Organizing Trek Stories and Content

[ATimson]

"Novelverse" implies all novels share a continuity though. Each term has benefits and drawbacks I'm sure; Destiny timeline communicates that it's all the stories that feed in and out of Destiny.

@ATimson used to call it something like the "Markradiverse" (for Marco Palmieri and KRAD).

Marcokradiverse. Obviously outdated, but "the modern novel continuity" is a mouthful. (And isn't future-proof. )

 

[Idran]

Is it possible to add filters to Memory Beta? Like in The Tower of the Hand?

From a technical perspective yes (though it would be a ton of work), but based on that thread on MB, they aren't open to anything in this vein anyway.

 

[TheAlmanac]

Probably more people have played Star Trek Online than will ever read Avatar, Book One, though.

As much as it pains me to acknowledge that at times, I try to keep it in mind when I look at what gets updated more often on Memory Beta by its (presumably young male) userbase.

"Novelverse" implies all novels share a continuity though. Each term has benefits and drawbacks I'm sure; Destiny timeline communicates that it's all the stories that feed in and out of Destiny.

I agree with this, especially as it relates to coming up with a viable shorthand for referring to that particular continuity on a wiki. "Destiny Timeline" is at least as useful as "Kelvin Timeline" for such a purpose.

 

[Avro Arrow]

http://memory-beta.wikia.com/wiki/Forum:Separating_Sources

I would personally be just as happy with the suggestion made by "Captain MKB" in that discussion page:

I would voice (and have voiced) support for a much more specific citation system where an inline "ref" tag citation could be placed after each phrase it cites, thereby minimizing confusion. You would say a ship was a certain class[1] and was commissioned in a certain year[1]. In this way, the reader can reference each fact with a source on a one-to-one basis, and can plainly see if they get to a Gold Key section of the biography it is separated and cited adequately for them to notice that it is topically discontinuitous and the citation or a background note can explain why.

This is basically what I was referring to with my in-line citation comment.

And people have started using "Destiny timeline" when Destiny was only really a miniseries.

I agree with this, especially as it relates to coming up with a viable shorthand for referring to that particular continuity on a wiki. "Destiny Timeline" is at least as useful as "Kelvin Timeline" for such a purpose.

I have to admit, "Destiny Timeline" *does* have a really nice ring to it...

 

[JD]

I've gotten into it with CaptainMike again over the last few days, but I'm giving up. They are obviously not even going to consider actually discussing my ideas.

 

[Jinn]

I've gotten into it with CaptainMike again over the last few days, but I'm giving up. They are obviously not even going to consider actually discussing my ideas.

I followed the discussion over the past days, and all I can say is, you tried and failed honorably against an unbeatable foe. Were you a Klingon, and MB the KE, your account would now be in sto'vo'kor and your sacrifice wouldn't go unnoticed.

 

[JD]

Thanks.
There was a bit more he put at the end I did respond to after my last post here, but I don't see this going past one or two more posts.

 

[JD]

And Captain Mike just personally insulted me, so now I'm definitely done.

 

[Jinn]

I might have accidentaly added fuel to the flames (or rather water to an exothermic welding...)

 

[JD]

Don't worry about it.
One point that came up that I was curious to see what people here thought about was MB approaching things as one big narrative, while I was originally thinking of things more as a bunch of little narratives.When I got thinking about it more, I didn't really like MB even approach things as a narrative, to me MB should be more for just sharing the information objectively without worrying about things like "narrative".

 

[Extrocomp]

I might have accidentaly added fuel to the flames (or rather water to an exothermic welding...)

I think your comment was a bit too antagonistic. I had fun reading it, but in my experience, criticizing your opponent will only make them more stubborn.

 

[Leto_II]

Yeah, but in CaptainMike's case, that's kinda like saying that something'll make a nuclear explosion "just a bit more" destructive than it already is. That guy's always had a short fuse.

 

[JD]

So it's not just me then?

 

[Defcon]

So it's not just me then?

Nope. As I said in the other thread Captain Mike is one of the main reasons Memory Beta isn't what it could be IMO:

Captain Mike being the Trump of Memory Beta doesn't help the site, either, in my opininon, at least that was my feeling when I was more active there.

While I could do my thing pretty much uninterrupted ( I was editing the site(s) for the German translations for a while), I had the feeling his "my way or the highway" attitude drove off several motivated users.

 

[JD]

That does make me feel a bit better. I was actually starting to feel a little guilty that I let things get so ugly.

 

[Jinn]

I think your comment was a bit too antagonistic. I had fun reading it, but in my experience, criticizing your opponent will only make them more stubborn.

You should have seen the original draft which started with a "Oh God, where should I begin" or something like that I'm glad I deleted that before posting as in that case he might have had a point.

Also, I still don't get how the MU is a special case...

 

[Extrocomp]

Captainmike's opinions can be a bit peculiar. He once tried to argue that the Q are not a species.

http://memory-beta.wikia.com/wiki/Talk:Q_(species)

 

[TheAlmanac]

I've gotten into it with CaptainMike again over the last few days, but I'm giving up. They are obviously not even going to consider actually discussing my ideas.

I know I've essentially already said this, but I suggest you take the approach of Wikipedia itself and Be Bold in editing pages yourself into a better format. Their bluff should be called to see how much someone's determined to be the sad little king of a sad little hill.

 

[JD]

I thought about it, but I thought it would better to discuss it with the other people there first. I guess I should have known from the stuff you guys have said on here that there was no point. I don't want to do it now, because it would probably just start an even bigger fight and I already had enough.
How did CaptainMike end up being the big decision maker there? Did someone actually put him charge or did he just kind of take over and nobody bothered to stop him or challenge him?
I can definitely see the same attitude in those posts as I saw in the conversation I started. He just won't even consider that his way couldn't be the right way.

 

[Idran]

How did CaptainMike end up being the big decision maker there? Did someone actually put him charge or did he just kind of take over and nobody bothered to stop him or challenge him?

It looks like he's one of two still regularly-active admins on MB, and the only active admin on MB at all with bureaucrat rights (in Wikipedia-speak, that means (among other less-significant things) he's the only one with the ability to make new admins). And there haven't been any new admin nominations, let alone selections, since 2015.

So basically it's because everyone else who could be a decision maker has since left MB.