Talk:Data (Star Trek)/Archive 1

message: sections on "inspiration" and "spiner on data" are far too short, too much fancrufty "data's lifestory" stuff. need to focus more on the character as a fiction.
:I don't see very much fancruft, and it may not be possible to put more information into those sections without hardcore research, but nothing's stopping you. Just have sources. - Defunctzombie 03:11, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Insipiration 

message: I don't think Data is dead.  In science fiction, you can write pretty much anything, and perhaps lets say Kivas Fajo,who stole him in "The Most Toys" is back to his old tricks and has been stalking Data through a locator chip.  He has pulled him out of the Nemisis explosion in time but Data cannot remember who he is so is unable to contemplate an escape.  B-4 later finds him on  shoreleave in an alien bar being shown off and contacts Picard.  Fajo later in a twist ends up in a cage as an exhibit by an insect race who have never seen humanoids.      nice? email me at                                rdhotz@webtv.net
:In all fiction there is generally a possiblity to resurrect any character. Science fiction perhaps has a bit more leeway but then it also depends on the type of science fiction and the author/story type. Hard science fiction for example is much less likely to have wacky explainations for obvious reasons. Star Trek of course doesn't fall into this category and I don't think it'll surprise anyone if data is brought back 203.109.240.93 12:43, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Data alive? 

message: I made this userbox for me and for people whos favorite character is the loveable android Data...

	This user  hearts  Data!
HasBeenCorrected 06:43, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Data Userbox 

message: A recent edit has changed the tenses from present to past, e.g. "Data is a character" to "Data was a character". I know Data is now destroyed but should that change the tense for the whole article? Personally I would still use the present tense, as he still is a character in the series. That also brings up the question of whether all Star Trek: Enterprise characters (etc.) should be referred to in the past tense as they would all be dead by the 'current' Star Trek date of the 24th century! What do others think? Marky1981 17:08, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: What you said - he's still a character. A person doesn't have to be alive in the continuity to be a character. TaintedMustard 14:48, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  'After death' tense 

message: I was disappointed to note the article mentions Data graduated Academy, but omits the year (2278?).  (And to think, I just saw his appearance in the "Riker's dreams" episode a few days ago.  Ah, well...)--squadfifteen, 15/11/05
:I know, I think the graduation 'year' Data mentioned in the the first part of the TNG pilot episode was before they (he) established the common year 2364 in "The Neutral Zone", which was also before Riker's near-death 'vision' quest in the 'mediocre' "Shades of Grey".  There have been been fandom explanations that "class of '78" means something other than year, like the number in a specific class or other cryptic identifier.  (And before you ask why I can handily mention episode names/details: I'm a fan, and have 'elephantiasis' of the brain ... though a life as well.) :)  There you go!  E Pluribus Anthony 04:28, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Graduation 

message: There were some links at the bottom of the page that were frankly disgusting (see also: mildly entertaining flash movies which really had little to contribute to an honest bio of Data, or anyone else for that matter).  I deleted them for taste's sake. -Nonregistered User (EDIT: ...and then they reappeared, and then I deleted them again.  To restate, they add nothing to the actual entry and I guarantee I'll remove them on every occasion I remember to care.  Also I'm no longer 'nonregistered'.  Feh.)--Bombfish 07:09, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  small edit. 

message: Why is Data said to be male? He is an android...
:Because he's technically "equipped" to be male, as the whole makin'-it-with-Yar thing apparently proved.  His daughter Lal was also female after being converted from her prototypical android form, which was seen first - THAT form was androgynous (i.e. sexless).  Even without (ahem) 'equipment', his appearance and generally masculine voice would suggest male secondary sexual characteristics, so there's really not any room left for interpretation as to his gender, whether biological or mechanical.   TKarrde 23:40, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Add to that the fact that the other characters refer to him with masculine pronounces like "he" and "his", rather than "it" and "its".  Regardless of whether or not you want to debate philosophically about which "human" terminology should and shouldn't be used in reference to the character, it's obvious that in that time, on that ship, he's considered to be male for any necessary purposes. - Ugliness Man 14:43, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe he was intended to be male, modeled after a younger Noonien Soong. I believe they first mention this during the episode "Datalore", I seem to recall someone saying he was modeled after the doctor in his youth. I may not be correct, so take it with a grain of sodium chloride. ;) --Defunctzombie 00:28, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Male? 

message: I've nominated this as a good article. Now that I'm thinking about it though, it might be missing a "Data in popular culture" or somesuch section. Perhaps there's something that can be said on Data's affect on scifi or popular culture in general. Did Data influence the creation of other characters? Also, is anyone else interested in trying to improve this to Feature standard? It'd be pretty cool to see Data on the main page. --Fang Aili 18:06, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll take a crack at it. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 21:58, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good article nominee 

message: I want to comment on a few things, to whomever might be interested. In general, I think this is a wonderful article. I also sense that it has the potential to become a featured article with a bit more textual content, research, and some visual aids.
I think that the stability of this section (or, at the very least, the editing and monitoring) is fantastic. It seems that, unlike some of the other wiki articles I've come across, good ideas and good prose are maintained within the article. I don't see any of the 'erosion' which is so typical @ wikipedia. On the other hand, I also have noticed that what isn't good or what needs a rewrite is taken care of.
I find reading through the article (as an admitted Star Trek fan, so YMMV) to be enjoyable. Like I said earlier, it could use a bit more depthful content -- perhaps I'll contribute -- but, in general, the article is informative and it paces well.
A particular mention: the discussion of Data's specifications, and then the comparison to modern day computing capacities is fantastic. I even appreciate the speculation as to the implications of the emerging convergence between what was seen in the 1980s as 'hi tech' and what is available now in the early 21st century.
Just wanted to share this. I would encourage anyone who is reading this to please take the time to continue to refine the article and then submit it for possible featured article status. It definitely needs work, but the kernel is there.
Good luck!
:On behalf of all those who've contributed to the article, thanks for the feedback! :) --Dante Alighieri | Talk 23:54, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ditto; more to come! E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 23:56, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just wanted to wander on by and complement w./ a bit of a critique 

message: Is it true that Data cannot use contractions? Is this something that was more important in earlier episodes than later episodes? 151.203.178.253 00:53, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contractions 

message: This is just me nitpicking, but if anyone has a chance the entire article should probably be reworked into the literary present.  What I mean is... characters in art "are" always in existence in the present, with the exception of every single version of the thing being erased.  Data "is" an android because I can always turn on the scifi channel and see him doing things still. --Torourkeus 22:16, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Me Nitpicking Like a Punk - Literary Present 

message: The section on Data's relationships shows a picture of spot, but does not talk about Spot.  Does Spot have her own article?  (We know Spot is female as she had a litter in the seven season.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Will Pittenger (talk • contribs) 
:Indeed, there is Spot (Star Trek). --Fang Aili talk 18:41, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spot needs to be mentioned in the Relationships section 

message: This article mentions Data's family several times, in some places using scare quotes to indicate that he is (clearly) not biologically related to Dr. Soong, Lore, etc. Other times, there are no quotation marks. This ought to be consistent throughout - which should it be? I say don't use them, but that's just my take on what looks right to me. 149.43.x.x 05:30, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Father" vs Father 

message: In The Best of Both Worlds, Picard as Locutus looks over Data and comments that he is a "...primitive artificial lifeform...". However, in Descent, Lore states that the Borg regard himself and Data as "perfect" lifeforms. Seeing as the Borg wish to become the most advanced creatures both technologically and physically (Star Trek First Contact), Data and Lore could be viewed as analogous to Species 8472, the apex of their type of organism. Rajrajmarley 22:07, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: just a nitpick but Data and Lore arent Organisms but nice point71.131.12.205 05:58, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems clear to me that "type of organism" refers to Species 8472, not Data and Lore. Furthermore, based on precident set in Starfleet rulings, Data (and consequently Lore as well) is a life form, and has enough complexity as a life form to be considered an organism, in as much as it makes sense being fiction and all. Cheeser1 07:00, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Okay awesome I get it now the their type through me off and I also agree that data and lore have been classified sentient life forms just not the organisms part but I am no expert. Anyways I get it now I was just a bit thrown by the phrasing and now I'm gonna shut up before I make myself sound stupider (too late)  71.131.12.205 19:34, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Standpoint with the Borg 

message: There are two things not mentioned in this article but I think aught to be mentioned, and that is Data's relationship with Sherlockholmes on the holodeck, and his love to play that multiple layered chess.
SHUT 08:49, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Data and Sherlockholmes 

message: This article seems to have an over-abundance of pictures. Perhaps a few of them could be removed? SpinyMcSpleen 16:46, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures in the article 

message: I’ve put in an RfC to see if we can attract more editors to this discussion.  The discussion is about how much content should be in the articles from a “scholarly” out-of-universe view and how much should be stated from the character’s “in-universe” history.   Dreadstar † 01:02, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  RFC 

message: I notice that Spot (Star Trek) redirects here but the article
currently does not mention Spot by name.  This seems inconsistent.
--208.76.104.133 (talk) 00:52, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spot 

message: It is missing vital info on the role his character plays as a whole -- eliciting human emotion despite his lack of emotions, i.e. pathos. It merits more than a sentence as it is one of his character's central theme. The 'character arc' section could be significantly reduced and written from an out-of-universe perspective, concentrating on plot significant to character development, such as his exploration of relationships, various almost displays of emotion, and more description of his overall  rather than a series of things he did.
I would be happy to do this, but I have no secondary sources to back up my opinion on the plot devices etc. so I guess it would count as original research. Unless, of course, everyone agreed with me, which I can't see happening in a hurry. Does anyone have any secondary sources describing Data's character?
The piece is littered with primary sources and the opinions of Brent Spiner and as such it already does not stand up to wikipedia's specs on articles, so i am tempted to update it to out-of-universe perspective anyway. Does anyone have any radical opinions/argumants against me doing this?
Info151. 10 April 08.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Info151 (talk • contribs) 19:05, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Out of Universe perspective 

message: Is it in the film or the television show in which we learn whether Data is bisexual or not?  Moreover, such a fact might reveal some of the facts about the the nature vs. nurture argument occuring amongst the human species.  -- Teetotaler 26 September, 2008  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.67.81.197 (talk) 07:38, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sexuality 

message: In the Spot section, Data's death is mentioned.  Why wasn't it explained/explored in the main article?98.24.122.5 (talk) 03:51, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Death? 

message: Since Data and Lore are, in a sense, identical twins, doesn't Data count as a fictional twin? Smijes08 (talk) 01:14, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fictional twin 

message: How about a section on Data's education and professional positions. For instance I know he was at StarFleet Academy from the books, and was Lucasian Professor  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vk2tds (talk • contribs) 05:20, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Education 

message: Using another wiki for references isn't within the WP policy (but I can't find it for the life of me).  Guy M | Talk  21:01, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: I've restored the infobox reference to Data being the 1701-E CO in the Countdown comics. (I believe the comic makes a passing explanation of how Data is somehow "restored.") A minor bit of licensed material, but licensed nevertheless. The Wikiproject page, and several talk-page discussions, clearly explain that Wikipedia's coverage is not limited to canon content. Hope this clears things up for the folks add/removing this bit of detail. --EEMIV (talk) 13:50, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That's insane.  I don't question mentioning it somewhere, but having it in the infobox without directly saying "this is from a comic book" leaves the distinct impression with the reader that it was from an actual movie/episode.  Nowhere does the rest of the article mention comics or books.  If they're not mentioned in the article, then including them in the infobox makes no sense whatsoever. --B (talk) 13:55, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:SOFIXIT. --EEMIV (talk) 14:16, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

text: Actually, you're incorrect: it looks like the article has had for a while a reference to the Countdown comic and Data's position in it. --EEMIV (talk) 14:17, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed, the infobox now says inline that he was only first officer and captain in the comics and the ref gives further explanation for users who may need further information.  That should resolve the issue of confusion and provide information about his non-canonical life.  (Technically, I suppose, all of his life was non-canonical since in the obscenity that came out last year, they hit a reset button and declared all of Star Trek never happened.) --B (talk) 14:26, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Countdown comic 

message: Wasn't Data promoted to Commander after Riker get's married in Star Trek: Nemesis? Rlinfinity (talk) 21:43, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No. --EEMIV (talk) 01:58, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rank? 

message: Hi all
Can I suggest a few changes ?
The Depiction section could be changed to "Life" or "Career" or some such title. THe Charateristics could be broken down into sub-sections such as "Character", "Abilities" and "Emotions" or some such titles. This would greatly improve the section and remove the potted lists aspect. The article is getting very confused as it seems there are a few repetitions of the same material and I think a lot could be moved from Depiction to Characteristics as these are separate things
It should be more like a BLP than as it is lol
Chaosdruid (talk) 04:05, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible fixes 

message: In the "Spot" section on the page, the following phrase exists:
:(The poem was actually written by Clay Dale, the visual effects artist)
There's no citation at all on this, and the text was added by an anon December 2006 to the "Spot (Star Trek)" page before it was pseudo-merged here.  While this bit of information may be true, what is the source for this, and how has it lasted this long without anyone questioning it until now? -- 130.15.49.33 (talk) 20:46, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ode to Spot author 

message: So happy to have stumbled across whomever edited it... I rofl'd  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.62.165.160 (talk) 17:27, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Portrayed By Dora The Explorer

message: Not encyclopaedic at all.  Overly fanboyish.129.139.1.69 (talk) 19:16, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Way too "in universe" 

message: It may add context to compare Data's 800 quadrillion bits of storage and 60 trillion operations per second to today's modern computer systems. These number still surpass personal computers by about 1000 times in speed, and 50,000 times in storage capacity.  However, todays server farms exceed the storage by perhaps 10-100 times and the fastest super computer (around 10.5 petaflops sustained as of November, 2011) is around 175 times faster.  (Data does have about 500 times the storage capacity of this one supercomputer that's 175 times faster, The "K computer", SPARC64 VIIIfx 2.0GHz, Tofu interconnect)  Gatortpk (talk) 05:58, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Data's Storage and Speed presently surpassed 

message: There is currently citation that points to another WP article to support the claim about Data's computational abilities. It is wrong to use WP as a source, and is clearly stated in WP:RS policy. Using a cite like this is against the current WP policy. And more, the cited link does not even mention anything about the claim. To properly cite the claim an WP:RS must be used, from an external site.
If you want to use the linked WP page as an informative link then you need to clearly state that it is mentioned that episode and not make it look like a reliable cite that confirms the claim.
Because of WP:3RR I won't risk undoing this wrong cite yet again, but I hope that you can understand that the reference is being used improperly and needs to be undone and replaced with a proper source for the claim.
And yes, I've seen the episode and it does make such a statements but that is nowhere near a reliable source by just saying I know it to be true. HumphreyW (talk) 02:54, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The fact in question is, as you acknowledge, taken straight from dialogue. As the IP editor(s) and I told you in the edit history, the episode itself serves as the reliable source. That's the whole point of WP:TVPLOT (and related MOS articles like WP:FILMPLOT; that's why the plot summary for, say, Star Wars does not need any citations). In such cases, when there is a citation and/or episode-article wikilink, they are to 1) state what episode serves as the source, and 2) as a convenient way for the curious to read about the episode. That's it. The article on the episode does not, and is not meant to, serve as the cite for anything. Ylee (talk) 05:34, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

text: I am the person who made this citation. Ylee has already explained it in what I believe to be clear terms, but just to make sure no doubt remains: Wikipedia is not being used as a source here.  The citation is of the episode itself - which is, in fact, the primary source of the material in question.  The included link to the Wikipedia article on that episode is merely convenience.  Incidentally, you may note that other citations on this page (and lots of other pages) are of this same form: Citations of the primary source, with convenient links to the Wikipedia article on the page. 69.118.138.104 (talk) 02:57, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Using Wikipedia as a citation source for Data's computational abilities 

message: The New American Oxford Dictionary defines self-awareness as: "conscious knowledge of one's own character, feelings, motives, and desires." 
It defines sentient as: "able to perceive or feel things." 
Two recurring themes of the series were: 1) Data's knowledge of his existence and actions, and his reflection on these. 2) Data's quest for emotional experience. 
Data was therefore definitively self-aware, and he was striving for sentience (whether he ever achieved it, or always had it, is perhaps debatable). 
The writers (and therefore the in-universe characters) commonly confused the two terms, but that doesn't mean we should. Startswithj (talk) 23:24, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Sentient" / "Self-Aware" 

message: Mr. Data clearly knows every aspects of how to operate the ship and deals with a wide variety of space and terrestrial phenomenon; I think he should he listed under every appropriate category, fictional chemist, physicist, painter, linguist, engineer, musician, geologist, meteorologist; I'm sure physically he's capable of martial arts but he never demonstrates that skill unlike multiple sciences. CensoredScribe (talk) 01:06, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: No. Categories should only be the most relevant to the article.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 13:25, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should Mr. Data be listed as under every fictional scientific profession category? 

message: "The episode "In Theory" traces Data's literary roots to Isaac Asimov's and Philip K. Dick's exploration of the nature of artificial intelligence and the nature of reality and humanity. The episode reflects the ideas created in such works as The Bicentennial Man and Asimov's Robot series (which introduced the Three Laws of Robotics)."
In what way does the episode reference Asimov and/ or Dick? Missing the reference for that. 95.91.186.16 (talk) 12:15, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Asimov/ Dick 

message: Data's storage capacity of "800 quadrillion bits" was converted only into pebibytes (PiB) instead of petabytes (PB), which is an infinitely easier conversion, more relevant, and more familiar to the majority of people.  Since there are 8 bits in a byte, and 1 quadrillion bytes in a petabyte... it's easy enough to just convert to 100 PB.  I didn't remove the original "88.81784197 PiB", but simply added petabytes.
Bzzzing (talk) 21:50, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pebibytes?  Why?