Talk:Cardassian

Physiology: "Resistance" Statement is in Error
To me the following paragraph seems just plain wrong: "Compared to other species, the Cardassians have a very strong resistance to the effects of alcohol, depressants and anesthetics. One Cardassian was able to down more than two bottles of kanar without being affected, and was even injected with 30 ccs of triptacederine without consequence, despite the fact that a dose of that magnitude would be enough to put an Algorian mammoth to sleep."

First and most importantly, the point of showing Garak's unsuccessful attempts to anesthetize himself in with Kanar and then an anesthetic was not that Cardassian central nervous systems (CNS) are more resistant to alcohol and anesthesia--the point was to show what extreme pain he was experiencing. The more pain one is in, the more pain reliever one can take before passing out. Cancer patients, for example, may be placed on opiates to be taken on a schedule, be given shorter-acting opiates if they start to feel pain, plus be given a quick-acting opiate (in lollipop form, believe it or not) for sharp episodes of breakthrough pain. Someone not in pain would conk out with a half-dose of the scheduled opiate--and there's no reason to believe that if he were not in excrutiating pain, Garak (and other Cardassians) wouldn't, too. Cancer patients whose pain keeps them conscious despite heavy narcotics could still die from respiratory failure if they take more than what the palliative medicine doctor prescribes; that's what Dr. Bashir was worried about.

Second, the reference to an Algorian mammoth was hyperbole, not "fact." One would have to be an extreme literalist to think the intention of Dr. Bashir's statement was that 30 cc's was the standard veterinarian dose; anyone who has ever sat in a literature class should know the point of the comparison was that Garak took a "large" dose, not that Cardassians can literally withstand anesthesia doses that an Algorian mammoth can't.

I would suggest that the paragraph be deleted altogether from this article. If it were to be corrected, it would clearly refer to Garak's situation in and would no longer express anything unique about Cardassians as opposed to humans and other humanoids. MultiplePOV 20:38, 2 May 2008 (UTC)


 * User:Thot Prad added it last July 9th. SennySix 06:07, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Top quote
"I don't like Cardassians - they're mean and arrogant!" - Quark (DS9: "Behind the Lines")

Doesn't this say more about Quark's feelings at a particular moment in a particular situation than it is a summation of Cardassians? After all, Quark is also madly in love with a Cardassian and friendly with others on occasion. A separate section citing other's views of Cardassians would be a more appropriate place to use this. MultiplePOV 04:08, 4 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree and removed the quote accordingly. It's not a particularly memorable quote IMO anyway. I think a small section on viewpoints of Cardassians would be a good addition. As as start, we could mention the following viewpoints:


 * Bajorans, as a subject species, in particular Kira
 * Miles O'Brien, as a human who was involved in the Federation-Cardassian War -, , et al.
 * Quark, as an entrepreneur in Cardassian space - the Beginning of the DW arc, as well as flashbacks in and
 * The Dominion, as their "partners" - Weyoun, the Female Founder (shouldn't be too long considering the article already details D/Carassian relations in History)


 * How's that sound? – Cleanse 04:42, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Are Cardassians Synapsids?
Cardassians are described in the article as 'reptilian', but are they in fact a Synapsid species? Synapsids are also known as 'mammal-like reptiles' (extinct on Earth), and this seems to describe Cardassian physiology quite well. They are certainly different from Sauropsid species (Gorn, Xindi-Reptillians, or for that matter Lizards and Crocodilians). Now, IIRC, there is nothing in canon that directly states that they are reptiles of any kind (althought I think several people described them as 'cold-blooded' several times). They also have hair on their heads, which would be unusual for a reptillian species.– 86.168.116.203 03:00, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I think it would be folly to overly describe them and try to place them in Earth evolution levels that have not been stated in canon. Reptiles are described living off Earth. Past that, pushing our luck. --OuroborosCobra talk 03:08, 18 March 2009 (UTC)


 * The ridges hint at reptillian heritage. Also, the spoon design on the forehead resembles the 3rd eye on Iguanas. My Iguana has prominent ridges around his eyes.

Female Pygmentation
I believe the blue coloration on female Cardassians should be regarded as cosmetic. There are examples of female Cardassians without it; Asha doesn't have it, neither does Jil Orra. While Jil is a young child, and perhaps the blue coloration doesn't appear until they grow up, Asha is a young teen, and there's not even a hint of it there. Mika's baby and Tora Ziyal are hybrids, but Tora is an adult and doesn't have a hint of the coloration either; while the rest of her Cardassians features are pretty strong. Should we say something about this in the article? MaGnUs 06:42, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * It's a background note at most - the only thing that can be said in the article is along the lines of "Female cardassians have been shown to have a blue spot in their forehead spoon"... &mdash; Morder (talk) 06:43, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * How about mentioning the fact that some of them don't have it?MaGnUs 08:25, 8 August 2009 (UTC)


 * It's an oversight, like the original Trill and Bajoran makeup in particular. I'd say leave it out. -O'BrienTheCoolGuy


 * Yes, it is not significant. Perhaps they are different races of Cardassians.--31dot 09:18, December 19, 2009 (UTC)


 * I think you could draw an analogy to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bindi_%28decoration%29. Since DS9 makes so many obvious references to religion throughout the work, it seems logical that this was another reference to Earth traditions. Of course, the Cardassians seem to be thoroughly atheistic, so it'd be just as well termed a cultural aspect akin to human lip painting. 76.20.238.60 03:10, April 22, 2010 (UTC)

Type II?
There were a large number of new additions in the last 24 hours that I've not come across before, most of which were rewordings of prior material (a lot of which appears speculative) with none of the citations changed. One bit of new information is as follows:


 * The Cardassian Union is a type II Culture. Cardassians are Patrilineal, whether they are also patrilocal is unknown.

Where is this information from? The article claims that it is cited from, but I don't recall any conversation about "type II", patrilineal", and patrilocal" stuff coming up... -- sulfur 13:04, December 31, 2009 (UTC)


 * Doesn't sound familar to me. Don't even know what those terms mean.--31dot 13:28, December 31, 2009 (UTC)


 * "Type II" probably refers to the, meaning a civilization that manages to control the energy output of whole solar systems, but not yet whole galaxies. I'm not aware of any Trek reference to this. -- Cid Highwind 13:57, December 31, 2009 (UTC)


 * I just noticed this remark myself and thought it sounded rather odd. Indeed, if you think about it they would not be considered a Type II civilization, since nobody in Star Trek (except perhaps the Borg) has advanced to the point where they can harness every last bit of energy that comes out of a solar system. Should this line be removed? (The patrilineal part could probably stay since Cardassian last names do seem to be passed down from the father's side, but patrilocal isn't in my dictionary...anybody know what it means? :-)) -Mdettweiler 22:22, March 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * Found something at Wikipedia: . Not sure how (and if) any of that applies, so I'm just going to be bold and remove the quoted sentence from the article. Let's see some better sources before moving it back. -- Cid Highwind 22:29, March 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * I've done a bit of thinking about this - the only references I remember are the Dyson Sphere in TNG (Type II), and the location of the Borg transwarp hub, which looks like it uses either a star, artificial black hole, some kind of contained supernova, or some other such piece of Treknobabble. I'm guessing (if true) that would either be Type II or something sort of between II and III.  Jswitte (talk) 19:09, November 20, 2012 (UTC)

Past tense?
Why are we referring to Cardassians in the past tense? They were not completely annihilated during the Dominion War. There were survivors. As far as canon goes, they are not an extinct species. Let's not jump to conclusions. 184.91.205.141 02:03, September 3, 2010 (UTC)spacebunny


 * It's a (slightly odd) Memory Alpha convention. Everything is written as if from the perspective of someone living long after the "present" seen in Star Trek TV and films.  The explanation and rationale are here, if you're interested. —Josiah Rowe 02:39, September 3, 2010 (UTC)

Lifespan
Shouldn't we mention that Cardassians seem to have a longer lifespan than most races, despite it being almost thirty years, dukat didn't look any different to how he did during the ocurpation, just a thought. --General MGD 109 19:47, September 9, 2011 (UTC)


 * We shouldn't unless there is some hard statistic or statement to hang our hat on- Dukat's appearance could be for any number of reasons.--31dot 20:03, September 9, 2011 (UTC)

Naming
Should there be something mentioning the similarity between Cardassians and Bajorans with their names? Both seem to use their family name as prominent unless interacting with someone close. For example, we didn't know Garak's first name was Elim until well into ds9's second season. If the similarity isn't necessary to be noted, it should be noted for the Cardassians alone in this article. --Jaguartalon 07:54, November 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't think that's true with Bajorans, at least any more than it is with any other species/culture. With a few Cardassians we don't know if the name used for them is their first or last name (such as Mila or Ari) and we, as well as Bashir, didn't know Garak was his last name until we were told that by Enabran Tain.  So I'm not sure we should generalize based on a few examples.--31dot 09:45, November 27, 2011 (UTC)

losses in Dominion War
The end of the article states 1 billion Cardassians died during the last few hours of the Dominion War. The cited figure in "What You Leave Behind", on MA, and in other works refer to 800 million. This is the first time I've read of "1 billion". Is there another canon or background source for this, like an episode script or an interview? Thanks! 74.69.127.200 17:59, February 7, 2012 (UTC)

Cardassian Wars
I would like to point out that, while Cardassians did manage to stalemate Federation, it is implied that Federation's involvement in Cardassian Wars was half-hearted (most people in Federation didn't even really notice there was a war) while Cardassians were being driven to bankrupcy.


 * I'm not entirely clear on what you're asking here. 31dot 21:24, April 14, 2012 (UTC)

Cardassian Bones
In Way of the Warrior Bashir mentions that the Klingons broke seven of Garak's transverse ribs and fractured his clavicle. I think that something about their skeletal structure could be added.

Speaking of ribs, a transverse rib is not a medical term, but an architectural term related to roof supports in vaulted roofs. For example; This could give us a bit of an idea of what Cardassian ribcages were like.