Talk:Starship Enterprise

message: Fellow Treksters: I have an idea that would affect articles about various starships Enterprise. I'd appreciate your input at the WikiProject talk page at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Star_Trek#Dammit._Very_complicated,_head-scratching_idea_to_consider. Thanks! --EEMIV (talk) 01:25, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Input requested: name-change proposal that would affect this article ... marginally

message: I don't think this addition was a good idea. To me, it looks like a whole lot of clutter at the top of the article. Perhaps just one single sentence would do the job better: "The most notable were Captain James T. Kirk's  from the original series, and Captain Jean-Luc Picard's  from Star Trek: The Next Generation." Lwarrenwiki (talk) 22:09, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Lwarrenwiki beat me to the punch; I agree with the assessment above. --EEMIV (talk) 11:36, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

text: I have made the change using the wording proposed.  ~ GB fan 11:53, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I agree, too. After I made the change yesterday I thought it looked like a lot and was a little redundant of the information given below. However, I really would have liked to have been able to comment on this before it was decided there had been a "consensus" in less than 24 hours. That being said, I think "original series" may need some clarification, and the rest of the article still needs help. Your average wiki reader (what do we call regular, wikipedia, non-editing, non-fan users?) may not know what the original series is, and they probably don't want to see the first section on how the Enterprise was developed and created. StarHOG (Talk) 13:47, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: No one said there was consensus.  You made a bold change that was questioned and others agreed that what you added was to much so I made an additional bold change.  ~ GB fan 13:59, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I guess I was a little ruffled by the implication in your edit summary, but you're right, it was unfounded and I apologize. StarHOG (Talk) 14:14, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable ships in the lead? 

message: I'm sorry, StarHOG, I don't mean to single out your edits, but I undid your insertion of sea vessels. They really are not relevant under Starship Enterprise#Depiction, because this article's title limits the section's scope to depictions of starships. A reader isn't coming to this article looking for ships at sea – the title is clear on that. If somebody is looking for watercraft (or "nuclear wessels") named Enterprise, there are pages such as  (a long dab page), just plain Enterprise (an even longer dab page), , and List of ships of the United States Navy named Enterprise. Lwarrenwiki (talk) 15:46, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: That is totally fine. I did a lot of research on what users will land on when doing searches for Enterprise and found that this page is the most likely place a lay-person would end up, so I was trying to add some disambiguation in the article based on putting myself in one of those people's shoes. It is, after all, an encyclopedia with no space limitations so I like to err on the side of too much rather than too little. I inserted the vessels as a single line mostly as a link to these folks if they were interested in historical ships that were also named Enterprise, that our fine lady comes from a long lineage of fine ships that bear that name. But I see you point, it doesn't actually have anything to do with the fictional ships from Star Trek that this article is talking about. It is why I scraped the shuttle, it isn't fictional, or part of the universe, or anything. Just another historical ship named Enterprise and not relevant to this article. StarHOG (Talk) 16:16, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:   I don't share your opinion about deleting the Space Shuttle, but similarly, I see your point. I would have kept it in because it's a spacecraft, but you're entirely correct that it is not a starship either. You made a fair point, not a pointy edit, and I'm OK with that deletion. Lwarrenwiki (talk) 18:26, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  Definitely not, though I can see how it may be interpreted as such. It is why I gave such a long explanation (above). StarHOG (Talk) 19:07, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  could the links you mentioned be put in the "See also" section? Morriswa (Charlotte Allison) (talk) 00:40, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  No place for seafaring vessels 

message: I was looking at this article to see if there was a reference to photon torpedos or energy missles and there isn't any. In fast, this article totally lacks any kind of description of what the Enterprise....well...IS. We should probably create a section that describes the common features of what a starship is. StarHOG (Talk) 14:23, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Description of ship 

message: I wonder about the statement  it was... an active participant in the Battle of Sector 001 and the Dominion War" in the Enterprise E section. On screen the ship (nor any Sovereign Class starship for that matter) was never seen participating in the Dominion War as depicted in Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. I think it was in books, but as these are generally not considered to always be canonical, I am not sure that it helps to include it - indeed  I worry that it may make the casual reader think the Enterprise E did battle with the Dominion in a film or appear in DS9.  Dunarc (talk) 22:50, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Enterprise E - Dominion War claim