Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
Starships & Technology
»
Help with my shiplist
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Ryan McReynolds: [qb]Given that it's in exactly [i]zero[/i] live-action episodes or films, it is decidedly not canon. Do you really think Paramount is "officially maintaining" anything? Of course not. It's just like the people who think that Paramount has some great list of what's canon and what isn't that the writers follow. They wouldn't even give the issue a second thought if fanboys didn't keep pestering about it. Mike Okuda stuck the registry list in a book since his art pal Greg Jein came up with it and that's about as far as it goes. With an incredibly large likelihood of never visiting the twenty-third century again in canon [i]Star Trek[/i], it seems pretty sure that there will [i]never[/i] be canon to support the Jein sceme. I, therefore, reject it for the time being. [/qb][/QUOTE]Umm...so what exactly do you think the [URL=http://www.startrek.com]www.startrek.com[/URL] website is? A figment of the fans' imaginations? The very fact that such a site exists, and that there have even [i]been[/i] such publications as the [i]Encyclopedia[/i], proves that Paramount DOES keep track of this stuff. (Granted, as we all have seen, not without a lapse here and there... ;) ) For the last time, [i]canon is not only what is onscreen, but also anything additional that represents Paramount's official view of the Star Trek universe.[/i] And issues of official viewpoint aside, the fact is that this number scheme is the ONLY one for which there is any kind of onscreen support. All of these registries have been seen in the show. A number of them have been definitely matched with their respective ship names on the show. True, some of the accepted matchings have not been explicitly made onscreen. But at least it fits with what was onscreen. However, there is NO onscreen support for ANY of the Franz Joseph numbers, excepting of course for the obvious NCC-1700, NCC-1701, NCC-1710, NCC-1017, and NCC-1371. As you said, there is very little chance of a revisitation of the time period in question. However, while you say that means we'll not be seeing any further support of these numbers, I maintain that there is no need of any. And what it also means is that we'll (hopefully) not be seeing any [i]contradictions[/i] of them. As non-sensical as it may seem, it's best to stick to the officially-sanctioned numbers. It leaves fewer unsightly blank spaces in our shiplists. -[b]MMoM[/b] :D [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3