Talk:Earth-Romulan War/archive

ENT alternate timeline speculation

Do we already have a page about the theory that ENT is set in a different timeline, which began with the time-incursion of Final Frontier? If we do, we should probably mention it among the Italic paragraph... Redge 14:50, 5 Jun 2004 (CEST)

The theory of Enterprise being in a seperate is a very valid one which is backed up but references to the divergent point in an Enterprise episode itself, ENT: Regneration. Cochrane made a speech taking about the Enterpise E and the fact they had come from the future to prevent a race of cyborgs from conquering mankind. IE: Star Trek First Contact.

During the film Cochrane and Lily were exposed to information about the Federation and Starfleet, which no doubt lead to the name change from the .U.E.S.P.A. to Earth Starfleet in Enterprise. Cochrane also saw the Enterprise E with it's glowing blue nacelles and copied the design into his in progress works.

Thye temporal cold war faction the Sphere Builders saved the Xindi from extintion, (in the prime timeline the Xinid died out rapidly after their homeworld was destroyed) and turned the Xinid's focus against Earth, so it is not beyound the realms of possiblilitly that the temporal cold war had a hand in thespeedy development of the warp 5 program and the modern look and cloaking devices of the Romulan ships, (but that is a matter for another articalea ndebate.

there is also a third timeline that is Enterprise is a predessor to TOs bu the technology and history is modified --Chronitons 22:31, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Nuclear weapons

The fact that "nuclear weapons" were used seems quite unlikely, plus it's hard to believe the Romulans don't even have proper viewscreen technology by the time. But Enterprise doesn't necessarily have to violate established canon, as the Romulan war is at least a couple of years away, and the Romulans haven't been mentioned very often on the entire show... -- Ottens

I changed "nuclear" to "atomic", to quote Spock. "Atomic weapons" do not necessarily have to be based on nuclear fission. Davok 21:09, 23 Oct 2004 (CEST)

what does make you think that "Romulans don't even have proper viewscreen technology" ? Perharps they simply didn't want to use it with human! --rami

Can someone Clarify this for me. How is it possible That the NX Class had Photonic Torpedoes, When in The " Balance of Terror " it Clearly states that the Earth-Romulan War was fought with " Primitive Nuclear Weapons "-Zavier

Any number of possibilities. For all we know, photonic torpedo production we extremely limited, to the point that only 1 or 2 ships could be equipped, while the rest of the fleet still had older spatial torpedoes. We don't tend to think of World War II as a war being fought with nuclear weapons, despite their very limited use at the end of the war. For all we know, photonic torpedoes weren't even used in the Earth-Romulan War, maybe they are all produced in an off-world manufacturing base on an Earth colony, or the moon or something, a target the Romulans could have destroyed in the opening days of the war. The fact is that we really know extremely little about the Earth-Romulan War. --OuroborosCobra ^talk 16:48, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Otten's website

In case anyone wants to know alll that info that User: 152.163.100.9 added came from User:Ottens's website. I've been on the site myself numerous times and it's really interesting. -- Krevaner 19:28, 14 Apr 2005 (EDT)

Thanks for the compliment. ;) The reason why its on my site and not included at MA is because the text is based upon canon, but has non-canon speculation along with it.. These pages are not fully 100% canon and should therefore not be included at MA. ~ Ottens (on a public computer now, and too lazy to log in)

I thought it looked familiar! (I agree that Ottens has some interesting stuff on his page, but that it doesn't belong here at MA.) --Josiah Rowe 11:23, 15 Apr 2005 (EDT)

Unseen 22nd Century Romulans

The remote-controlled Romulan ships seen in "Babel One", "United", and "The Aenar" offer one possible explanation as to how Earth (and possibly the Vulcans, Andorians, and Tellarites) could have fought a war with the Romulans and never have seen their faces. Almost from the beginning (but especially on TNG), the Romulans have had a repuation for being secretive. Plus, given the fact that they're related to Vulcans, they might have feared their enemies being able to developing some sort of biological-based weapon against them based on their similar physiology. Besides which, they might have thought perhaps keeping their appearance a secret might have a psychological advantage. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.76.180.160.

upcoming feature film

In my opinion (that's why its in discussion) the Earth Romulan War- or lack thereof- is what's wrong with Star Trek of late, epically Enterprise. All the canon stuff from before is gone, and they have to just ruin everything. I don't know if we should consider anything that happens in Enterprise canon, just because it is so deviant from every other timeline in the Star Trek Universe. The work done by Masao Okazaki and Bernd Schneider presents a wonderful picture of the Earth-Romulan War that far exceeds what is presented in Enterprise in terms of consistency, imagination and excitement, and should be embraced better by those who do Star Trek in my opinion. I think that it would be a mistake on the part of Star Trek to ignore the Earth-Romulan war, as it is the centrepiece of Twenty-Second Century Star Trek.

Now, see, this is what I really hate... people are just too lazy to try and figure out possible ways to explain apparent continuity errors -- rather than keep an open mind, they instead just go right to complaining or dismissing an episode or show entirely. With that said, I have two things to say in regards to MA policy: Enterprise, regardless of what non-fans may say, is considered canon here at Memory Alpha; and second, the type of discussion the above anon initiated is not what talk pages are for -- they are to discuss the quality/substance of the article in question, not to engage in idle chit-chat and complain how they did or did not like an episode, character, show, etc. --From Andoria with Love 19:20, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)

"Their Ships Are Painted Like Giant Birds of Prey!"

Stiles comment on the appearance of the Romulan fleet during the war is based on first-hand account by his family members that served and unfortunately died during the Earth-Romulan War. He foolishly assumed in his frantic panic-stricken mind, that the ships probably didn't change their appearance in over 100 years. Obviously they came to find that they were different. The 23rd century Birds of Prey weren't painted like giant birds. But he wasn't too far off. There was the symbolic icon of a bird painted on the bottom of the hull. The 22nd century BoPs are not painted at all. Originally I was going to add this comment to the picture on the article showing the 22nd century BoP, but decided against it. I've instead put it in background information along with fan spectulation. AC84 from 23:30, 23 January 2006 (PST)

Rework Needed

There is a lot of good information in this article, but much of it is too conjectural, I believe. Take, for example, this segment:

• "This conflict was a contributing factor in the formation of the United Federation of Planets in 2161, and led to a more than a century of Romulan isolation from Earth and Federation affairs. (Star Trek Generations, TOS: "Balance of Terror")"

"Balance of Terror" never mentions anything about the formation of the Federation, nor does Generations. I propose that the article be revamped to include only canon information in the body (including pictures), with speculation retained within the background area only.Aholland 03:46, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Unless someone objects strongly, I will see if I can redo the article to confine itself to only canon information on the war, with speculation being confined to a Background section. Aholland 11:51, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, please do. :) -- Cid Highwind 11:52, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Done. I hope well. :) Aholland 16:58, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Just one thing. The references should be inline cited and not posted at the end of the article. --Alan del Beccio 17:03, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Okay - I'll do just that. Aholland 17:05, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Date of the War

I believe that the date of the war should be changed back to 2166 in the article. This is the only date actually supported by the series itself. Spock clearly says the conflict took place a century before "Balance of Terror". Not "about a century", or "nearly a century" or "over a century", but "a century". This is the same man who calculates odds to the tenth or hundredth of a percent, so I think he means what he says. If there is any canon that states a different year, or if there is reason to believe that "Balance of Terror" did not take place in 2266, please let me know. Otherwise, I believe it is erroneous and misleading to a reader to give any date other than 2166. Aholland 04:49, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

It's a tough one, I'll give you that. Yes, Spock is painfully precise, but on the other hand, would Earth really engage in a war on its own without the Federation five years after its foundind? Its a tough one. Amazing that seemingly meaningless lines 40 years ago cause such chaos :) Jaz ^{talk | novels} 05:00, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

The newspaper clipping created for, but not seen in, Star Trek Generations states that the Federation was founded after the Romulan war ended. I know the canonicity is extremely challenged elsewhere, but it has been used for articles on Thomas Vanderbilt and T'Jen and others.--Tim Thomason 05:08, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Actually, since we don't know the exact year(s) it was fought, stating it was fought in the "mid-22nd century" is the best way to describe it. Also, while this may not be canon, it should be noted that, according to Manny Coto, had Enterprise been given a fifth season, he would have lead the storyline into the wars. (I wish I had a link with that, but I don't at the moment; I will look around and post it here when I find it.) --From Andoria with Love 05:19, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

I think this is what I was looking for, but it only states that they were going to focus more on the "Romulan threat"... it didn't exactly say they were gonna bring in the war. So, you can basically just ignore everything I said above. :P --From Andoria with Love 06:18, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

So to summarize the bidding: (a) I think it equally plausible that the Earth would prosecute a war on its own if the newly formed Federation didn't want to and Earth felt under attack; (b) there are other things created for, but not included in, Trek movies as well, but that doesn't give them any standing for canon at all (e.g., Kirk's original death scene in Generations); and (c) as long as we can establish the year that "Balance of Terror" took place, we can easily count backwards 100 years, so we do know when it took place based on the episode itself. Unless we change the year for "Balance of Terror", or assume without any rationale that Spock left his penchant for precision in his quarters that day, Spock's line - the only line in the entire series to establish when the war took place, mind you - should be the precedence governing the question at hand. Anything else is, to my mind at least, abandoning actual dialogue that does not conflict with anything seen in the series for a desire wholly outside the series to have the war pre-date the Federation. Respect for canon would, therefore, seem to require 2166. Aholland 06:24, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Aholland has a point. To this day, we still have no canon evidence to suggest whether the wars took place before or after the founding of the Federation -- only speculation and conjecture. However, whether we list the war as occuring "in the mid-22nd century" or "circa 2266" really makes no difference as, essentially, they mean the same thing, at least to me; it's just one speculates a closer date. For the record, even Vulcans tend to round off numbers, as well (see "Awakening" - "Vulcan and Earth have been allies for a hundred years" (actually 92 years at that time)). --From Andoria with Love 06:34, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Shran. I've looked at your user page and agree with your basic philosophy of trying to rationalize inconsistencies where we need to, and your general acceptance of Trek in all its various incarnations. And if I thought there really was no difference to a reader between "mid-century" and a date 16 years after the middle of the century I'd say leave it as it stands. But I would equally object if someone wanted to say that Star Trek premiered on TV in mid-century (it was 1966), that the D-Day invasions of France took place mid-century (it was 1944), or that Nazi Germany signed a treaty with Poland pledging not to attack in in mid-century (it was 1934); each statement significantly misleads the reader. I fully agree that fudging a date a little, or setting it in an "era" is necessary sometimes to maintain a degree of consistency and continuity within and among the various Trek series and movies. But there is nothing anywhere I am aware of - and I did a lot of research on the point - that contradicts 2166, so I say why fudge the date even a little if there is no need? (And point taken that, yes, Vulcans round - and lie! - but Spock's character during that time was such that he was pleased by being more precise than anyone else around him; I see little reason to doubt his attention to detail here.) Aholland 14:58, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

The point is that people (and here that includes Vulcans) generally don't mean 100 years, 0 months, 0 days when they refer to something being "a hundred years ago". We shouldn't go and try to calculate an "exact" date from two less-than-precise statements. I'm not sure, but I think we even had a discussion and decided by consensus to use links to the decade or even century in these cases. -- Cid Highwind 16:12, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, there is such a chat, I just don't remember which talk page it is on at the moment. Jaf 16:35, 4 February 2006 (UTC)Jaf

Three points, and a proposal:

• I really don't understand the problem or the reluctance to peg a date. There are absolutely no internal conflicts in the entire Trek saga that make circa 2166 a problem for the date of the Earth-Romulan war. None. And we have a data point that actually places it there. Isn't that what canon is all about? Taking the show, as shown, and using as much as is possible as canonical except where it conflicts with itself?
• As a footnote, placing the war in 2166 would be supported by the lack of any discussion of the war in Enterprise's finale, which took place in 2161.
• I agree that when most people in general conversation say "a century ago", they mean 100 years, plus or minus a bit. The amount of the "bit" depends on how detailed you like to be. However, in my experience people in general, and Spock in particular, giving a presentation to a large group would not be so cavalier about time. And it isn't just my personal experience: if you do a Google search today (as I just did) on "a century ago", you will find very few references that really mean other than 100 years from when written - plus or minus a couple of years at most if they are covering a topical era. But that's it; no 16 year or so spread that would be required for Spock to say "close enough" when telling the crew something happened a century ago, plus or minus 8 years. (In fairness, had he said "over a century ago", I'd shut up and let it pass since it would then work; but he didn't.)
• In case there were questions as to when "Balance of Terror" took place in the Trek universe, all we have to do is a little math. In DS9: "Trials and Tribble-ations", Dulmur and Lucsly state that it is then "one hundred and five years, one month, and twelve days" after the events of TOS: "The Trouble with Tribbles". In TNG: "The Neutral Zone", the year is explicitly stated to be 2364. The "Neutral Zone" takes place approximately 9 years before "Trials and Tribble-ations" (you can tell from the Stardates, as well as by the events shown in the intervening years). So that put "Tribbles" in the year 2268 (2364+9-105). In the "real world", if the second season of Star Trek represented one year after the first season, that would put "Balance of Terror" in either 2266 or 2267, depending on the month. Possibly as far back as 2265, but that would be pushing it. One century prior to that would be between 2165 and 2166.
• I therefore propose that the article be modified to "circa 2166" as the date of the war, and an expansion of the explanation of how the year was derived. Are there any objections based on information from the shows themselves? -<unsigned by Aholland>

I maintain that an offhand remark about something happening "a century" ago doesn't necessarily equal this happening exactly 100 years ago - not in everyday speech, and not even in Star Trek speech. Subtracting 100 from the apparent date of that episode might not lead to any "internal conflicts" now, but pegging an exact date where none was given still shouldn't be the way to go (We're not here to create "false canon"). On top of that, could we perhaps go back to the original quote:

Constructed on asteroids, they [the outposts] monitor the Neutral Zone established by treaty after the Earth-Romulan conflict a century ago.

I don't want to sound pedantic - but what exactly was "a century" ago? The whole conflict? The beginning? The end? The "establishment by treaty" of a Neutral Zone after the conflict had already ended? All of it? Something completely else? I simply don't think there's any one irrefutable interpretation of that quote that pinpoints one year in the 22nd century... -- Cid Highwind 18:33, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

In all fairness, Aholland suggested the date be placed as "circa 2266", or around 2266. He's not suggesting we specifiy an exact year. That said, how about instead of pegging the year(s) in which the war was fought, we just say that the wars had come to an end around 2266? This would support Spock's comments about the Neutral Zone being established "a century ago" while not pegging an exact date for the conflicts. Or we could say "mid-to-late 22nd century"... --From Andoria with Love 19:16, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

How many Earth years are in a Vulcan century? Jaf 20:04, 4 February 2006 (UTC)Jaf

1. Earth years have always been used in Trek unless prefaced by "one of your Earth years" or some such thing. So the question of Vulcan centuries is not at issue, I think. He also would not use a Vulcan time calculation when addressing a ship of almost all humans.
2. The question of what Spock refers to is a fair one. The full quote is that the Earth Outposts "monitor the Neutral Zone established by treaty after the Earth-Romulan conflict a century ago." That tells me the treaty came after the conflict (duh!), and that therefore the conflict itself was a century ago. Put into context, in 2042 people will speak of WWII being a century ago; they will likely do so in 2045. But they will stop in 2046. So the last year for the conflict would be 2166 by that logic.
3. Shran's thought of "mid-to-late 22nd century" might be okay if the background explains how the date was derived. But I believe that a better approach might the "the 2260s". That captures Spock's comment which indicates the war was active in 2166, does not confine the entire conflict to that single year, and does not conflict with anything in the show. How's that for a compromise?Aholland 20:26, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

For the record, it has never been clarified that Earth years will always be used; we just assume this is the case in most instances (except, of course, when it comes to Tuvok's age). Anyway, stating the war took place sometime circa the 2260s is fine by me. :) --From Andoria with Love 20:37, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

"Also, the mysterious Delphic Expanse is never again mentioned, which makes some sense if it is behind the Neutral Zone."

The Delphic Expanse ceased to exist after Enterprise disrupted the Sphere Builders. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Baka42 (talk • contribs).

Thanks. Mistake on my part :) Aholland 00:11, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Alternate approach

Has anyone thought about the Earth-Romulan war starting after Earth forms the Federation? What if the UFP didn't want to get involved? Or was powerless to stop Earth from pursuing the war? What if the UFP was ineffective at stopping wars as the League of Nations, if at least initially? --Joe 17:24, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that has been discussed (either on this page or elsewhere) as a possibility. In fact, there were some rumors that the abandoned story concept for the next Trek film would have had the war taking place after the founding the Federation, but before it became the government-like coorporation we know from the TOS/TNG eras. --From Andoria with Love 07:53, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Massive Undiscussed Timeframe Changes

With all due respect to the user Tim Thomason, I have reverted the article's statements on dates to a state prior to his edits of 2/12. We had a very lengthy discussion (still above) on the timeframe for the Romulan War over a period of days and, as a consensus, decided to go with "circa the 2160s" based on the on-screen evidence and the fact that the date was the only one supported by on-screen continuity. Although it is certainly his right to question the conclusion, given the amount of time spent discussing it here I, for one, would appreciate a full discussion on this page prior to simply making massive edits that contradict the consensus reached. As to his point of using a newspaper clipping in Generations: I fully support putting the information in the background section. However, since it is never seen on-screen, directly conflicts with "Balance of Terror" and the negative implications from "These are the Voyages", and was something created by unknown persons in the production art department without any script guidance, its usefulness as canon is nil. It would be like saying that the Table of Elements in "Rascals", never clearly seen on screen but available in reference works, is canon. If so we might as well throw in the towel for seriousness in the series as it has elements like "Daffyduckium", "Zeppo", "Exitstageleft", and others. These two pieces of unseen (on screen) production art carry the exact same probative weight for purposes of establishing canon. I think it a travesty to throw out a reasoned conclusion on dates that is based on screen dialogue and does not conflict with anything in the series and, instead, replace it with an errant piece of production material that was not even deemed important enough to show clearly on-screen. Aholland 14:49, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

I understand your reversion, and I apologize for not posting here first about the clipping. I mentioned it above, but it may have been overlooked by some users (not you of course). Again, thank you for being courteous about the matter and not hateful of my ill-conceived actions.

As for the clipping: I realize you believe Spock's statements in "Balance of Terror" (I think it could be interpreted that he was referring to the construction of the outposts after the war), and I know Balance of Terror trumps any background art every day of the week. I think that, in my mind at least, since the clipping doesn't conflict with any info, and it was background material made for the Movie by the production, (some unknown in the art department like you said), it should be fair game. Bye the way, the Table of Elements has been fully incorporated into Memory Alpha, and we have the daffyduckium, zeppo, and exitstageleft articles, as well as many other funny okudagrams which exist in the Star Trek Universe. I apologize for the "space travesty" (not as bad as the Leslie Nielsen one) but, as stated, I see it differently.--Tim Thomason 22:28, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure if there's really a need to apologize... I was one of those who missed Tim's comments on the news clipping that he posted above; had I seen them, it would have given me a new perspective on this. While I do agree that not every piece of background production should be made officially canon, they are considered so for the purposes of this wiki, as they are written/designed by those active in the production.

I personally don't think Spock's line of the outposts "monitoring the Neutral Zone established after the Earth-Romulan conflict a century ago", should be taken as exact -- otherwise, it would mean exactly a century ago to the day, which is unlikely. Also, as established, Vulcans do sometimes estimate and round their numbers. What Tim added was considered canon for this wiki, and thus didn't really need to be discussed beforehand – although an explanation mighta been helpful ;). Removing said info without discussing it first, on the other hand, is something we tend to frown upon. (*frowns*) But yeah... here at MA, production info is considered canon (as long as its stated in background that it was never seen/used), so please keep that in mind in the future. :) --From Andoria with Love 22:57, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

I still maintain that Spock can count, and can as easily say "over a century" if the time period is more than 100 years, or "nearly a century" if under - give or take a couple of months, I'll give you that. Requiring him to be off by at least 7% is not fair to our very precise half-Vulcan friend.  :)

I respectfully disagree with you on canon policy. The current Memory Alpha:Canon policy says "Background information from the production staff (Rick Sternbach, Michael Okuda, etc) should either be included under the relevant background section (where available), or added to the article's Talk page where its validity can be assessed for inclusion." I'm fine including the newspaper clipping in the Background section. I'm fine discussing it here for inclusion on its merits. But I don't believe policy is to mandate inclusion. For the reasons noted above, I believe that inclusion of this particular bit of unseen material is not warranted. However I'm quite willing to engage in a discussion about it on this page if there is a cogent argument for it other than "it exists". Aholland 04:20, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Hmm... right you are. Again. I honestly don't know how this slipped under our noses. I sense a change in the policy coming on. :P (To clarify, that was a joke.) --From Andoria with Love 04:45, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Good points as always Aholland. I'd like to point out that the newspaper clippings "validity" has been discussed, along with other things in the Picard family album, on that page's talk page. That is why pages based on that article were created in the first place. There was much discussion and a period of time where the info was not included, but that has past. I still don't agree with you on Spock's statement, but I have nothing new to add there, just bringing up the original discussion.--Tim Thomason 04:51, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

To more clearly get to the heart of the matter I added to the current discussion at the Picard family album article. Thanks for the pointer! Aholland 06:07, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Removal of Background Information

• "Nearly 40 years of speculation and supposition surround the Earth-Romulan war. This article attempts to only draw from canonical sources: the series as presented, rather than widely held beliefs built up over time or only found in associated reference materials. A few items of note, then, as to how we know what we know:

• "The time period for the war is the subject of some discussion. To summarize:

• "Balance of Terror" is believed to have taken place in 2266. This is supported by the episodes: In DS9: "Trials and Tribble-ations", Dulmur and Lucsly state that it is then "one hundred and five years, one month, and twelve days" after the events of TOS: "The Trouble with Tribbles". In TNG: "The Neutral Zone", the year is explicitly stated to be 2364. The "Neutral Zone" takes place approximately 9 years before "Trials and Tribble-ations" (you can tell from the Stardates, as well as by the events shown in the intervening years). So that put "Tribbles" in the year 2268 (2364+9-105). If the second season of Star Trek represented one year after the first season, that would put "Balance of Terror" in either 2266 or 2267, depending on the month. Possibly as far back as 2265, but that might be pushing it. So 2266 is just about right.
• "Spock says in TOS: "Balance of Terror" that the Earth Outposts "monitor the Neutral Zone established by treaty after the Earth-Romulan conflict a century ago." That would place them being set up somewhere around 2165-67. Spock may be many things, but no one has ever accused him of being imprecise with words or anything dealing with numbers. (Had the war ended in 2160, for example, the accurate statement would have be "over a century ago".)
• "What we can tell from the above is that the war was active in 2165-67; when it began or when it actually ended is not known. So placing it in "the 2160s" seems the most appropriate choice, pending any further revelations in later episodes or movies.
• "Note that it is not necessary for the ending of the war to pre-date the founding of the Federation; having it occur after the founding does not conflict with anything seen in the various series.
• "There is, nonetheless, a belief held by some that the war was concluded prior to the founding of the Federation in 2161. (The 2161 date comes from TNG: "The Outcast".) This is not based on anything shown in the series, though; it is drawn from external reference works, production material not seen on-screen, and fan speculation over the years. The closest the series has come to determining a year was a newspaper clipping from the Picard family album in Star Trek Generations, prepared for production use but never seen onscreen. According to that, the War ended a year before the Federation was founded in 2161. This places the War ending in 2160 or 2161. It is difficult to reconcile this date with Spock's summary, however.
• "Please also see the Discussion page for thoughts and opinions on the evidence for and conclusions regarding when the war took place.
• "Romii is noted prominently in the Neutral Zone map in "Balance of Terror". It was never mentioned anywhere else. It could have been a major stellar system in the Star Empire, or simply a nearby object identified for orientation purposes only.
• "Romulans having warp drive during the war has been controversial ever since Scotty said they only had "simple impulse" in "Balance of Terror". Whether he was wrong, that the experimental ship was an unusual design, or the ship’s warp ability was damaged and it was limping along on impulse drive, is not knowable. (And begs the question of how it transversed interstellar distances on just impulse.) Suffice to say that Star Trek: Enterprise conclusively established Romulans having warp capability prior to the war. This is consistent with the rest of the series, actually. Romulan ships of the same design as in "Balance of Terror" chased the Enterprise while the ship was at warp in "The Deadly Years". And in Star Trek: Insurrection, Admiral Dougherty stated that "warp drive helped to form a bunch of Romulan thugs into an empire", which is sensible as star empires without faster-than-light travel would be difficult to control. The Star Empire existed prior to the outbreak of war.

• "And no discussion of the Earth-Romulan war would be complete without some base speculation based on, but of course not part of, canon:
• "Earth’s allies likely included the Andorians and Tellarites. The Vulcans may or may not have fought alongside them, as they might have wanted to keep a low profile (see the next note).
• "Romulan influence on the Vulcan High Command, through their collaboration with Administrator V'Las, may have affected Vulcan policy in regards to Earth. Depending on the length of V'Las's tenure and the start of his collaboration, the High Command's insistence on the slow development of Earth's warp technology, and their failure to come to Earth's aid during the Xindi superweapon threat, may carry the taint of Romulan hostility prior to the war. (ENT: "Kir'Shara")
• "The Xindi, the Suliban, and the Delphic Expanse could all have ended up on the Romulan side of the Neutral Zone. If so, the Romulans might have attacked and reduced the influence of the Xindi and Suliban between the war and the 23rd century, explaining why they faded from history after being so prominent (to Earth) in the 22nd Century (although the Xindi are said to someday join the Federation in ENT: "Azati Prime", so they can't be entirely destroyed). Keep in mind that the Romulan commander in 2366 said that he and his colleague had seen "100 campaigns together", so they had to be fighting someone.
• "However, in fairness, literally dozens of alien races are present near the Federation that we don't know about. For example, in 2373 there were more than 150 members of the United Federation of Planets, and over 1,000 semi-autonomous colonies (Star Trek: First Contact), but only a relatively small number have been seen on screen. It is equally plausible to the above that the Xindi were neither behind the Neutral Zone nor decimated by the Romulans. The absence in chronologically later series can be explained by their simply not being crucial to the events seen. (Similar explanations have been proposed for the lack of Denobulan appearances, but they are beyond the scope of this article.)
• "It is possible that Earth itself commenced the conflict, as Data remarked in 2366 in "The Defector" that "in their long history of war, the Romulans have rarely attacked first...they prefer to test their enemy’s resolve." In other words, Earth may have been provoked into acting first. If so, that might explain why the Federation, as a governing body, stayed out if the war was either ongoing or came after the Federation's founding; the young organization may not have wanted to be seen supporting unilateral military action by Earth.
• "It is not clear why Spock would generalize the weaponry to "atomic" when clearly other weapons were available. Whether because these other weapons were based on atomic reactions, the widespread and, perhaps, predominate use of "old-style nuclear warheads" (as 2266 Romulans put it) during the war, faulty data, or other reasons entirely, is unknown. It appears anomalous, but may have been nothing more than an example to heighten the point he was making: that the war was fought with much lower technology than present in the 23rd Century. (Note he didn’t say it was "exclusively" fought with atomics and is therefore less conclusive than saying it took place "a century ago".)
• "Various later modifications to the treaty may have taken place, as the floor of the Romulan Senate in 2379 and the star chart used by Starfleet in 2266 show slightly different boundaries for the Neutral Zone.
• "The Star Trek: Enterprise series finale, "These Are the Voyages...", deals with the formation of an alliance that in Deanna Troi's words, "will lad to the founding of the Federation", but makes no mention of the Earth-Romulan war. Some have viewed this as a continuity gap in the episode, but from the discussion above it appears the war might not have even started at that time.

"Cloaks and Continuity: "The ability for Romulan ships to cloak in the 22nd Century, as shown on "Minefield", has produced a quandary in continuity and the question of whether the Romulans could therefore cloak during the Earth-Romulan war. "Balance of Terror" clearly has the Enterprise crew surprised that a "theoretical" invisibility screen could be practically applied. Nothing is canon at the moment, but a few thoughts on the subject: "It is possible that the "enormous power" required to bend light and, therefore, cloak one’s ship made the 2152 version of the cloaking device impractical for large-scale wartime use by ships traveling interstellar distances. If so, then the 2266 version might have generated the surprise it did, since cloaks would not have been in wide use during the war. "Another possibility on the cloaks seen in 2152 is that the technology was purchased/stolen/taken as spoils of war from the Suliban (who had cloaks, possibly provided to them as part of the Temporal Cold War) but was not capable of being replicated by either the Romulans or the Suliban until the 23rd Century. Their use would have been discontinued as they wore out over time, and reintroduced only later. "It is conceivable that neither the 2152 cloak nor the 2266 cloak worked in conjunction with Romulan warp drives, even if the drives were off-line and only residual warp fields were present. Consider these facts: "Scotty’s assertion that the cloak-capable "Balance of Terror" ship just had impulse drive and was never seen at warp; "The fact that the cloak-capable ships in "Minefield" don’t go to warp; "The fact that the warp-capable ships in "The Deadly Years" don’t cloak. (Although there is a the barest remnant of a cloak effect based on the episodes’ frugal use of prior special effects from "Balance of Terror", there is no dialogue to support it and so can be viewed as merely a viewscreen glitch or minor SFX mistake given that the Romulans are never clearly shown going into or coming out of cloak); "The fact that no one on the Enterprise in 2266 would have been at all surprised by a cloaked ship if cloaks had been in use during the war. After all, a warp- and cloak-capable ship would have enormous strategic and tactical advantages – the kind of advantages one remembers. "The fact that the normally ethical Federation stoops to petty thievery when a cloaking device clearly capable of being used at warp is put into production in TOS: "The Enterprise Incident".
Of course, even the ships not seen at warp would need some kind of faster-than-light capability, else their journeys would take years or decades. So perhaps a low warp of 1.5 or less wouldn’t damage the cloak. This would still allow the ships to get where they were seen to be, but put them at such a disadvantage against the Earth warp 5 and 7 ships that they would not have been used outside the Star Empire systems during an interstellar war.

• Spock’s statement that invisibility is "theoretically" possible implies that it has not been practically demonstrated. This is a problem as Earth has seen cloaks from the Suliban and the Romulans prior to 2266; the technology would have been interesting enough for Spock to have heard of it if he was familiar with theoretical invisibility. It has been suggested in the cloaking device article that the Suliban cloaking devices do not so much bend light as use a form of particle radiation to alter the molecular structure of matter in order to allow light and sensor signals to pass through it. If true, then there may be an explanation: that 23rd century Starfleet viewscreens compensate for Suliban-style cloaks and other similar phenomena by tying into the sensors and making them as fully visible as if they weren’t cloaked at all. (This is consistent with the viewscreen as seen; it is not a window, and sensor problems – like those in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan – can impair the screen’s usefulness in ways that are not logical if it is just a camera stuck out the bow of the ship. "Minefield" itself uses a similar approach, but has to be manually invoked.) Thus Spock’s line following Kirk’s inability to see the ships on the viewscreen makes a bit more sense, and a new type of cloak based on bending light that evades both sensors and viewscreen would, indeed, be theoretical to the Federation.

---

The [above] information was removed without prior discussion or having saved it anywhere from the background section by Vedek Dukat. It is reproduced here as I believe it is important for anyone thinking of modifying this article to understand the basis for its statements. I am ambivalent as to whether it goes here or in the main body of the article; but it shouldn't just vanish without a discussion. Aholland 12:39, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

I understand that the Earth-Romulan War was supposed to be some "big event" in the Star Trek universe, but with so little presentable information we cannot expect much from it, article-wise. It seems every version of the article wants to compete with the Dominion War and it simply cannot. Besides, there is something disturbing about an article when the background information is twice (or three times!) as long as the actual "in-universe" content presented. There is such a thing as too many tangents, and too much over analyzing and speculation – much of the content within the article has ZERO to do with the war itself. Much of the content was a rehash of the background information already presented in the cloaking device, Romulan Bird-of-Prey (22nd century), and Romulan Bird-of-Prey (23rd century) articles, to name a few. This article is about the war; comments about specific technologies-of-the-era and possible preludes that cannot be confirmed should be presented in the article that that piece technology (e.g. atomic weapon) or alliance (e.g. UFP, CP) is specifically being defined in.

I also removed the images and references to those ships and their armaments in the article, where no such specific references were made in that respect in any of the war references. Although accurate in terms of describing "vessels of the era," including that information into the main content of the article borders the realm of speculation. Nowhere do I recall a reference to the Romulans having cloaking technology during the war that required a 10-point tangent on the subject. To me, and apparently VedekDukat, that level of "soap box-commentary" does not seem to fall into the area of "appropriate content" for an encyclopedia article about the war.

However, in spite of the castration of the background section of the previous version of the article, I have restored sections that pertained to the specifics of the war that cannot be defined in adjacent articles (the who, what and when aspects). Finally, with what is now left, I have attempted to present it in a more "neutral" light, based on the Wikipedia spirit (at least much more so that it was) of "letting the reader decide."

Referencing ships of the era is fine, if the article was about "ships of the era," but it is not, and no where has it been referenced that these were the craft involved in the war. Like the intro to the background section says "The details of the Earth-Romulan War are shrouded in mystery..." --Alan del Beccio 17:33, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Gvsualan has, I think, done a pretty decent job at sorting through things and fairly drawing conclusions from the existing data. As one of the prime movers for the recent revisions to the article, and seemingly endless discussion thereof, I understand his point and am okay with his rewrite, edits, and statement of things in the Background section. While I believe there is a little more certainty on some points than presented, it does allow a reader to draw conclusions fairly and objectively. Aholland 18:47, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

A valid source?

I originally placed this at Talk:Picard family album, but it's probably more suitable here.

A historical archive, courtesy of the good folks at Enterprise.

To the right is a view of Starfleet's historical archive as seen in ENT: "In a Mirror, Darkly, Part II". From the looks of it, it might simply be snippets from the Star Trek Chronology, but if we can make out what it says, then this would be a valid source, as it does appear on-screen. Since, however, it is unlikely anyone will be able to read this, I suggest asking Mr. Sussman what it says and what datapoints were used. Hopefully, it'll tell us something about the Earth-Romulan War. --From Andoria with Love 07:47, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Aurelius Kirk might be another good person to ask about this, based on some of his other work around these parts. (See: Talk:Korrd, Talk:Khitomer Massacre, Talk:Vreenak or Talk:Inheritance (episode)) Jaf 19:00, 14 February 2006 (UTC)Jaf

Does this mean that Aurelius Kirk has a better shot of that screen? Aholland 19:57, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

No, it just means that he has shown some skill in overlaying the possible text in photoshop as evidenced in the aforementioned links. Jaf 22:19, 14 February 2006 (UTC)Jaf

I know Mike Sussman says he doesn't know what it says, but there's got to be a source somewhere. What if a better screencap or a book with it or something comes out and it reveals what is on the screen. Should whatever info, barring it doesn't conflict with anything, be used on MA? That seems to be the heart of the matter, and is being discussed currently at Talk:Picard family album and Memory Alpha talk:Canon policy.--Tim Thomason 22:35, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

I support inclusion if it meets criteria. We need a diplomatic / democratic solution to this. Jaf 22:47, 14 February 2006 (UTC)Jaf

I submit that any discussion of a screen that cannot be read and for which an external, legible source does not appear to exist is not ripe for a discussion of inclusion. Let's wait to discuss it until someone knows (or purports to know) what it says. Aholland 23:42, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

I have found a source that was able to help me (er, actually, s/he found me), and I have a better view of what was on the screen. I will update the photograph momentarilly. --From Andoria with Love 00:00, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

The historical archive graphic seen in "In a Mirror, Darkly, Part II".

To the right is the graphic used in the episode, given to me by a source from the production who wishes to remain anonymous. As you can see, it is bascially snippets from the first edition of the Star Trek Chronology and, as such, it contains some errors... an obvious sign that the production personnel weren't expecting it to be legible. The most glaring error is the 2061 date for Zefram Cochrane's historical warp flight, which actually occured in 2063. However, the way it is written, we can merely assume Cochrane did a previous warp test flight in 2061, which led to the more historic flight in 2063. Another obvious error is Cochrane's disappearance in 2117, when current canon has established it to be in 2119. For what it's worth, the individual who gave this to me stated that these were mistakes that could be ignored in light of more concrete information seen in Star Trek: First Contact and Star Trek: Enterprise.

However, I would now like to draw your attention to the dates of 2156 and 2160. As you can see, those are the years in which the Earth-Romulan War is placed. Unlike the news article in Picard's album, this bit of info was seen on-screen (albeit, not clearly), and therefore should, IMO, be counted as canon for the purposes of this wiki. And there you have it. :) --From Andoria with Love 00:56, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Note: Apparently, whoever writes these Starfleet records needs to work on his/her spelling and grammar skills, as well as their history. :P --From Andoria with Love 01:01, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

This does fall into the "way cool" category of stuff. But given the anonymous nature of the source, and the numerous entries that are completely out of sync with more "established" facts, I question the use of any of it as a valid reference. In other words, it should be a bit of all or nothing, not pick and choose what we like or don't like. But really interesting! Aholland 01:37, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Obviously, the individual who supplied us with the image wishes to remain anonymous for personal reasons. We're gonna have to accept that. Like it or not, however, this is what appeared – appeared, mind you – in the episode, and we have to deal with it. Pushing it to the side as though it never existed is, obviously, not an option.

Oh, by the way, a quick note to Vedek Dukat: next time you remove such an extensive amount of info, you may wanna place it in the talk page rather that simply removing it. Just a suggestion. ;) --From Andoria with Love 15:25, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

And this might even better be placed on a discussion page for this display graphic - if no article exists, or will exist, I suggest the talk page of the image itself. Anyway, the anonymous source is a small drawback, but I personally don't doubt the fact that this graphic was the one used in the episode. Compare the number of lines per paragraph, the line lengths, the absolute and relative positions of blanks in these lines - it's a perfect match, and I guess it would be very hard, if not impossible, to fake that while still having a coherent text.

Of course, the choice of entries would seem completely random in a "real" history article, but that doesn't make the individual entries wrong or "invalid". This should be treated just like any other display graphic of which a better source exists. -- Cid Highwind 20:06, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

That's the problem – for things such as the Romulan War and the start of World War III, this is the best source that exists. Unfortunately, if Aholland has his way, this graphic will count for nothing as will all the other "barely visible" or "unseen" graphics and other "backstage" info throughout Trek. This means hundreds of articles will be deleted. This, however, is a discussion for another page... --From Andoria with Love 23:24, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

I don't know where you're getting that from, but the suggestion on his user page seems to state something different. :) -- Cid Highwind 23:31, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Cid is correct: I am proposing something other than a wholesale slaughter of innocent articles, in part based on Shran's earlier comments on the draft. Well, maybe a couple of the guilty ones . . . .  :) The analysis I would use based on my proposed canon policy would be this:

• The image on the computer screen appeared in the episode itself. That makes the image a valid resource, and as such can be used as a citation in an article that discusses the Trek Universe. Say, WWIII.
• The image is completely illegible in the Episode, so it couldn't be used for much of anything.

Shran, through connections we all wish we had, obtains the original graphic itself. The policy states: "Visual material can be supplemented by clearer visual images of the identical material seen . . . if the clearer image is . . . generally and publicly available from a verifiable production source." Although I prefer my production sources to be in published works, this probably meets that criterion. So now we can read the darn thing.

Having read it, we see it has some potential problems. For example:

• Col. Green led eco-terrorists? I thought he was famous since TOS for genocide.
• WWIII seems to equate to the Eugenics Wars, but about 30 years after the dates in both TOS and WOK.
• The year of Cochrane's first FTL flight is not the same as established in "First Contact" and reaffirmed in VOY: "Friendship One".

This is very oddly written. An astronomical survey has as much historical weight (without mention of why) as 37 million killed? As nuclear war? More significance than First Contact, which isn't given a date at all, just a side reference? (Must have been a slow year in 2067 - althought that is also the year of the *very* famous Friendship One launch.)

And so on. Some stuff dead on, some at odds, some just plain odd.

Despite conflicts with other valid resources, both the production art AND the other references are valid resources for the construction of Trek Universe articles. BUT, if you include information from one (say, Green and eco-terrorists), you have to note the conflict with the others (TOS, ENT).

After all that, someone could raise the idea of demoting portions of the production art down to a mere Restricted Validity Resource, meaning it could still be used, but would be in background sections and the like. On this piece of art, that would be probably an entry by entry basis. If it could be shown that the visual information that can only be seen when examining an external reference (rather than the Episode itself) conflicts with a higher validity resource (i.e., dialogue), then that single part would come out, and the remainder stay intact. Rather like cutting cancer out.

If the majority of the production art is cut out by this process, the entire thing can be demoted. Still used, but demoted.

In this case, I'd guess that the dates for WWIII and Cochrane's flight might get tossed pretty quickly; too much conflict. The end date for the Romulan war might be discussed, but that's not quite as conclusively wrong (despite my beliefs!). Green might have been a militant tree-hugger too, for all we know, so that would probably NOT get removed. But (barring other goofs) the rest - including the existence of the Federation graphic - would probably STAY as a valid resource.

My commentary on the graphic - and why I don't trust it - is that it looks like something hastily assembled to serve as background. No chance it would be legible on screen. So I'd only use it as an ancillary piece of data, not the foundation for an article, say. But that's me - and as much as I'd like to think I know it all, a policy shouldn't simply be "ask Holland". Aholland 01:24, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

First off, I would like to apologize for my comments above (and anywhere else I made such comments). I was under the impression you were attempting to make MA a production info-free site, which of course cannot be done without deleting hundreds of articles. As for your comments above (if I understand them correctly), I agree that we should note conflicts of more "concrete" sources. However, with the issue of Green, if you remember in ENT: "Demons", it was revealed he lead a genocidal attack against those with radiation sickness in order to ensure that humanity remained "cleansed", I guess you could say, which I don't think is too far off from what the graphic states. That the war was fought over the issue genetic manipulation and genome enhancement seems to suggest that the war itself was a result of the Eugenics Wars, which would validate Spock's comments that the 1990s were the era of Earth's third World War. Granted, this is merely speculation, but it makes some sense, at least to me. But I do agree on the Cochrane issues. And, I think that's it. :) --From Andoria with Love 01:53, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

No apology needed; I can see where you could have reached your conclusions. What can I say: we're just both passionate about the subject matter! Aholland 03:00, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

oddly, that timeline seems to be off consistantly, at least on the points that can be compared to known dates. by about 2 years. add two years to each date, and you get: warp flight in 2063 with first contact following, cochrane goes missing in 2119, ect. exactly as canon. that would put the romulan war starting 2158 and going to 2162 -Mithril 01:18, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Dead link

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case! If the dead link is fixed, please also remove this comment.

• http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/inconsistencies2a.htm
  • In Earth-Romulan War on Tue Mar 14 21:49:06 2006, 404 Not Found
  • In Earth-Romulan War on Sun May 07 21:03:12 2006, 404 Not Found

--HighwindBot 19:53, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

I updated the link. Aholland 01:25, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

22nd Century BoP

Sorry, but I have to ask this. What is the justification for having the Romulan Bird-of-Prey (22nd century) pictured in this article? Doing that implies that they were used in the war. We have no evidence of that, and in fact we have evidence to the contrary:

Stiles: "They're painted like a giant bird of prey."

Stiles was describing the ships seen in this war. Well, these aren't painted that way. Now, am I saying it is impossible that they were used? No. I am saying that there is no evidence they were used. The only time we even see them is in 2152, possibly as much as 8 years before the war. For all we know, they were a design that was for some reason or other retired before the war began. --OuroborosCobra ^talk 11:11, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

It's a "contemporary" Romulan ship of the period, just like the NX class is a contemporary Earth Starfleet ship of the period. We know the NX class is in service AT LEAST until 2161 (when Enteprise is retired). There's nothing to suggest that EITHER side built entirely new fleets just to fight the war, so they must have used what they had. Simple logic.Capt Christopher Donovan 12:30, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

The logic isn't that simple, I'm afraid. While there's nothing to suggest that this type of ship wasn't used in the war, there's nothing to suggest the opposite, either, so the article shouldn't pretend that this was the case. That said, I'm not sure if the article does... as an illustration of "contemporary" Romulan ships, without stating that this exact design was used (perhaps even with a note stating that we don't know), the image probably could stay. Question is, is it necessary for the article? -- Cid Highwind 12:38, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm not going to insist that it's necessary, but the article as it stood was a bit bland, IMO, with just one or two graphics...a few ship pics couldn't do it any harm, as long as they're ships from the appropriate power and contemporary to the time period. YMMV...Capt Christopher Donovan 12:43, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Sure, it's a bit bland... but then again, we don't know a whole lot about the war, so it's rather fitting, doncha think? ;) --From Andoria with Love 16:16, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Literality in date estimates

Quote from the article:

• In "Balance of Terror", Spock notes that the Neutral Zone was "established by treaty after the Earth-Romulan conflict a century ago." This places the war, at minimum, during the 2160s, but certainly during the mid-22nd century.

Why does everybody take estimates of 50 and 100 years ago literally, like "current" events having on-screen all just happen to be on anniversaries? --Kitch 19:49, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Considering we say that it might be at any point in the 22nd century, I'd say we are not taking it entirely literally... --OuroborosCobra ^talk 19:59, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

New Romulan Symbol?

If the war was hundreds of years before the symbol of the Romulan Empire was changed,why is the new symbol used.Shouldnt it be the symbol we saw before nemisis or even the tos romulan symbol?

The "TNG-romulan symbol" is used, because that was established as the symbol romulans used in the mid-22nd century in season 4 episodes of Enterprise. --Pseudohuman 10:34, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Shran & I checked it out a couple days ago and there is actually a new symbol on the walls of the remote control-room. It looks like a modified version of the one seen in Nemesis. --Morder 10:43, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Indeed, but the computer monitors use the TNG-symbol, wall symbol is just art on the wall.--Pseudohuman 10:51, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Actual Dialogue

Do we have different versions of this episode?Because to my hearing Spock clearly says "over a century ago", which by the way makes the begining of the whole discussions about the date where it was stated that Spock said just" a century ago" quite pointless. The mistake could originate that the online transcripts[1] leave out the tinly little word over. Kennelly 16:32, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

According to the accurate transcript at [2] Spock says: "a century" Kirk says: "a whole century" and McCoy says: "over a century". and to be exact Spock is talking about the date when the treaty establishing neutral zone was made, Kirk is talking about the last time a romulan ship was seen, and only McCoy is talking about the actual war. --Pseudohuman 10:46, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

I hate to dispute the accuracy of this site but I've seen several errors on that site. This particular one is in error. Spock does say "Referring to the map on your screens, you will note beyond the moving position of our vessel, a line of Earth outpost stations. Constructed on asteroids, they monitor the Neutral Zone established by treaty after the Earth-Romulan conflict of over a century ago.". – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Morder (talk • contribs).

I would be very leery of trusting that site as well. For the most part it's quite useful, but I could cite several examples of lines attributed to the wrong characters and words left out or spelled in such a way that they have a different meaning. Accurate isn't always the best term to describe it. - Bridge 12:23, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

removed defunct link

Removed the following:

• Conjectural peace treaty - reproduced from the Star Fleet Technical Manual

as the page seems to not exist, however I copied it here in case it is restored at some point. 31dot 00:51, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Alliance Involvement

It was recently added to the sidebar that Earth's allies Andor, Tellar, and Vulcan participated in the war, based on the image to the right. Are we treating this as canon? I don't really see a consensus from the last discussion above, and the article doesn't seem to take it into account.– Cleanse ^talk 06:01, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

This is a tough call. It did appear in the episode, but even with high-definition, it's illegible. In addition, many of the dates are inaccurate and some are pretty random. Then again, none of that has stopped us from including things before. ;) --From Andoria with Love 06:13, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't know about you but I can read every word perfectly. Unless that's not the one from the episode. :) --Morder 10:26, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, this image was the graphic used on the set as supplied to us by Mike Sussman; here's how the image appeared on-screen. :) --From Andoria with Love 13:35, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

We're contradicting ourselves...

We are accepting Colonel Green's first name and the details of his actions as seen in this viewscreen graphic as canon. So why are we not accepting the years in which the Earth-Romulan War was fought? Those years are listed on the graphic, as well. Are we picking and choosing what we like and don't like? (Note: this is not an invitation to move the Green page to another name, that must be discussed first). --From Andoria with Love 06:44, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

The Earth-Romulan war was the reason the Federation was created! It is implied and also would make good common sense. the other powers are suprised by Earth's ability to defeat the Romulans, by pure attirtion.--Chronitons 22:45, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

The years 2156-2160 should be accepted as canon. No need for the vaguenes. --Pseudohuman 10:05, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

I implemented the changes. With eco-terrorism, Phillip Green and 2160 taking the screen at face value (but noting contradiction) there is no reason not to do the same here. If there are contradictions we follow our normal policy. Here there is none. I rewrote the background info accordingly. While doing so I removed the following as it is now redundant:

• Contrary to the unseen article and the unreadable graphic, no other sources have indicated if this war occurred before or after the founding of the Federation. However, if the succinctly named "Earth-Romulan conflict" is any indication of the involved parties, then this would seem to imply that this event occurred before the foundation of the Federation, and was fought between Earth/Humans, the Romulans, and their respective allies; nothing so specific as the Federation or the Coalition of Planets.

This is exactly the same situation as Daffyduckium and all the horrible in-joke elements we accept from a display in TNG: "Rascals".– Cleanse 06:54, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

The Earth-Romulan war was the reason the Federation was created! It is implied and also would make good common sense.--Chronitons 22:38, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Giant logos

Giant logo crushes puny Earthlings

Is it just me or are the logos in the sidebar displaying at 292 px? The code in the article has much more reasonable sizes (100 and 120 px respectively) so is this a template problem, a page problem, or something on my end?– Cleanse 03:25, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

From what I understand, all images within templates are automatically fixed at 292px (or, if it's smaller, the largest possible size) to better conform to Wikia's new and hopefully short-lived style. --From Andoria with Love 04:14, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, looks like you can still override it - see Template:Sidebar government, which sets a 150px size to avoid the giant logo problem.

But I think I see what's happened here. The template (Template:Sidebar military conflict) at one point must have had such parameters for setting the size of the images, but they aren't in the current code.– Cleanse 04:47, 15 July 2008 (UTC)