Kelvin Timeline all but confirmed

[Trekkin]

but there is no mention of anything from ENT in the TOS-TNG-DS9-VOY timeline.

James Cromwell's Cochrane. Character from ENT, appears in TOS and TNG.

And from his POV, had already experienced FC by the time of ENT. Just for added closure.

In addition:

I ...the episode that tries to explain why the Klingons were smooth headed in TOS. To me that wasn't necessary.

Whether you conveniently ignore it or not, that there would also be an ENT element 'mentioned' in DS9.

 

[Nerys Myk]

but there is no mention of anything from ENT in the TOS-TNG-DS9-VOY timeline. So for my own personal continuity I like to place it in the Kelvin timeline where it is referenced.

The show was made after the others so it would be a bit hard for them to mention Archer or the NX-01. Nor should the writers be limited to stuff mentioned in the other shows. But one can find things that fit will little effort. And the creators dropped a few things in there for that purpose. Otherwise its just being stubborn and silly for petty reasons.
You don't get a "personal continuity" in Star Trek. All you get is the stuff you like and the stuff you don't. Calling it a "personal continuity" is just hubris , entitlement and a false sense of proprietary.

 

[Mirror Mirror]

One of the planets named 'Archer' in I think TNG, was retconned be named after, well Archer.

This happens in large franchise all the time. Stuff gets retconned. That is why we have the term retcon

 

[Gojira]

Sure, and I can too. But, that has no bearing on CBS and their choices, nor my own personal enjoyment of the material. If that's the case, than anything post TOS is not in my continuity.

The differences from TOS to TMP didn't damage my enjoyment of the film, and same with changes from TMP to TWOK.

There is nothing wrong with having a personal continuity. The changes in films and shows doesn't bother me much either.

 

[Mirror Mirror]

No offense to anyone but I really despise the idea of "personal continuity" or "head canon." There are more than a few episodes I don't like. They happened. I don't like that them, I may not watch them but I accept the fact they exist.

I feel there is a place for this, such as fanfic or say you are running a game or something.

 

[Campe]

I feel there is a place for this, such as fanfic or say you are running a game or something.

That's probably fair. But just this bull of "I dont like it. Therefore it does not exist in my mind."

Talk about entitlement.

 

[fireproof78]

The show was made after the others so it would be a bit hard for them to mention Archer or the NX-01. Nor should the writers be limited to stuff mentioned in the other shows. But one can find things that fit will little effort. And the creators dropped a few things in there for that purpose. Otherwise its just being stubborn and silly for petty reasons.
You don't get a "personal continuity" in Star Trek. All you get is the stuff you like and the stuff you don't. Calling it a "personal continuity" is just hubris , entitlement and a false sense of proprietary.

Have you met us?

 

[Gojira]

The show was made after the others so it would be a bit hard for them to mention Archer or the NX-01. Nor should the writer be limited to stuff mentioned in the other show. But one can find things that fit will little effort. And the creators dropped a few things in there for that purpose. Otherwise its just being stubborn and silly for petty reasons.
You don't get a "personal continuity" in Star Trek. All you get is the stuff you like and the stuff you don't. Calling it a "personal continuity" is just hubris , entitlement and a false sense of proprietary.

Ironically, it was here at Trek BBS Where I first heard the term and concept of "personal continuity." There is absolutely no reason to get judgemental about it. It's not hubris or a senses of entitlement or a false sense of proprietary. It's simply how I enjoy a franchise with a vast catalog. There are fans that do ignore episodes or movies in the franchise and there is nothing wrong with it, it is there personal business and nobody needs the thought police telling people that can't do it. Lighten up.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Ironically, it was here at Trek BBS Where I first heard the term and concept of "personal continuity." There is absolutely no reason to get judgemental about it. It's not hubris or a senses of entitlement or a false sense of proprietary. It's simply how I enjoy a franchise with a vast catalog. There are fans that do ignore episodes or movies in the franchise and there is nothing wrong with it, it is there personal business and nobody needs the thought police telling people that can't do it. Lighten up.

Like I said, it's the stuff you like or don't like. It's not a continuity.

 

[Gojira]

That's probably fair. But just this bull of "I dont like it. Therefore it does not exist in my mind."

Talk about entitlement.

You're kidding me?! You guys need to stop caring so much what others think and do with this stuff!!

 

[Campe]

You're kidding me?! You guys need to stop caring so much what others think and do with this stuff!!

You can have your head canon.
I can find the concept ridiculous.
I don't see what the problem is.

 

[Tuskin38]

You're kidding me?! You guys need to stop caring so much what others think and do with this stuff!!

Lets say what if Discovery was a direct sequel to Voyager, was 100% Prime Timeline and looked like the previous shows, no visual re-imagining.

If it referenced one of Enterprise's episodes directly. Would it then be in your 'head canon's Prime Timeline?

 

[Gojira]

Like I said, it's the stuff you like or don't like. It's not a continuity.

The continuity of Star Trek is a bit of a mess. Someone a page or two back demonstrated how many timelines could have been created with all the time travel in the franchise. Trek has contradicted its own continuity many times. So we are free to pick and choose things that make sense. In TOS it was implied they traveled all over the galaxy, by TNG and later shows the galaxy is divided up into 4 quadrants and it would take Voyager 70+ years to get home. Trek contradicts itself often. So I make up a continuity to deal with the contradictions and I do ignore things I don't care for! I wish I had a dime for every time a fan said "I pretend this didn't happen!"

 

[Trekkin]

You're kidding me?! You guys need to stop caring so much what others think and do with this stuff!!

'Continuity' is not a synonym for 'Fan doesn't watch an episode twice.' It's an element of production. An optional element, but still theirs.

As is canon.

Hence why it was pointed out that there's some room for 'personal continuity' when it comes to fan works ( productions in themselves,) not so much anywhere else. Elsewhere, it's just 'I reject your reality and replace it with my own!'

 

[Nerys Myk]

The continuity of Star Trek is a bit of a mess. Someone a page or two back demonstrated how many timelines could have been created with all the time travel in the franchise. Trek has contradicted its own continuity many times. So we are free to pick and choose things that make sense. In TOS it was implied they traveled all over the galaxy, by TNG and later shows the galaxy is divided up into 4 quadrants and it would take Voyager 70+ years to get home. Trek contradicts itself often. So I make up a continuity to deal with the contradictions and I do ignore things I don't care for! I wish I had a dime for every time a fan said "I pretend this didn't happen!"

It's fiction not a jigsaw puzzle. The pieces don't have to fit perfectly.

 

[Gojira]

Lets say what if Discovery was a direct sequel to Voyager, was 100% Prime Timeline and looked like the previous shows, no visual re-imagining.

If it referenced one of Enterprise's episodes directly. Would it then be in your 'head canon's Prime Timeline?

More than likely yes. I am excited for Discovery and looking forward to it. I like the way it looks. But because of how it looks I just like to think of it as being part of the Kelvin timeline. If it turns out to be in the Prime time line it really won't bother me.

 

[Gojira]

'Continuity' is not a synonym for 'Fan doesn't watch an episode twice.' It's an element of production. An optional element, but still theirs.

As is canon.

Hence why it was pointed out that there's some room for 'personal continuity' when it comes to fan works (a production in itself,) not so much in audience discussions of the actual show.

I understand that. There are many episodes and movies in Trek that are the official canon and continuity. They exist and I recognize that. There is also room for an individual to have their own personal continuity and I am learning here tonight that it's something I should not and will not mention to another fan again.

Gosh, it's like I'm in a group of Religious Fundamentalists!

 

[Gojira]

It's fiction not a jigsaw puzzle. The pieces don't have to fit perfectly.

Emphasis on the fiction. I'm not asking for perfection, all I'm doing is putting all the pieces together in a way that fits for me.

 

[Trekkin]

'Fan/personal continuity' is an oxymoron.

What's being described is simply unwritten fanfic, or unrealised fan edits. But for some reason, people don't seem to like that description. It's apparently not...impressive-sounding enough.

 

[Gojira]

Well as unless we can time travel IRL, it would be pretty damned odd to see a show not written for another decade be talked about in the older shows.

Which is why I personally enjoy thinking of ENT as part of the Kelvin Universe.