Talk:Trill (planet)

Needs attention
This article practically contains no information. Depending on the amount of information that exists about "Trill", this article is either incomplete or needs to be reformatted (removing unnecessary sections). -- Cid Highwind 16:57, 2005 Jan 23 (CET)

The Membership Question
I don't see any evidence that Trill is a member of the Federation. We only know of 3 trill ever in Starfleet, and Dr. Crusher hadn't even heard of them.
 * That is being discussed. See - Talk:Trill. Tyrant 03:14, 20 May 2005 (UTC)Tyrant

I think since the statement is non-canonical it should be removed.
 * See the Trill species talk page for more discussion on this. Logan 5 02:46, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)


 * Someone on Talk:Trill brought up what I think is the key point: if Trill is not a member of the Federation, why would Klaestron IV be able to extradite Dax using Klaestron's extradition treaty with the Federation? - Montrealais


 * Even if Trill was not a Federation member, Dax (as a Starfleet officer) would probably still fall under Federation jurisdiction. -- Cid Highwind 10:12, 23 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I really don't think a government could extradite another government's national just because it employs her. The fact that nobody ever even mentions that Trill would have a separate jurisdiction over Dax, despite that they were looking for any possible excuse to delay extradition, seems to me to indicate pretty incontrovertibly that Trill is a Federation member. - Montrealais


 * We actually know of not 3, but 6 Trill in Starfleet; Curzon, Jadzia, Ezri, Kell Perim, this guy, and this guy. I think that while it wasn't stated, it was the intent of the writers/producers.  What we should do with that in hand is really a question of our canon policy. Jaz  talk |undefined 20:00, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Also, there was another Trill woman that served on the Enterprise-E. Interesting fact in the conversation I don't think has been noted: "Verad once worked as the communications clerk of the Federation consulate on Khefka IV..." (Verad Dax) Trill have worked as Federation Ambassadors, and work at consulates of the Federation? Not hard core, but that seems to push the conversation in the direction even more. - AJ Halliwell 03:34, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Deep underground
What episode serves as reference for the historical bit saying the humanoids were forced underground and that's how joining came about? It isn't clear from the article and I don't recall this being mentioned on screen. Logan 5 13:37, 22 Aug 2005 (UTC)


 * Neither do I. Jaf 03:22, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)Jaf

I belive it was said in. Mainphramephreak 07:49, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Status during the Dominion War
In the Star Trek Star Charts, Trill is listed as being in the Kalandra sector. In the DS9 episode In the Pale Moonlight, it is noted that the Dominion launched an attack in Betazed from the Kalandra sector. If Trill is in this sector, it stands to reason that Trill was attacked or at least under threat. The latter would seem more likely as the USS Destiny was dispatched to Trill to return the Dax symbiont in Image in the Sand

Sea color
I removed the "Trill's seas are purple" bit because it seems like a hasty conclusion in light of Past Tense Part 1. As I recall, she says only "The seas could use more purple" or something very close to that. Given the context, she could be reminiscing about any other world she called "home." Combine that with the view of Trill from space, in which the seas don't appear at all purple.  Gonk  ( Gonk! ) 01:53, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
 * One of her previous hosts could have been colorblind and the seas, therefore, looked purplish to her...now without that hosts eyes she's no longer color blind...anyway, yeah, I agree with you. -Morder 02:27, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Admittedly, the image from space is contradictory - but T'Pol mentioned in how the sky on Vulcan was occasionally blue. So perhaps the sea on Trill is blue with occasionally hints of purple? Either way, Bashir's no-place-like-home comment implies something should at least be mentioned in the article, with a background comment on the contradiction. - AJ Halliwell 03:26, 14 June 2009 (UTC)