Organizing Trek Stories and Content

[JD]

We started a discussing some issues with the way Memory Beta puts together it's content in the Ira Graves thread, and I mentioned those issues there and got into a debate with another contributor about this. They put everything thing together, whether it came from a episode, stand alone book, comic, video game, RPG, or a Novelverse book, but I think the stuff should all be separated by what the source was. The contributor I was arguing with insists that it's all one big universe and should all be together, but I think there are to many inconsistencies between the different material for that to really work. I do have my "personal continuity" that does include bits and pieces from all of those, but I still tend to keep them separate unless they are meant to go together when I'm organizing things.
The debate on there got me wondering how you guys on here feel. So do you think everything should all be put together when you're organizing this stuff, or should stuff separated by whether or not it's consistent and what it came from?

 

[Jinn]

I think it should not be divided by the type of the source. I'd only seperate the stuff that doesn't work with each-other. So, if there's a RPG that just so happens to be consistent with the novelverse (though I doubt that such a thing exists) I don't see why it should be seperated.

 

[Leto_II]

I think it should not be divided by the type of the source. I'd only seperate the stuff that doesn't work with each-other. So, if there's a RPG that just so happens to be consistent with the novelverse (though I doubt that such a thing exists) I don't see why it should be seperated.

Yeah, I'm the exact same way -- when organizing my personal continuity on "paper" (i.e., a Word document), I always first go by whether or not a given source is consistent with other sources, not necessarily discriminating against an awesome bit simply because it comes from, say, an RPG or a comic book, versus a TV episode or a novel. Worldbuilding-consistency is always the very first thing I look for (along with characterization, of course).

 

[Dayton Ward]

For something like Memory Beta, it might be nice if information was separated by source type (novel, comic, video game, etc.), perhaps with notations about how one source's information differs from other sources. That'd be a lot of work to retrofit at this point, though, and the MB folks are already pretty busy just keeping up with new material, making corrections, etc. Otherwise, it's nice to do a search on, for example, "Koloth," and have everything on one page.

 

[Jinn]

Though I can kinda see why seperating games makes sense as they sometimes have to change things around in order to make the game actually fair and playable.

 

[Christopher]

The question is what's meant by "together." Naturally it makes sense for all the various information about a given character, planet, species, or whatever to be in the same article. But it doesn't make sense to lump information from contradictory sources together in the same subsection, paragraph, or even single sentence, and it's just bad form to include information without specifying its source. The proper format should be to have a single article subdivided into sections for different, inconsistent accounts. For instance, the article on the Earth-Romulan War should have one subsection for the Novelverse version, one for the Federation: The First 150 Years version, and so on for other incompatible versions.

Of course, there are cases where it's ambiguous whether two versions can be reconciled, and different fans may have different opinions on that. But that's all the more reason to list each reference source distinctly, to cite where each claim comes from, and leave it to the individual reader to decide what fits together, rather than imposing a single interpretation. A reference text should be clear, detailed, and objective. It should not impose an editorial slant, certainly not one that leads to a confusing presentation of the data.

 

[Enterprise1701]

We started a discussing some issues with the way Memory Beta puts together it's content in the Ira Graves thread, and I mentioned those issues there and got into a debate with another contributor about this. They put everything thing together, whether it came from a episode, stand alone book, comic, video game, RPG, or a Novelverse book, but I think the stuff should all be separated by what the source was. The contributor I was arguing with insists that it's all one big universe and should all be together, but I think there are to many inconsistencies between the different material for that to really work. I do have my "personal continuity" that does include bits and pieces from all of those, but I still tend to keep them separate unless they are meant to go together when I'm organizing things.

Is this editor one of the fools who tries to treat the pre-ENT novel, ENT novel, and Federation: The First 150 Years takes on the Earth-Romulan War into one coherent timeline?

 

[JD]

That is exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about. I guess since I already identified him in the other thread, I might as well do it here too, it's CaptainMike/MKB.
And I was talking more about doing this on places on Memory Beta, not necessarily how organize our own personal continuities.

 

[TheAlmanac]

That is exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about. I guess since I already identified him in the other thread, I might as well do it here too, it's CaptainMike/MKB.

I've done my best to back you up in the Memory Beta thread you started, but the admins in that thread are coming across as deliberately obtuse. :/

There's a part of me that thinks if you have the time/energy to do so, you should just go ahead and edit entries to create the sections you're talking about (especially since some entries there already do this). If any edits get reverted, that'll just be the confirmation that fighting it further is not worth the bother.

 

[JD]

Well, I seem to have maybe gotten to through to CaptainMike, but now someobody else against it popped up.
I just saw your post TA, and I appreciate the support.
EDIT: I just saw the last post, and I guess I was wrong about CaptainMike.

 

[Desert Kris]

I kind of regard different sources as being their own universe, but may have some explicit overlap between them. Older novels and newer novels have their own narrative space, and I think the New Frontier novels are kind of in their own realm. That's without even mentioning the Crucible novels, which deliberately set themselves apart from the rest of the novels (and Children of Kings exists halfway between two continuities, I've heard...?). And the comics I also regard as existing in their own narrative space as well. I've looked up information on single characters on Memory Beta, and it's nice to have all the information compiled in one place. I'm glad that notation is included when there are irreconcilable information about a character's history from two sources contradicting each other, but I've felt bemused by a sense of one source being favored over another. So Memory Beta is useful for compiling information in a single entry; I wouldn't want to keeping clicking over to 10 or more different versions of a Pavel Chekov page and try figuring out what different sources are doing differently with the one character. I can keep track in my own head that the comics and books and games are different continuities. I don't know if that makes sense.

 

[Extrocomp]

The debate on there got me wondering how you guys on here feel. So do you think everything should all be put together when you're organizing this stuff, or should stuff separated by whether or not it's consistent and what it came from?

If two different sources are consistent with each other, you can't justify putting them in separate sections just because one is published by Pocket Books, another by DC Comics and another by Activision. You might regard the Novelverse as a separate continuity from the various comics and games, but other people might treat every comic and game that's consistent with the Novelverse as part of the Novelverse. In my opinion, separate sections are only needed for completely incompatible continuities like First 150 Years or Starfleet Year One.

and Children of Kings exists halfway between two continuities, I've heard...?

I don't know about Children of Kings, but Burning Dreams is definitely halfway between two continuities. The chief engineer is Moves-With-Burning-Grace from the Early Voyages continuity but the communications officer is Dabisch from the Where Sea Meets Sky continuity. The novel also references the Calligar, which are from the Vulcan's Glory/The Rift continuity.

 

[DimesDan]

Any chance of a link to this thread on Mem Beta? Would be nice to see what is actually said, not on second or third hand accounts.

 

[Extrocomp]

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

 

[Christopher]

This isn't even necessarily about continuity. It's just about basic scholarship -- cite your sources and make sure it's clear what information comes from what source.

 

[Idran]

So Memory Beta is useful for compiling information in a single entry; I wouldn't want to keeping clicking over to 10 or more different versions of a Pavel Chekov page and try figuring out what different sources are doing differently with the one character.

No one was talking about different pages except for a brief suggestion that was quickly discarded as untenable; when they say separate, they're talking about separate broad sections in a single article; about not pretending that all this stuff was meant to be consistent with one another and not forcing it together for the sake of a chronological presentation in a way that muddles provenance of information.

 

[bok2384]

Once having been a prominent member of Memory Beta, I must admit to reading this thread and the one that spawned it with some interest.

The problem with Memory Beta, or to take its original name the clunky Non-Canon Star Trek Wiki, is that it has a rather broad remit for the amount of sources it uses. Everything from novels, to comics, to RPGs and fast food cups are given equal billing, with no one media being given prominence (except what was canonically confirmed on screen anyway). With that in mind, I suppose a chronological listing was the only way it could be done due to the fact that all things were equal. To me, chronological is more "in-universe" and a better fit, but as others have noted, with so many differing sources, things have become muddled. Perhaps this should have been discussed at the genesis of the wiki, but as one of those earlier contributors we were just using the novels at that stage and were aping the setup and methodology of Memory Alpha.

If I was establishing the wiki today, I would probably plump for using tiered system when presenting the information. Canon taking the top tier, with novels forming the next tier, comics the next, computer games and RPGs making up the next. In other words, information presented in the novels (which haven't subsequently been overridden) take precedence, but any contradictory information is listed along side it in an italicized indented paragraph which can easily be identified as occurring in another continuity. That way the chronological flow is maintained, but perhaps the cost being bias to a certain media over another, yet all references are included.

 

[JD]

Yeah, I'm kind of starting to wish I had mentioned this when the thought first occurred to me ages ago when people there might not have been quite so set in their ways.
Sorry about not including the link at first, I was originally going to try to keep this a totally separate conversation, but the MB thread and this one started to crossover a bit more than I intended.

 

[DS9forever]

I hate all the ST Online stuff on MB. And people have started using "Destiny timeline" when Destiny was only really a miniseries.

 

[JD]

That's why I like Novelverse, it doesn't favor one person or series over any of the others.