Are you sure?
Spoilers The Roddenberry Archive brings every iteration of Star Trek’s USS Enterprise bridge to life
- Thread starter Tuskin38
- Start date
No. Books go through the Paramount license and they're still considered non-canon. As nice as this is, it's still not part of canon.It's official, done through the Paramount license, but does that also mean canon?
I'm no expert
Still need to be convinced that this is not Nexus Kirk.
Canon is always shifting! I'm old enough to remember when TAS was not.
This is Paramount sanctioned and on-screen, it's just a slightly different delivery mechanism from broadcast TV and film. But streaming has upended that traditional definition. Is YouTube less canon than Paramount+?
I guess at the moment it exists as licenced content, but not canon. Unless Paramount say otherwise.
This is Paramount sanctioned and on-screen, it's just a slightly different delivery mechanism from broadcast TV and film. But streaming has upended that traditional definition. Is YouTube less canon than Paramount+?
I guess at the moment it exists as licenced content, but not canon. Unless Paramount say otherwise.
Just as VERY Short Treks isn't canonical, just as myriad computer games aren't canonical, just as officially licensed commercials featuring Trek actors in their Trek roles aren't canonical, so too is this not canonical...for me, until They say otherwise. 
That doesn't mean you can't pretend it's real, or you should enjoy it less.
It's absolutely just as canonical as the comics that it's partially based on.
That doesn't mean you can't pretend it's real, or you should enjoy it less.
It's absolutely just as canonical as the comics that it's partially based on.
Last edited:
It's all very vague. Like, Spock's son is entirely from behind-the-scenes info. They tie into a lot of novels and comics so I imagine as canon as them? But I think it's all in the eye of the beholder in a world where the 23rd century interchanges between TOS and SNW's look.
I demand something in one of the shows to contradict this. Otherwise people will be confused.
This was absolutely brilliant. Wonder how long it takes to create. Almost feel like all their clips are AI prompts as they are all quite trippy and aren't always clear at what they are saying
So this is more an art piece, than canon or pseudo-canon?
And who gives a damn, in my head its canon and thats all that matters, as it should to everyone else. Canon police take the day off today please!
Short Treks = canon
Very Short Treks = not canon
Nexus Kirk does not need the references to "We've got the body on ice at the Super Secret Thing" from Picard.
Ah, I think I misunderstood. For some reason I thought you previously meant there were now shuttle interiors available for virtual walkarounds, which I made myself crazy trying to find.
The same could be said about those CD-Rom interactive movies from the 90s like Star Trek Klingon, Star Trek Borg or Starfleet Academy. They still weren't canon, and neither is this.
Last edited:
It's almost like canon doesn't matter for enjoyment.
I can't imagine the canon story that would have to be told to contradict this. I mean, some canon story that goes out of its way to state that Saavik died childless? What kind of story about Spock's death in the Kelvin timeline that absolutely rules out being visited by a 2290's James Kirk?
Schrodinger's canon. Unless SFA writers make a story where Kirk is resurrected in 32nd century, which is probably unlikely. Maybe a hologram? No idea.
They were all awesome additions to the wider Star Trek franchise, and so is the Roddenberry Archive!
Similar threads
