User talk:Cleanse/Archive 3

The Enemy Within
Hi there, I don't understand was was supposedly wrong with my entry. --Captain Wiesel 12:13, 13 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi. On MA we have decided against noting trivial errors in background information. See MA:NIT for more details. The whole section on that page really needs to be cleaned out in that regard; it seems to have been written awhile ago. It's just hard to enforce consistency on 700+ episode pages ;-). Hope this helps.– Cleanse 13:31, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick answer. And you're right: This section should be cleaned if production errors etc. are not part of the background information. --Captain Wiesel 15:59, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

The Trials of O'Brien
I must say that I love your selection there. Especially that last entry. What a great picture too... :) &mdash; Morder 06:33, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Lol, just messing around. Gotta thank Shran and Jörg for that brilliant cap. ;-)  – Cleanse 06:57, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

New sidebar
You're an admin and awake, so I'll run this past you, since 31dot and Morder are out for the night. Do I need approval to make a new sidebar template, as per the discussion on Forum:Holograms vs. Fictional characters, for fictional characters, code here, seen here. I was hoping to get to the pages in question tonight, since my last edit of most of them was to add the hologram sidebar, which is incorrect, it seems. So is there any issue with me just creating this sidebar and getting down to it? - Archduk3 06:44, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * That looks fine to me. I actually made Template:Sidebar hologram lol, and no one objected. ;-) One minor suggestion: "Portrayed by" shouldn't be in italics; the italics for "Played by" is just to show that that field is real-world.– Cleanse 06:49, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Categorizing templates
Could you add to the Imagelicensing template, I do not have access. Thanks. - Archduk3:talk 00:48, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Done.– Cleanse 00:52, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again. If you know of templates that were missed, let me know. - Archduk3:talk 00:54, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Klingon Spelling
I can understand staying with the script, but should the correct spelling at least be mentioned? I mean nIb'poH is pronounced differently than nIbpoH, and it is grammatically incorrect.  '  is a letter in Klingon, not a silent seperater (which would be fine to use if it was spelled out phonetically, which it wasn't as the capitalization was accurate). I am 98% sure that you knew most of this already. I just think it is worth a mention (especially since the writers would just thumb through the dictionary and shove syllables together :) ). Of course, you've been doing this way longer than I, and your opinion means much. Would a mention detract or contribute? Would it violate standing policies? -- El Payaso Malo 99.36.205.22 04:17, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * The problem is that none of the rules of the Klingon language were seen on screen and that they are therefore non-canon. Rather than place these notes on the individual pages (such as Déjà vu), it would probably be better to add it to the Klingonese section as an example of how the writers departed from the dictionary (something like "They misused the letter  ' , such as in nIb'poH")– Cleanse 04:33, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I must confess I don't actually know any Klingon myself, but another thing to keep in mind is that for all we know there are various dialects and accepted spellings in the Empire. and  vary in spelling and grammar in several ways after all.– Cleanse 04:47, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * "They misused the letter  ' , such as in nIb'poH" - sounds like a nitpick to me :) &mdash; Morder (talk) 05:01, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Eh, maybe "misuse" wasn't the right word. After all, how the writers spell it is what it is canonically. ;-) But I was thinking it would be beneficial to keep the list of differences between Okrand's version and what was on-screen. Looking again, I think nIb'poH would fall under the first dot point there.– Cleanse 05:09, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

I just feel that it should be mentioned, is all. Somewhere. I will give the writers this, though: this word is more accurate than most of the others. They didn't even try to put a K there (which Klingon does not have). Usually, they just put whatever letter or sound they want, even if Klingon does not represent it, and Okrand has to make it fit later. Example: Worf. Klingon does not have an F sound, and you almost never have two consonants next to each other in the same syllable in a proper noun; usually each syllable is a vowel between two consonants (you will see this broken occasionally, as in targh or  jay' , but it is almost unheard of in proper nouns). Plus, you never have a syllable start with a vowel. Ever. The only exception is the suffix -oy. To make "Worf" fit, Okrand used wo'rIv. That means "Worf" is used by Worf simply so non-Klingons can say his name with little trouble. My point is they would just throw sounds together (which the writers admit is laziness on their part, which gives Okrand a challenge, so I assume he doesn't mind much). As far as Klingon having various dialects, most planets (including Earth) have ended up using one form of one language out of convenience and the others fall into antiquity. It is mentioned on screen that Klingon has several (eight) dialects (in Enterprise by Sato, I think), but one is obviously more common than the others (at least it's safe to infer from onscreen spoken Klingon) and the same sounds are used. Even the dictionary mention that there are eight words for forehead, depending on which regional dialect you speak (the other dialects seem rare and to differ very little from the more common one). -- El Payaso Malo 99.191.163.162 03:44, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

This is somewhat relevent, but I was wondering if it would be a good thing to mention when a Klingon name in a show or film means something in tlhIngan Hol, even in the "apocrypha" section, because such meanings are probably intended in most cases. For example, vagh means five, pagh means nothing or zero, bortaS means revenge'', etcetera. -- El Payaso Malo 99.30.247.13 05:42, September 10, 2009 (UTC)


 * Since it comes from a licensed source, yes, it would be fair game for the apocrypha section. And the and  already have such notes. :-) – Cleanse 10:54, September 10, 2009 (UTC)

That's sounds fair. Some articles that are Klingon related have the tlhIngan Hol Okrand transliteration (ala English Wikipedia displaying the names of articles that are nonanglophonic in origin in the source language in parentheses), but not all. Would it be fair to add the ones that are absent if they have been presented from a tlhIngan Hol canon source? There are transliterations for non Klingon related places and people available from Okrand (but only things that a Klingon would care to mention in dialogue), like Kirk, Jeanluq Picard, Organia, Denebian Slime Devil; but I'm refering specifically to Klingon related articles, like House of Mogh, Kargan, Duras, Kronos, Khitomer, Klingon Empire, Pipius Claw; etcetera. It would keep the articles a tad more uniform, and I'd rather add those that are missing than remove those that are present, and add them as Okrand presents them (as personal transliteration for encyclopedic purposes is almost universally discouraged). What do you think? -- El Payaso Malo 99.30.247.13 01:39, September 14, 2009 (UTC)


 * Are you suggesting having something like on Kor (Where the page reads: "Kor, son of Rynar (tlhIngan Hol: qor)")?.


 * If so, I think that's actually incorrect. Such information (unless it is incorporated into canon somehow) should be formatted as a background/apocrypha note (in the appropriate section, or by using Template:bginfo). If you do it that way, I see no problem with it. Just note which source the transliteration comes from.– Cleanse 03:00, September 17, 2009 (UTC)

note to self
on rewrites of various third season eps incl. – Cleanse 10:42, October 13, 2009 (UTC)

Thank you
Thanks for finding that citation for Journey's End. I thought I'd seen that before but couldn't remember where. :) --31dot 12:17, October 21, 2009 (UTC)


 * No problem. :-) – Cleanse 12:23, October 21, 2009 (UTC)

Australian Trek fan club magazine
Do you have any chance to find out which issue this could be or maybe could take a look at this issue? See this note for the information. – Tom 20:22, October 22, 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm afraid I can't help there. I hadn't even heard of such a magazine until now. :-p – Cleanse 11:30, October 23, 2009 (UTC)

Mega Galaxy Class?
I think that deserves an entry on Transphasic Chroniton Torpedoes! --OuroborosCobra talk 06:08, November 1, 2009 (UTC)


 * Not a bad idea at all. ;-) – Cleanse 10:44, November 1, 2009 (UTC)

Sussman
Thanks, I had a feeling it was him but wasn't sure... &mdash; Morder (talk) 00:15, November 7, 2009 (UTC)


 * No probs. I just recalled seeing that one in the history. ;-) – Cleanse 04:58, November 7, 2009 (UTC)

Stargazer
I take it that since we don't have an article on Bedford Falls, that the information wasn't on the Dedication plaque, on screen, and is only from the companion? (Just checking) - Archduk3:talk 01:07, November 25, 2009 (UTC)
 * It seems that the plaque was illegible onscreen - . "Bedford Falls" isn't listed on our page USS Stargazer dedication plaque, but I have no idea where that text comes from (the motto can be cited to several sources though). There's also this comment - - which suggests that the original art is lost somewhere.– Cleanse 02:10, November 25, 2009 (UTC)


 * However, this isn't really my area of Trek obsession, so it'd be great if someone can get to the bottom of this issue. ;-) – Cleanse 02:21, November 25, 2009 (UTC)

I thought it was weird that there were all these references to it and no page. I'll see what I can do with my meager resources. - Archduk3:talk 02:37, November 25, 2009 (UTC)

Dark Page
Just joshing around with Shran - I was hoping he'd see it before someone else reverted though :) &mdash; Morder (talk) 07:16, December 6, 2009 (UTC)


 * Thought'd be something like that. ;-) – Cleanse 07:30, December 6, 2009 (UTC)