Talk:Federation outposts

Not outposts
These have been removed from the list because they are not strictly outposts. They probably need to be moved to an appropriate list or article.


 * (Subspace) communications
 * Corado I Transmitter Array
 * Epsilon IX Monitoring Station
 * MIDAS array
 * Relay Station 47
 * Starship maintenance
 * Remmler Array
 * Surplus depot
 * Surplus Depot Z15

-- Harry 12:28, 8 Jan 2005 (CET)

Non-Federation
established Outposts 1 through 8 as "Earth" outposts, not Federation. Unless someone has a citation to information otherwise, they should be removed from this article. Aholland 03:01, 12 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Do we really need to cite that Earth is a member of the Federation? Lets see, every episode of TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY, all ten movies, ENT: Shockwave Pt II, The Xindi, Carpenter Street, Storm Front, and These are the Voyages.  Satisfied? Jaz talk]] 06:36, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

I obviously did not explain myself well; sorry. The point is that the outposts are the responsibility of Earth, not the Federation. Had the outposts been Federation-run in even the 23rd Century, Spock and Kirk would have referred to them as "Starfleet Outposts" or "Federation Outposts" or simply "Outposts". Instead, they consistently state that they are "Earth" outposts. There is absolutely no reason to do that unless they are NOT Federation. It was not a slip of the tongue, not a single mistake, and not inconsistent with the idea that Earth still exists and, while a member of the Federation, is not subordinate in all things to the Federation. They can be manned by Starfleet but "owned" by Earth; nothing wrong with that. In fact, there is some question whether "Commander" Hanson is even Starfleet. He has no rank, his uniform is a slightly different material than normal Starfleet, and the only other place the uniform shows up is in "Arena" at (drumroll) an "Earth observation outpost". So my sole point here is that the episode establishes the Romulan Neutral Zone outposts as being "Earth" outposts, not "Federation" outposts. Their being listed in the article as otherwise strikes me as incorrect. Aholland 13:55, 12 March 2006 (UTC)


 * That would seem to imply that Earth is not part of the Federation, which, should be noted, was hardly, if at all, established at that point in Trek lore. I think that needs to be taken into account when analyzing this. --Alan DelBeccio 14:05, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Why would that need to imply that Earth is not part of the Federation? We speak of - for example - "Vulcan laws" not "Federation laws" even though Vulcan is a member planet. Because they are unique to and solely of Vulcan. Why can't Earth have things unique to Earth and solely of Earth? Doesn't fidelity to the episode as aired require this? Aholland 14:11, 12 March 2006 (UTC)


 * ...yet you somehow overlooked the other part of my comment that still deserves attention...the Federation wasn't even established at that point in Trek lore. In fact, reference to "the Federation" wasn't even uttered until, several episodes later, so obviously everything up to that point was "Earth this and Earth that." Even then, there were still later references to UESPA. I think the later reference to Federation Outpost 23 along the Zone was a indication/recognition of the expansion of that list of Neutral Zone outposts by the 24th century. --Alan DelBeccio 14:27, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

From a production standpoint you may be correct. The concept of the Federation was first introduced in spoken dialogue, I think, in "Arena". Yet even "Arena" also has "Earth observation outposts". Our task here at Memory Alpha is not to fudge the data to create a perceived coherency; it is to report what is in the episodes. Reporting that Item A is "actually" Item B because we think that makes things neater is simply outside the scope of the site and belongs solely to a background section here and fanon elsewhere. We don't, for example, dismiss "lithium" merely because of later uses of "dilithium", or"laser weapon" because of later uses of "phaser". And we shouldn't do so here either if the desire is to remain true to the episodes. Although by the 24th century the outposts may have been turned over to the Feds (I would want the citation for it, though), it is clear from the only available evidence yet brought up that in 2266 the outposts were Earth outposts. If there isn't any contradictory evidence, the article should be changed accordingly. Aholland 14:42, 12 March 2006 (UTC)


 * (Written while Aholland posted his reply... :) ) That is the established "behind-the-scenes" reason, but it still is "Earth outpost" as in "Earth-Romulan War". If we assume that "Earth" means "Federation" in one case, should we assume the same in every case? I don't think so - although I think that these outposts might be kept on this list if we just add a small note clarifying that they were indeed called "Earth" outposts... -- Cid Highwind 14:44, 12 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I would be okay with Cid's suggestion; it preserves the data but allows aggregation into one article. Aholland 14:47, 12 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm surprised no one mentioned this (although Cid came close), but in this case, in terms of canon, it could be said that they were called "Earth outposts" because they were established by Earth prior to the founding of the Federation, which is when the Earth-Romulan War ended (according to current data). But, yeah... Cid's suggestion sounds fine with me. I'm not really sure where I was going with this, just thought I'd point it out. :P --From Andoria with Love 15:05, 12 March 2006 (UTC)


 * In response, and with regards to Ahollands initial comment on this topic, established that the USS Enterprise (NCC-1701) was an "Earth" (specifically United Earth) starship, not Federation, meaning that the Enterprise is the responsibility of Earth, not the Federation. Had the Enterprise been Federation-run in even the 23rd Century, Kirk would have referred to it as "Starfleet ship" or "Federation ship" or simply "ship". Instead, it is twice inferred that the Enterprise is an "Earth" ship. There is absolutely no reason to do that unless they are NOT Federation. It was not a slip of the tongue, not a single mistake, and not inconsistent with the idea that Earth still exists and, while a member of the Federation, is not subordinate in all things to the Federation. As this was essentially Ahollands stance from the beginning, his point now seems somewhat moot, as it appears that the Enterprise itself, at one time, also falls into the same nomenclature as these "Earth" outposts do. --Alan del Beccio 20:09, 14 October 2006 (UTC)