Memory Alpha
Register
Memory Alpha
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 31: Line 31:
 
==PNA==
 
==PNA==
   
What is this PNA thing that is posted at the top of the page? -- [[User:Enzo Aquarius|Enzo Aquarius]] 16:08, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
+
What is this PNA thing that is posted at the top of the page(it's not a good thing, so don't ask about it)? -- [[User:Enzo Aquarius|Enzo Aquarius]] 16:08, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

Revision as of 01:45, 8 May 2005

WooHOO!!!!!

NOT A SPOILER, it's on enterprise's website[[1]]: ENTERPRISE ISN'T REAL!!!! IT'S JUST A HOLODECK PROGRAM ON THE ENTERPRISE-D!!!!!!! HOOOORAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! NON-CANON!!!!! just another screwy TNG holodeck program gone wrong!!!! Star Trek has been saved!!!!

-of course Jonathan Frakes gaining 100 lbs and playing a TNG era riker is a minor continuity problem, but WHO CARES!!!!! ENTERPRISE IS A HOLODECK PROGRAM!!!!

  • On a side note, didn't they used to try and hide the fact that they've been owned by the Scifi Channel for the last two years, oh well, so their last episode looks a lot like babylon 5's last episode on scifi,

and so what if they were dumb enough to reuse the headset thingie from farscape, at least they're ending it!!!

Cancellation

As of February 2, 2005-Enterprise has been cancelled

I would say All Good Things.......... but I would be lying. <--- please add signatures whenever leaving witty commentaries. --BlueMars 11:14, Feb 3, 2005 (CET)

Enterprise was just getting better. Those fools. They can't leave us like that... Perhaps they continue the story with a movie? Or the show restarts later on, dealing with the foundation of the Federation or the Romulan War? .... Why am I dreaming? --BlueMars 11:14, Feb 3, 2005 (CET)

I would rather see Enterprise continued on the big screen, instead of assembling a new cast.-Rebelstrike2005 16:26, 3 Feb 2005 (CET)

I would like to remind every one that talk pages are not discussion forums. If you want to talk about the cancellation of Enterprise, please visit the SCN or TrekBBS, et al. -- Michael Warren | Talk 17:55, Feb 3, 2005 (CET)

"Closing the franchise for good"?

What's the source for this quote? It seems odd to me: I can understand a Paramount spokesperson saying that they were closing the Star Trek office that's been at Paramount/Viacom since 1987 or so, but what does it mean to close a franchise? It seems improbable to me that a Paramount spokesperson would close the door on all future Trek, instead of saying that it "needs a rest" or something like that.

The current wording on the page indicates that Paramount plans never to make any more Star Trek ever again, which isn't the case AFAIK. What is the case is that they have no plans to make more Trek at this time, which is different from "closing the franchise for good". -- Josiah Rowe 03:56, 14 Feb 2005 (GMT)

I wonder if this means that the restrictions on publishing fan fiction Via Pocket Books will be lifted. I would love to see both professional writers and amature writers come up with various and different adventures for starships other than the USS Enterprise... I suppose I mean, where the writer will have no restrictions at all. Like what had been in place before the Next Generation.

Time Travler 03:37am 15 Feb 2005 (USCST)

PNA

What is this PNA thing that is posted at the top of the page(it's not a good thing, so don't ask about it)? -- Enzo Aquarius 16:08, 7 May 2005 (UTC)