

× Cörey (talk) 08:34, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

RE: Multiple uploads[]

File:MultiUpload.png

Multiple upload in the VisualEditor

Hey Mike! The multiple upload special page is not a core feature of MediaWiki, and as far as I'm aware, there are no plans to port that functionality over to the UCP in its current state.

For now, you can use the VisualEditor to upload multiple files. If you take a look at the image to the right you'll see how. Keep in mind this doesn't mean you have to use the uploaded files on the page you're editing.

× Cörey (talk) 20:11, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Proposal: Let's have individual pages for unnamed characters played by named actors[]

I intended to post this on the forum, but the "create new topic" button doesn't seem to exist right now. If you get it working, please copy this post to the forum, so everyone can see it.

I've always hated how Memory Alpha handles unnamed characters. They have long, convoluted lists of unnamed characters that are separated by species, by century, by ship posting, by location and by Starfleet division. For example, there are 4 unnamed character lists for Starfleet Deep Space 9 personnel, another 4 for Bajoran Militia Deep Space 9 personnel, another 1 for personnel in general and another 1 for residents. It's next to impossible to find an individual character in such a mess, especially since the links don't always work properly.

Instead of doing what Memory Alpha does, I propose we have individual pages for each unnamed character that is played by a named actor. For example, an unnamed crewman appeared in The Man Trap, who was not listed in the credits, but the actor who played him was identified as Garrison True in one of the Rittenhouse autograph cards. So he could have an article titled Crewman (Garrison True) or Unnamed Crewman (Garrison True). This would make it a lot easier to find specific unnamed characters.

What do you think? --NetSpiker (talk) 04:12, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

The disappearance of the forum code is disheartening, i had to manually create one myself. i'm having a very hard time not leaving nasty messages for the hacks that are bungling this upgrade.
on the topics of unnamed characters, i am in strong agreement that MA's method is wrong. failed attempts to write an interwiki link is clear proof.
i'm a strong proponent of giving certain unnamed characters their own article. its much easier to grasp Chakuun cohort general than unnamed Chakuun#Cohort general. or USS Enterprise personnel officer rather than unnamed USS Enterprise (NCC-1701) personnel (2260s)#Personnel officer. I think characters that can be addressed nomenclature in this way can and should, following the general lead of character names and redirects like The Keeper, etc..
for canon characters, the ones we have named actors for is certainly a good criteria to select who graduates into having their own article
however, the use of actor names seems a bit exceptional in terms of POV. this is the non-canon wiki. it just feels wrong for MB as we arent "TV show-centric", but i think those could be useful for searching and linking if they were made redirects. for example, USS Enterprise personnel officer works fine without resorting to "(Nancy Wong)".. certainly if there was more than one we could form a redirect with "(Nancy Wong)".. but the article titles should maintain a semblance of POV, so i want to pass on that aspect of it.
certainly i've created a few already and we can start looking at the ones that exist to make sure they make sense as we broaden our new intentions of individual articles for significant unnamed characters -- captainmike Site-logo.png 12:11, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

I get your point about breaking POV, since the actors are not supposed to exist from an in-universe perspective, but the only alternative I can think of is to give each unnamed character a number if they don't have any other distinguishing features. So Garrison True's crewman could be Unnamed crewman 1, similar to how scripts and movie credits refer to unnamed characters. Maybe you can think of something better. --NetSpiker (talk) 13:15, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

I'd like to explore any possible option before resorting to actor names. even other 'out of POV' options - series/season/storyline abbreviations, or episode names would be better suited to our purposes. After all, a lot more people can identify "The Naked Time" than can identify "Garrison True", wouldnt you say? -- captainmike Site-logo.png 13:46, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

How's it going?[]

Hey Mike, hope you're doing well.

I wanted to check in and see if you've encountered any new issues with the UCP?

× Cörey (talk) 21:56, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

End of the year review![]

Hey there!

Hope you’re doing well! We know it’s been a unique and challenging year for everyone, but hopefully, Fandom was able to bring some joy during these uncertain times. As this year comes to a close, Fandom is thinking about how to move forward in 2021, and in order to do that, we would like to reflect back on our work in 2020. That’s why I’m reaching out to you because we’d love to hear your opinion about the work that we’ve done in previous months. We’ve had a lot of major changes this year, and we would like to continue working in the right direction and find solutions to any problems you may have. Your voice is vital in making that happen.

We would greatly appreciate you, and any other interested users here, filling out this form with your feedback about your experience on the platform this year, so we can get a sense of how we did, how we can improve, and what our focus should be for 2021. This survey will be totally anonymous, so we encourage you to be as honest and constructive as possible.

Also, if you would like to be more involved with what’s happening at Fandom, feel free to join our Discord server if you haven’t already. This is an active place for users of all communities to come together and interact with various staff members from different departments, either through scheduled AMAs or just general everyday conversation so that we can collect feedback from you about our platform and see how we can work to implement those changes. We’d love to see you there!

Thank you in advance for taking the time to provide us with your thoughts and feedback. Thank you for all of your continued hard work on Fandom, and we wish you the happiest of holidays!

If you have any additional questions, comments, or concerns, feel free to send those my way and I will be more than happy to help you!

× Cörey (talk) 17:58, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

incoherent tables.[]

What do you mean by incoherent tables? I thought for the most part i was keeping them organized and ready to receive new content as it became available. I try to use example from previous pages and try to follow them. I just have good intention want to make pages like Seven's Reckoning as detailed as possible as things were back when i joined Memory Beta back in the early 2010s.CC-1990 (talk) 01:14, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

There's no need to add excessive amounts of code to center things, join table cells together across columns and rows for no reason.
  • If you want something to be centered, or to change the size or style, there should be a code written into the table. There's no need to write confusing code into every cell.
  • If you want to list the artists or other details, then the link to each detail should be written repeatedly in each row or column. otherwise there's no need to add that information to the table. tables exist to present multiple data points, otherwise if there's only one data point, there's no need to use a table.

I've been continuously reverting your edits to try and clean up the information presented. It should be limited to simple links and lists, not using html coes to do major formatting. You revert my edits, which is edit warring and making you subjects to bans and blocks. i've been very lenient. -- captainmike Site-logo.png 02:24, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Appropriate Citations and Autopopulating[]

I was still putting the citations to the game in, when you did the move, which I appreciate, but I don't see what I did wrong. And I don't know what you mean by Autopopulating. In any event, there are now two pages since I was still editing, and I don't think I have the authority to move. The current Orb of Peace Star Trek Online article is complete as best as I can. Rayfire 01:55, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

  • Thank you. Rayfire 01:58, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
first off the article should just be Orb of Peace at the simplest possible name
all articles need to be cited using a citation template. the template {{STO}} will add the citation to Star Trek Online and the appropriate categories. you should never manually add the category "...articles sourced from Star Trek Online" -- it's automated -- captainmike Site-logo.png 02:04, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
I see. Well thank you for taking the time to explain, and should I try my hand at article creation again, I'll endeavor not to screw up. I chose to put the Star Trek Online in there to avoid conflicting with the existing starship, so I thought that was the simplest. Rayfire (talk) 02:18, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

inappropriate formatting[]

Why are you changing Seven's Reckoning around? I thought it had appropriate formatting. I've been using what other pages have done since this wiki was founded. What have i been doing wrong?CC-1990 (talk) 00:47, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

your problems are with table formatting. stop using html span tags to unite 4 cells and stop applying center tags to individual cells. if the table needs a specific format then write the code into the table itself, not repeatedly in every cell -- captainmike Site-logo.png 03:12, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

RE: The Galaxy[]

Hey, sounds good to me. I usually use a capitalized "The" when starting a new sentence or at the start of information contained in an infobox. Though, it does look a bit weird having "the galaxy" there, I would contend that "the Galaxy" should be the preferred case here.

Do you happen to have a manual of style that includes a section about the preferred formatting for situations like this? If not, that may be something that we should look into creating to prevent any future occurrences.

× Cörey (talk) 22:59, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Memory Beta:Policies and guidelines > project:style
i've been having a devil of a time getting the autocomplete to work on these since i never remember what they're called. i'm starting a new "log" that i'll find a simple pin workflow for, it ill keep track of all the little nitpicks we're trying to codify - captainmike Site-logo.png 23:08, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Fandom Desktop[]

Hey, thanks for the message. I'm glad you like it. There were a few issues with dark theming still persisting (such as tables and infoboxes still being white), I've fixed these now and they should all appear okay. I didn't know which colour you wanted the navboxes on the main page to be in dark mode, but black seemed acceptable, so I've put them as black for users using the dark skin. Let me know if this is okay!

Thanks again, Original Authority[talk] 14:38, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Complications concerning “Star Trek: Coda - Moments Asunder”[]

This new upcoming novel, Moments Asunder, has some confusing complications. For example, the destruction of Romulus in the year 2387, and the Vulcan Ambassador Spock who becomes trapped not only in another universe, but also in another time, over 100 years in the past. - AdamDeanHall (talk) 03:06, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Why is this a complication? --NetSpiker (talk) 08:12, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
Because of the formation of a space/time continuum tunnel that leads to an alternate reality where the movie Star Trek takes place. - AdamDeanHall (talk) 11:22, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
But what does that have to do with the Coda trilogy? We don't yet know if the destruction of Romulus is something that happens in both the Picard and Novelverse continuities or just the Picard continuity. --NetSpiker (talk) 11:32, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
I'm unaware of any information being available to me personally or in valid sources for this wiki that mentions Spock or the Romulan nova being involved with Coda - you're literally making that up unless you can provide some sort of official source. Regardless - the BOOK HASNT COME OUT YET. Not adding assumptions and presuppositions to articles (or my TALK PAGE) is actually one of the wiki's most important rules - STOP. -- captainmike •••• 11:59, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Sorry[]

I didn't know that image was HD, to me it didn't look HD, I am sorry and I don't mean to be rude. Please understand that.Typhuss999 (talk) 12:46, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Look I am not trying to be rude, on the other page, he put it on the Characterbox and on that talk page, I shouldn't have changed it. Please forgive me, I don't mean anything by it.Typhuss999 (talk) 16:55, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Gaeta[]

I noticed that you reverted the page "Gaeta" back to "Alex Gaeta" after I removed the Alex name back in August 23. The Alex name only appears in the script and refers to a different character, not Gaeta. I explained all this on Memory Alpha's Talk:Alex page, which I indicated in my edit summary. I'll post it here:

I decided to rewatch the scene in the episode and compare it to the script. The scene shows Tucker climbing over the warp core and onto the catwalk. Then he looks towards the warp core and says "lock it off right there". At this point he could be speaking to either of two crewmen who had climbed the warp core, neither of whom are Mark Correy. Then he jumps down and we finally see Mark Correy, who Tucker pats on the back. Then he wipes a smudge on the warp core and Reed says "I believe you missed a spot".

Now here's the scene in the script:

Charlie is in his element --he's working atop the WARP CORE,which extends horizontally across the room.

CHARLIE(shouting down) Okay, Alex, give it some juice!

A crewman below throws a series of levers, and a pulsingpillar of PLASMA courses through the warp core.

CHARLIE (CONT'D) (shouting down) Beautiful! Lock it off right there!

Charlie ducks and weaves through various outcroppings and slides down an access ladder, dropping to the deck below. He eyes the warp core, notices something, reaches in his pocket, pulls out a handkerchief and polishes off a small smudge on the casing. As he proudly inspects his work...

REED (O.C.) I believe you missed a spot.

Since the Mark Correy crewman only appears later in the scene after Tucker has climbed down from the warp core and catwalk, he can't be the character called Alex in the script. --NetSpiker (talk) 23:57, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

I've been keeping abreast of the conversation on Memory Alpha and I disagree. Since you went ahead and undid my edits of only a few days ago without waiting for this response from me, you obviously weren't concerned with the ramifications of an edit war, so i have restored the article to that previous state in the face of that decision. By plowing ahead without my response you very much put yourself in the wrong. -- captainmike •••• 01:04, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Exactly what part of my argument do you disagree with? It was not my intention to start an edit war. I assumed that you hadn't read the Talk:Alex discussion, since you didn't address it in the edit summary for your rename. --NetSpiker (talk) 01:36, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Advertisement