Talk:Borg Queen

Stuff
Be sure to include that the Borg's worst defeat was in Endgame. (although that may go on Borg page)(and also "her majesty's" photo)

You know what would really be neat? Photo's of every different Borg Queen (Allice Kridge, Susannah Thompson, etc..) in one side-bar. You could compare them. -- Redge 14:09, 25 Jul 2004 (CEST)
 * There have only been two borg queen actresses. --Gvsualan 02:07, 7 Mar 2005 (GMT)

Unless we count Lanya (Kellie Waymire), heh. Tyrant 02:30, 7 Mar 2005 (GMT)Tyrant

Which actor is in the pic? Tyrant 22:55, 6 Mar 2005 (GMT)Tyrant
 * Well if the picture title is correct "BorgQueen2373", I'm sure you can figure it out ;) --Gvsualan 02:07, 7 Mar 2005 (GMT)

the queen's conciousness lives in the network itself. a personafication of the collective consciousness. destroying any one of the queen will not harm the collective, as long as there is still any part of the collective in existence.

Isn't the Borg Queen Kobali? She certainly looks like one, and it could provide a clue as to the Borg's origins, as the Kobali are basically all reanimated corpses.


 * She may well be, but I personally don't think so. Since this is never stated or implied, nothing here will say anything about that. Also, how would the Kobali's being reanimated corpses explain the origins of the Borg? -Platypus Man | Talk 22:41, 23 Sep 2005 (UTC)


 * because the kobalis' reanimation technology closely paralells borg assimiliation...


 * however..i dont think that the kobali point to the origin of the borg so much as the other way around.. but i am convinced that the two species must be somehow connected ..not only are their "reproduction" methods similar..but they also share the same pallid skin tone too...

pna-incomplete
Needs info on the "Unimatrix Zero" episodes.--T smitts 06:23, 19 Jul 2005 (UTC)

It appears that the single-queen idea is only an assumption
I am still researching this but there appears to be nothing stating that there is only one single instance of Borg Queen, at any given time. It is an assumption. If anyone else here has any clues as to where something like that might be stated in canon, please feel free to speak up. Cannons go "BOOM"! 02:52, 12 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * Not sure it has been stated, but if it was it would have most likely been in Dark Frontier. However, we also can't assume there are multiple Queens without direct statement.  So if anything more ambiguous wording might be the best solution. Logan 5 03:20, 12 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * Okay, well it's already on the list for review and yes I am up early :( Cannons go "BOOM"! 03:37, 12 Oct 2005 (UTC)


 * The use of *the* in The Queen and the comparisons to insect colonies seems to lean towards there being one. Jaf 03:27, 12 Oct 2005 (UTC)Jaf
 * If I talk about "the" ant then I am speaking of a single instance out of many possible. Ergo, even the semantics are ambiguous and misleading. This is what I am getting at here Cannons go "BOOM"! 03:37, 12 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * That would be fine if the "the" was only used in the presence of an entity, however, that is not the case. Take Muse (episode) for example, in which the queen is refered to as "the" in her absence. Jaf 15:49, 6 June 2006 (UTC)Jaf

Just an idea like that(it may even not bet pertinent to this forum) but, is it possible that the borg collective, like a beehive can create a new queen by feeding a larva with "royal jelly", can create a new borg queen by infusing a set of programming in a drone, when needed? This would be an elegant solution to the "appearance" of a new queen from time to time?70.80.1.155

Wouldn't only one queen mean that if she died, then the whole race would be gone? (We saw in First Contact that killing the queen kills off the drones simultaniously.) Then, wouldn't the queen that Picard and Data killed would have killed off all the other Borg in the universe, or does it just apply to those on the ship? I'm not too sure about timelines, but if Picard/Janeway killed off the queen, then the other wouldn't have encountered the borg later, who would have died without their leader. On the other hand, the death of a queen would only imply the loss of all drones under her jurisdiction. Therefore, it only makes sense that there are more than one queen... --Kitsune H 11:49, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Although I know most videogames are not considered "cannon" sources, in Star Trek: Legends, they refer to the Hive having multiple queens, each used as a kind of central processing unit. The way I took it was kind of like a higher form of Vinculum (no idea if I spelled that correctly) in humanoid shape.

i always assumed that those borg died because the plasma coolant got them too but it has been a while since i watched first contact81.108.233.59 14:44, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

I just reviewed Dark Frontier
It is definitely obvious that the Borg Queen travels and is not rooted to her Unicomplex (or does not have to be). However, the Borg Queen, at the transwarp hub, being directly connected to all the interspatial manifolds, cannot travel. In addition, from EndGame, there is good evidence to suggest that each transwarp hub requires it's own Queen for smooth operations. From this, we have grounds to make the case that there are multiple Queens and that Borg Queen may be only a type of Borg, a rare type, but only a type. Major Pita 13:45, 12 Oct 2005 (UTC)


 * I am the first, the beginning, the end, the one that is many. I am the Borg.


 * To me it seems obvious that the Borg Queen was meant to be a personification of the whole collective, not an individual that controls it or parts of it. If we want to speculate, this could of course mean that the collective could choose any number of representations (=queens) at the same time - but we try to avoid speculation here. -- Cid Highwind 13:54, 12 Oct 2005 (UTC)


 * Agree with Cid here. As noted on the Talk:Unicomplex page,
 * However, the Borg Queen, at the transwarp hub, being directly connected to all the interspatial manifolds, cannot travel. In addition, from EndGame, there is good evidence to suggest that each transwarp hub requires it's own Queen for smooth operations. From this, we have grounds to make the case that there are multiple Queens' is speculation unless there is direct statement to say as much.
 * I don't recall any mention that she could not travel, nor that "directly connected" to the interspatial manifolds means "physically connected". All borg are "directly connected" to the Collective, even if they are not "physically connected" all the time.  I'm also not sure what "good evidence" we have for the one-hub/one-Queen idea since good evidence usually means a script reference. Logan 5 14:03, 12 Oct 2005 (UTC)

(re:Logan) Good evidence is not limited to scripts only. Visual effects are also canon. Assumptions regarding there being only one instance of Queen are also not supported in script or canon, that I can find, anywhere. Ergo, neither will I accept that limitation. Major Pita 14:20, 12 Oct 2005 (UTC)

(re:Cid) First, I really want to know where that quote is from ;) However, it is absolutely clear that that is the voice of the collective, speaking for the collective and not the Borg Queen. To assume a single queen is also rampant speculation. In fact it is less supported than the Borg Queen as type of Borg theory. Logically, having a Nexus/Queen type makes sense to operate large complexes or specific types of complex construct, like a transwarp hub. It is also consistant with Borg psychology that there is never a 'single' of anything, they despise uniqueness and destroy it by assimilation and replication. They are not going to have a single unique Queen. However, the latter is speculation, as is the assumption that there exists only one single instance of Borg Queen. Major Pita 14:20, 12 Oct 2005 (UTC)


 * The quote is from First Contact. Re-reading the article, it doesn't even state that there's "only one" queen. What exactly are we discussing about? :) -- Cid Highwind 14:33, 12 Oct 2005 (UTC)


 * (re:Slamlander) True, on screen visuals do count. But lack of direct evidence for one or the other calls for an ambiguous note on the article, not a hard statement thatt there are multiple, or only one. Also, as noted below, there is no quote saying there is only one queen in the article so I'm not sure what the debate is about.
 * All of what you have noted below in response to Cid is part of the big Borg debate that's been going on since First Contact, but it's all speculation. It may be logical inside a certain theory of the Borg, but it's not canon. Logan 5 14:45, 12 Oct 2005 (UTC)


 * I've never seen Endgame, but I've seen First Contact, and I think it's safe to say the only reason the Borg Queen would appear at all after she already died is because the Borg are the most popular villain in Trek history. The fact is she was intended to be a single person in First Contact, but like all of the good Batman villains in the moviese, they killed her off. Any evidence suggesting one thing or another about multiple queens is one of those continuity errors (like the Klingon make-up prior to the "Augment" BS) they figure the fans can come up with their own explanations for. Maybe I'm out in left field, but that's how I see it. --Schrei 15:18, 12 Oct 2005 (UTC)

You may indeed have the truth of it here but I'll be satisfied to just get to the evidence the have in End Game. That is what any future ST stories are going to use, after all. BTW, I just finished End Game. Major Pita 15:26, 12 Oct 2005 (UTC)

(re:Cid) Quoteing from the page in question, The Borg Queen (played by Alice Krige and Susanna Thompson) is a single entity that exists as a nexus of the Borg Collective. (emphasis mine). I'm perfectly willing to leave it ambiguous. However, I'm not willing to leave it even emplied that there is only a single Borg Queen instance. Major Pita 15:26, 12 Oct 2005 (UTC)


 * Well, every Borg Queen we saw was a "single entity" (vs. "the collective" of the Borg), right? -- Cid Highwind 15:35, 12 Oct 2005 (UTC)
 * ;P Even you, making that argument, don't believe it. That's not how it parses and that's not what it says, and it certainly implies that there is only one Queen. Be careful not to byte on that tongue in your cheek ;P Major Pita 12:06, 13 Oct 2005 (UTC)


 * Right. Single entity in this case means a distinct aspect of the collective not "one and only one".  A Borg entity can be in both mulitple physical locations and in a single location, just as the collective is housed within every drone and a single drone at the same time.  But if the consensus is really that this is confusing I'd say just strike single and say "entity". 65.166.218.250 19:21, 12 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Riddle me this; While it is possible that the Borg Queen may travel and remain connected to all the interspatial manifolds of all the transwarp hubs (EndGame)this presents a problem; In First Contact, there was a Queen on the Borg vessel that went into the past. Even trasnwarp communications do not cross time. Therefore, the Borg were cut off from their Queen while she was out of the timeline. There had to be more than one Queen at the time of the Battle of Sector 001. Major Pita 22:34, 13 Oct 2005 (UTC)


 * Could be one "being" with many bodies, not unlike the rest of her people. But, lets not forget that she accused Picard/Data (not sure which) of thinking three dimensionally when he couldn't figure her out, so lets not get all full of ourselves and think we are going to conclude this on a talk page, it was obviously written with the concept of not being fully understood by humans in mind and as it was written by humans.... well. : ) Jaf 22:55, 13 Oct 2005 (UTC)Jaf

That almost sounds like a fundie christian argument ;) The Borg are not gods and if they could communicate across time then the ST universe has a serious problem. Yes, I have been considering the one-mind:many-bodies view all along. This is consistent with a Queen as type of Borg approach and is exactly the point that I'm trying to make. Major Pita 23:04, 13 Oct 2005 (UTC)


 * (re:Slamlander) If the Borg Queen is merely a representation of the whole collective, as was implied in FC, then there isn't any necessity for one Queen per *hub or *matrix or *whatever, or a second Queen while the first one is timetravelling or incinerating in orbit around Sol III... -- Cid Highwind 23:11, 13 Oct 2005 (UTC)

I have a problem with the implications in FC. It is the only tape I have that isn't in the original English. It's in French and I'm not sure that I trust the translator, especially with American directors watching over them (What defines an American? ans: Those who only speak one language ). So, I can't check the Premiere Contact very well (dubbed movies suxors! Original voicetrack with subtitles is much better). Major Pita 23:20, 13 Oct 2005 (UTC)


 * Perhaps you should try to find a version that you can check, in that case? It would make this discussion so much easier... -- Cid Highwind 14:06, 14 Oct 2005 (UTC)

I just reviewed my version of FC. There are some surprising revelations that I missed the last few times I watched it. Suffice it to say, we are both wrong. I am going to stay my consensus call. As stated earlier, I only have First Contact in French. However, language subtelties are not going to be an issue. The evidence is quite clear, Borg cannot operate without a Queen, period. In FC, all the Borg Drones collapsed and/or ceased to function the moment the Borg Queen died. While this does not have much supporting dialog, it is absolutely clear from watching the film and is the main reason that Picard survived and why they were able to regain control of the Enterprise ... it is absolutely clear Drones cannot function, as Borg, without a Queen closely linked and online!

There was a Queen on the Borg vessel that went into the past. Even transwarp communications do not cross time. Therefore, the Borg (of 2073) were cut off from their Queen while she was out of the timeline. They continued to function because they already had another Queen online. In the time period that they arrived (2063), that Queen was the only Queen in communications distance. This is why she told Data I am the Borg, normally it's We are the Borg. Had there been another Queen online, I suspect that it would have been "we".

Now I agree that there is still more research that needs to be done here. There are exactly two documented instances of long-time Borg Drones being removed from the Collective, one is Seven of Nine and the other is Hugh. Picard's de-borgifacation isn't documented. I am looking into those for more clues. If it is indeed substantiated that Drones are dependent on Queens then we definitely have a strong argument against there being only a single Queen.

At the moment, the evidence seems to support the idea that there are many Queens operating in a matrix otherwise the Borg would have become seriously dysfunctional after yet five years later in  they appeared altogether too healthy. Major Pita 07:34, 16 Oct 2005 (UTC)


 * Well, hate to burst your bubble, but... In the Enterprise episode the Borg that are revived in the past after having been frozen in the Arctic Circle were perfectly capable of functioning and even assimilating individuals and they were certainly not in contact with the Queen.  The Borg who died immediately after the Queen died in FC could just have easily died not because they couldn't live without her but because of some feedback, etc from being so close to her when she died.  But especially given the evidence from Regeneration, I don't think your speculation for multiple Queens based on their quick deaths holds up.
 * Moreover, the idea that the Borg would become dysfunctional after FC without "multiple" Queens is not substantially more supported than the notion that as soon as one Queen dies, she is replaced by another. Just as in an insect colony.  If the Queen in FC, or in Endgame for that matter, were replaced nearly immediately by another drone that was elevated or created as a Queen at the instant of her death, there would be no need for multiple Queens active at the same time.
 * Basically what it comes down to is that we've only seen or heard of one queen at a time, anything else is speculation. Ambiguity is still called for, not a definite "there is only one" nor a definite "nexus of Queens". Logan 5 02:54, 17 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Now you have me at a disadvantage as I must confess that have never seen an Enterprise episode nor do I have any tapes or DVDs. :( Major Pita 11:57, 17 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Basically, i have seen entire Voyager series and not the actual film, but its some interesting points in the Voyager series, too. First, its only mentioned one queen, and that she is with unimatrix 1 in the nexus, but its talk of several of those, without elaboration. Secondly, i dont think 7of9 really knew anything about the queen really, she probably never knew "top secret" high hiarchy stuff about borgs, and the queen have attempted recruiting lots of secondary independent borgs, and has been known to depose old secondaries, too. 7of9s parents found one older former independent borg, so that is NOT an borg queen recruitment. 7of9 say in episode "collective" drones who get disconnected from borg is supposed to deactivate themself, but many drones has been known to not do so, including those encountered in that episode. It it looks like the queen is the major weakness about borg, If she is destroyed or nexus harmed, borgs loose contact, and kills themself. If all collective depended on one queen, the entire collective could be destroyed if an supernova destroyed her hub, who is known to not be true. Its one odd question more connected, do borgs depend on queen or nexus as highest rank in the hiarchy? The episode "collective" sugest an borg cube severed from collective would destroy it self, and since collective is alive in Voyager series, it seems it is some backup in some vay, secondary bodies of the one queen, or more queens. Psyonic 11:03, 20 Oct 2005 (UTC)

i thought those borg died because of the plasma coolant getting them too but i havent watched first contact in a while81.108.233.59 14:50, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

In Endgame, Admiral Janeway goes to the unicomplex to destroy the Borg Queen, because the queen controls the transwarp hub, and without her they would have adapted to Voyager's new weapons. If there was more then one borg queen operating at one time, Voyager would not have been able to destroy the transwarp hub, because a different queen would have began controlling it immediately.Icecreamdif 02:24, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Consensus call
I submit that we are at a form of impass. Equally, I think that there is no more evidence supporting a single Borg Queen than there is evidence supporting more than one Borg Queen. Rather than imply either one, I suggest that the article be corrected to either clearly state the ambiguity or that Starfleet Intelligence report on the various possibilities. In either case, the current article should not stand as-is. Major Pita 06:36, 14 Oct 2005 (UTC)

I sugest doing it simple, stating its not known if its one or more queens. Psyonic 11:20, 20 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Assimilation chronology
While researching the Borg Queen I ran into some inconsistencies concerning the desire to assimilate Earth. The first try was in 2367, known as the Battle of Wolf 359, here it was clearly stated that the Borg desire was to assimilate Earth, attempt #1. In 2373 the Borg tried again, known as the Battle of Sector 001, to assimilate Earth in the past, attempt #2. However, in 2375 the Borg Queen stated to Seven of Nine that the first attempt to assimilate Earth failed. Now, being in 2375 and knowing that there was only one attempt made to assimilate Earth it raises the question what about 2367 and 2373 ? If you look at the known evidence their would be cleary 2 attempts made, so the Queen is wrong. Or would it simply be a glitch of the screenwriters ? -- Q 14:57, 10 Dec 2005 (UTC)


 * Could just be a glitch with the writers. However... does the Queen actually say to Seven that the next attempt would be the 2nd? Does she say that there had not been any other attempts in between? Or simply that the first attempt failed.--149.135.12.24 12:38, 1 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Indeed, it is most likely an error on the writers' part. If she only mentions 'the first attempt', then it's likely an error, especially since the Battle of Sector 001 was almost a success (and most likely would've been if the USS Enterprise (NCC-1701-E) didn't intervene). - Enzo Aquarius 13:13, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Alien Influence
The Borg Queen looks quite similar to the Supreme Leader from Captain EO (a picture of the queen can be found here). Perhaps it was an influence on the design of the Borg Queen... ? --Defiant | Talk 23:57, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Apparently, Brannon Braga confirms that theory here. --Defiant | Talk 00:18, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Speculation about "3D-thinking"
I should like to remove the following:
 * In First Contact, when asked by Picard how she'd survived when the cube sent to Earth in 2367 was destroyed, the Queen replied that Picard had become small, thinking in three-dimensional terms. The fourth dimension is temporal, not spatial, so it would suggest that she escaped through some subspace or hyperdimensional technology. The idea of the fourth dimension being a temporal one assumes that the Queen is speaking of Picard's perception of Minkowski spacetime, but the fact is that a dimension can describe any number of things other than time and space. Indeed, a large number of instances - such as those of the Queen - could be seen as making out a dimension of its own, in which case the Queen might have been criticizing Picard's assumption that there was only one instance of her.  Moreover, the suggestion that Picard thinks in but three dimensions may simply be a metaphor for thinking in mundane or otherwise easily graspable terms (indeed, she never suggested that thinking in four or five dimensions was much better).

Some may say that I am nitpicking, but with all the doubt concerning the nature of the Borg Queen it strikes me that speculations such as this one may not be founded on solid enough ground to warrant them a place in this article. --Fraek 20:22, 17 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Saying that the fourth dimension is temporal, and not spatial, is not correct. Typically we do think of 3 spatial dimensions and 1 temporal dimension, however, proposed 4th, 5th, all the way up to about 11th spatial dimensions have been proposed by scientists, and are a major part of quantum physics (along with 1 or occasionally 2 temporal dimensions). It's also theorised that the reason our universe curves in on itself (ie, like a giant game of Asteroids, travel in a straight line long enough and you'll end up back where you started) is that the shape of the universe is the 3 dimensional surface of a 4 dimensional curve, and being 3 dimensional creatures, we simply do not percieve the 4th dimension. Similar to how if you wrapped a 2 dimensional universe onto the surface of a 3 dimensional sphere. So really, if taken literally, the Queen implying 4 (or more) dimensional thinking could either be temporal *or* be higher spatial dimensions. Just so you know :) Marianne 12:13, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * "Saying that the fourth dimension is temporal, and not spatial, is not correct". Well, not in Star Trek, anyway. "if taken literally, the Queen implying 4 (or more) dimensional thinking could either be temporal *or* be higher spatial dimensions. Just so you know :)". Indeed, quite right, especially in a fictional universe that has extra dimensions like "subspace", "fluidic space" and "infinite velocity" (sorry, I know that last one is rejected canon) and so many forms of time travel that a Temporal Prime Directive and cleanup SWAT are required.--TribbleFurSuit 06:50, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Not just the fictional Star Trek universe - I believe current quantum physics puts the count of spatial dimensions at something between 11 and 13 (I can't exactly remember), even if we can only directly percieve or measure 3 of them. Marianne 19:54, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Just wanted to lend my support that the next dimension after the first three (spatial) dimensions is not necessarily time. --Cepstrum 12:48, October 3, 2010 (UTC)

about legacy; queen
didn't the recent game Legacy establish that she was a Romulan science officer?
 * I have not played it, but I seriously doubt it. --OuroborosCobra talk 07:48, 10 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't think that games are Canon. And, don't forget that there are multiple queens, so maybe that queen might have been. --Kitsune H 11:50, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Removed text: speculation
I removed the following speculation from the background section:


 * One explanation, using an idea from Computer Science Fault Tolerance methods, could be that there is only ever one active Queen who acts as a figurehead and is the sole physical outlet of the hive mind, but that several spares exist as well, stored in multiple places. The decentralized hive mind has a timer, which is activated when the hive mind falls out of contact with the Queen. If the Queen does not resume contact before the time runs out, it is assumed that the Queen is dead, and one of the spare queens is activated. It can also be conceived that the Queen serves to give the collective purpose.  Another explanation could be that the body of the Queen is merely a puppet, while the intelligence that controls it is a mind formed from having all the drones in the Collective connected together, much like neurons in a humanoid brain.

and


 * The use of multiple actresses to portray the Borg Queen could be meant to show that her appearance is merely that of any number of specially equipped Borg queens. These drones could simply be vessels for the hive mind in situations where the outward image of a leader is needed.  For all we know, multiple "Queens" could be operating simultaneously throughout the galaxy, just like multiple queen bees control the population of bees on Earth.  There may even be one or more of these drones stored on each cube, just in case (also like it works in beehives where new queen bees keep being bred).

-- Renegade54 05:50, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The origin of a Borg Queen has always been unclear. It could be that she was created by the Borg Collective to serve as a representative, such as when Jean-Luc Picard was assimilated and chosen to speak for them (as Locutus) in order to facilitate their introduction into Human-like cultures. An alternate theory is that the Borg Queen was originally the first Borg, constantly replaced with a similar drone when destroyed, but this, like the previous theory, is purely speculation. What is certain is that she had full control over the Borg Collective and was able to command every Borg drone throughout it. To disconnect a drone from the Hive mind or destroy a Borg vessel required merely a thought from the Queen. The full might of the Borg Collective was at her disposal. When a drone was disconnected from the Hive mind and Borg Collective the Queen was still able to contact it when the drone in question was regenerating in an alcove.
 * Removed speculation. &mdash; Morder 19:57, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

the queen that never dies
Could it be that her real humaniod self is hidden deep in the borg collective with her electronic memory passed though concidering in First contact when her flesh was removed it revied that her cranium and spinal cord was metal robotic parts, not from any normal organic compounds? it could be possable she is only a copy of the orginal, and the orgianal would be heavely guarded most likely at thier organic orgin or homeoworld.


 * I disagree, Cpt. Picard oviously destroyes the remains of the skull and spinal cord, her facial and organic remains destroyed by biosolving gasses. And with description it claims that the death of the queen had no effect to the hive, i also disagree: The queen was kind of a taskmaster, tactician that gave tactical decisions to the hivemind. She could redirect the effords of the hive to better solve the task, othervice it would continue its original mission: seek out quality targets and assimilate em. Queen could state, "take this first, it has more value".--JHawx 10:41,November 23, 2009 (UTC)

Alternate history
Someone added a fanboyish "alternate history" section to explain the existence of the Borg Queen. Since it doesn't belong in the article (as per our ), I have placed it here for your reading pleasure. --From Andoria with Love 05:32, 2 April 2007 (UTC)


 * This alternative explanation is presented without removing the previous entry, although it flatly contradicts it in several ways.


 * The Borg Queen is the physical embodiment of the Borg Collective. She is similar (in many respects) to a painting or sculpture of a deity.  A deity is not a "being" per se, and therefore could not be accurately represented thus.  However, the representation is made in order to give individuals a reference point, something to pray to.  The Queen only exists to serve as a reference point, someone to talk to, when negotiations with the Collective as a whole are required.  Even then, the Collective will often negotiate as the disembodied entity it truly is without providing the comfort of a face to others.  In one case, the Collective even created a specific drone to serve in negotiations with humans (Locutus), presumably because the Collective did not feel humanity warranted the intervention of the Queen.    It would be incorrect to describe her as controlling the collective (or any drone within the Collective) as that implies she is separate from the Collective.  When asked "Do you control the Collective?"  She responded "You imply disparity where none exists.  I am the Collective." (First Contact)  The Queen could be considered to have no origin as humans consider the term.  She was born with the Collective.  She seems to control the collective in several cases, however in reality what is seen is a representation of the Collective reacting to stimuli.  The Collective has no single "controller" or "leader."  It simply "is." 


 * The Queen is known to have been destroyed several times. However, the Queen is timeless and immortal so long as the Collective remains intact.  The death of her corporeal vessel merely prompts the construction of another (if warranted).

Speculations
I'm actually surprised to see what happened to this Article. Its sad really. Its all about the speculations there are about the borg queen and not about the borg queen herself. Why not just tell what IS known about the queen instead of telling a Non-canon story about what fans think the queen MIGHT be?

I know this article doesn't belong to anyone, but i think its been edited in the wrong way and the article i had created is a much more realistic explanation of the borg queen Lionhead 10th April 2007
 * I'm not sure what you are talking about. Fully 2/3s of the article is the canon section, which is based on what we DO know about her. There is a somewhat large background section, but certainly not the majority of the article. --OuroborosCobra talk 14:43, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * mmm, as far as I can tell only the first paragraph contains some speculation about her origin. (some of that is derived from canon info but nonetheless speculation) So I think more than 2/3s is canon. All in all it is a complete article as it is now -- Q 17:12, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I know, but the one thing that bugs me is saying "A" borg queen, instead of "the". We all know her as "The" borg queen, the speculation that there are more of them is non-canon as in the shows they also call her "The" borg queen and only the existance of 1 is confirmed(the fact she is played by 2 different actresses it totally irrelevant). Also the sentences continue referring to "Her" instead of "Them", so its not correct. -Lionhead 14:17 15 April 2007 (GMT +1)

What about the Hansens?
In 2356, the Hansens were aware of a Queen. So, the section of this article called "First Encounter" is wrong to state that "The existence of a Borg Queen was first established in 2373 when...". 68.121.165.204 06:08, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
 * You're correct in this. I have added this to the article. -- Q 20:31, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

- I disagree, hansens only suspected there was a queen, but could not proof this. i could theorize borg queen is a male, that does not still make it so.--JHawx 10:42, November 23, 2009 (UTC)

POV
"The existence of a Borg Queen was first established in 2373..." This seems like a Federation POV.Ddeschw 22:54, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Indeed, and since Memory Alpha is written primarily from Federation POV as a Federation database, one would expect that. --OuroborosCobra talk 00:14, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I misunderstood. I thought the POV was from the perspective of someone omniscient and outside of the events of Star Trek. Ddeschw 20:48, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

One Queen
There's only one Borg Queen. The only reason people are speculating there is more than one, is because 2 actress played the role. That's like saying Sam had 2 different husbands, both named Darrin. Same character, different actors. Note: Alice Krige revised the role in the Voyager Series finally. That was important enough to get the real deal for. The most intelligent thing stated here about the Queen was:

''The Borg Queen is the physical embodiment of the Borg Collective. She is similar (in many respects) to a painting or sculpture of a deity. A deity is not a "being" per se, and therefore could not be accurately represented thus. However, the representation is made in order to give individuals a reference point, something to pray to. The Queen only exists to serve as a reference point, someone to talk to, when negotiations with the Collective as a whole are required. Even then, the Collective will often negotiate as the disembodied entity it truly is without providing the comfort of a face to others. In one case, the Collective even created a specific drone to serve in negotiations with humans (Locutus), presumably because the Collective did not feel humanity warranted the intervention of the Queen. (TNG: "The Best of Both Worlds", "The Best of Both Worlds, Part II") It would be incorrect to describe her as controlling the collective (or any drone within the Collective) as that implies she is separate from the Collective. When asked "Do you control the Collective?" She responded "You imply disparity where none exists. I am the Collective." (First Contact) The Queen could be considered to have no origin as humans consider the term. She was born with the Collective. She seems to control the collective in several cases, however in reality what is seen is a representation of the Collective reacting to stimuli. The Collective has no single "controller" or "leader." It simply "is." The Queen is known to have been destroyed several times. However, the Queen is timeless and immortal so long as the Collective remains intact. The death of her corporeal vessel merely prompts the construction of another (if warranted).''

Well I would argue that point and make it more like there are literally two types of Collective. The normal 'Borg Collective' and the higher 'Queen Collective' I don't know whether it's true or not, but the Queen could have a 'knowledge collective' with every Cube, Sphere, etc has a Queen that can access the same info, meaning every Queen we've met is an original that has access to all info other Queens have had.

There have to be at least 2 Borg queens.
Why? Because we saw one DIE, and then saw another one being formed. So it makes perfect sense to refer to her as "a Borg Queen" rather than "the Borg Queen". Whether they exist simultaneously, or are technically the same individual, is irrelevant. Commodore Sixty-Four (talk) 20:45, 12 February 2009 (UTC)


 * That said, the current use of "a Borg Queen" not only sounds wrong, but is inconsistent with what is actually used in canon, They are always referred to as "the Borg Queen". And isn't canon more important than grammar? Commodore Sixty-Four (talk) 09:09, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm throwing this out on the stoop to see if the cat licks it up; If you look at Endgame closely, you note that Admiral Janeway travels -back- to the Unicomplex via the trans-warp hub. The Queen isn't actually -at- the trans-warp hub itself. She's way, way, back in the Delta Quadrant. So, unless I'm wrong, by infecting the Queen at the unicomplex (which the Queen can be quoted as her stated location) the unicomplex blows up -along with- the trans-warp hub that is half way across the Delta Quadrant, -implying- the Borg are eliminated all together.

What this has to do with the idea of multiple queens (at the same time) or just one at a time (and thus as it relates to the above mentioned "there have to be at least two borg queens") is simple; The queen wasn't regulating the spatial manifolds -from- the trans-warp hub itself. She was doing that from the Unicomplex. It was stated that of all the Borg's tactical advantages that the hub was, perhaps, the most significant. If there were going to be -multiple- queens at once it is logical to assume there would've been one -stationed- at the Hub. There wasn't. Because the unicomplex blew up in addition to the trans-warp hub I surmise that the collective was eliminated in spite of Janeway's "Just enough to bring chaos to order."

The multiple/singular Queen at any given moment argument I can still see another side to based on pure lack of anything "harder" than what I have. I think it was obvious to everyone that, physically, more than one Queen exists. The debate was weather or not they existed at the same moment in time. But to me the debate over weather or not the hive survived Endgame was never really a question. So what am I missing?

--24.113.223.154 14:33, 10 April 2009 (UTC)AgentProxy--24.113.223.154 14:33, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Species 125
Assuming that a new queen is "activated" to replace a missing/deceased one, is it right to assume that every Borg Queen resembles Species 125. The queen from the episode could simply mean that she specifically (that individual who was assimilated and eventually became the Borg Queen) was a once a member of Species 125. (besides, it does seem unusual to have the one more or less in charge of the Borg Collective resemble a much later species, rather than "species 1". But then again, the Ferengi having such a low number compared to humans doesn't make any sense either.) Vern4760 08:19, March 9, 2010 (UTC)

One Queen
- Could it be possible that the borg queens identity is stored in the colectives mind and that the queens body is only a body. That way if her body is wasted she can get a new one and just control the new body. This would explain why the queen is still alive after being killed so many times. Futher proof when asked by Picard how she had survived when the cube sent to Earth in 2367 was destroyed, the Queen only replied that Picard had become small, thinking in three-dimensional terms --Kevmlb93 18:43, June 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * Sure, it's possible, but there's no on-screen evidence to indicate so. It's ambiguous at best. -Angry Future Romulan 19:24, June 30, 2010 (UTC)

Recent Unregistered Changes
There is no reason for the article to be changed. The deletions (see history) seem to be of personal preference - which is not a good enough reason to remove them.Obey the Fist!! 20:55, September 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * There *is* a fair amount of speculation on the page. I added some incites as well as cleaned it up a bit. Any time you see a phrase such as "some fans say" (which fans? me and my best friend Billy?) or any other such weasel words, you have a potential problem. -- Renegade54 21:38, September 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree that the "many fans felt" sentence is problematic, and should probably be removed. The "taskmaster" clause also seems to me to be an individual interpretation of the Borg Queen's role; "brings order to chaos", although vague, is at least canonical.  I don't remember the Borg Queen ever being referred to as a "taskmaster" on screen. —Josiah Rowe 05:08, October 1, 2010 (UTC)

I agree with you both. My reverts were a kit and kaboodle thing. I didn't like the "some fans say" and the "taskmaster" but frankly, it was easier to change everything back (I'm lazy, I know).Obey the Fist!! 17:18, October 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * I've removed those two bits. —Josiah Rowe 21:59, October 1, 2010 (UTC)