Weren't a lot of non-canon names assigned to the TMP personnel in the novel Ex Machina? It would be nice to add them in italics if anyone has them.--StAkAr Karnak 23:23, 11 Nov 2005 (UTC)
- Here are the Ex Machina author's notes on crew names, including photos.--StAkAr Karnak 03:39, 13 Nov 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks for the link, I added all the info I could. You could've added it yourself but no biggie.--Tim Thomason 04:04, 13 Nov 2005 (UTC)
This guy seems to have already an article : Harrison (Doctor) (same image), but in the unnamed personnel article : "Many think this person might be named Harrison". Is it him or not - Philoust123 21:08, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- I'd say its not -- he is never referred to as "doctor" in the episode, and to further confuse things, a different crewman is referrred to as Harrison in "Space Seed". The reason someone thinks the laughing crewman was Harrison is because a loop of the unnamed man's voice is played over the speaker when McCoy calls looking for Harrison. Seems more likely that the Harrisons are indeed one, and that this Harrison sounded like the other man while laughing. -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 22:29, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
She is seated at the science station. When the Talosians scan the computer records, Tyler pushes her aside and takes over the library computer station. In scenes deleted from the final cut, this extra can be seen walking in front of the main viewer and seated at the science station as Spock relays information about the Talos stargroup. The images are found here, towards the middle of the page It appears that she has no braid at her wrist. --GNDN 15:32, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
- i have to point out, this isnt the science station as we are familiar with it from TOS.. this is the station next to spock's regular seat. look at this shot:  -- the image is taken from the front part of the bridge. Spocks station would be just past Garrison's elbow. -- Captain M.K.B. 15:46, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Agreed, but given that this is the area where the LCARS console is located, as well the place where Spock gets the Talos information from (compare the screencaps at the site cited above), I think it's fair to say that she was working at the science station. I mean, things can change in 13 years, right? --GNDN 16:01, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
- I still think its more of an assumption than a given for us to state that though -- after all, shouldn't every bridge station have some sort of computer interface? this is why i put a note in that states that the console was never referred to with any other name. all we know about it is that it ties into the ship's computer, which is fairly unremarkable -- even though Spock's station later performed that function the rest of the time, how do we know this station wasn't a separate entity? -- Captain M.K.B. 16:18, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Circumstantial evidence is evidence based on a series of inferences leading to a natural or logical conclusion. First, the console I referred to is unique to the science station. The device, which prints out the hard copy of the transmission in "The Cage," is the same one seen in front of Spock from "Where No Man Has Gone Before" and throughout the run of the series). Second, Spock (wearing science blue), uses this station to gather information for Captain Pike. Finally, when the Talosians begin their scan, Tyler shouts "The computers!" and leaps to this station, taking over the device referrenced above. Not everything in Star Trek is spelled out, but when the on-screen evidence supports a logical conclusion, I believe its inclusion is warranted. In fact, I am thinking about adding a "2254" paragraph to the science station page. --GNDN 16:39, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
- But drawing conclusions like that isn't really in our mandate here at MA, is it? Just because two computers have a printer doesn't mean they serve the same purpose... I think calling this a "science station" should be disallowed except in background notes -- it could just as likely be the computer terminal and we would be doing a disservice to the science station next to it by calling them both one and the same, based on an assumption. -- Captain M.K.B. 16:44, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Captain M.K.B. --Please look at the notes I left on your talk page, and feel free to respond by email. I think this is a fruitful discussion, but it may be getting beyond the scope of this article.--GNDN 16:52, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
David Gerrold as the Armed lieutenant
It is painfully obvious to me that Gerrold was playing a security guard. Not because of the phaser (although that is a dead giveaway), but because of the trademark belt he is wearing. The belt often made them look as though their pants were up high. It was the standard issue black security belt all the security officers wore in season two and three of TOS. Any objections to me changing the role to Security Officer Lieutenant? --AC84 04:51, 23 September 2006.
- Yes, since it wasn't said that that belt could only be worn by security guards. -- Captain M.K.B. 17:35, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
- Apparently my statement of the obvious was not taken under advisement -- the Gerrold character is now listed as a security lieutenant, with the citation/explanation stating that the belt was worn by security personnel only.
- However, the fault is that it wasn't -- Scotty wore a phaser belt (in Spock's Brain), but he's an engineer, not a security guard. I realize that facts presented by me are usually rejected on this wiki because of personal bias against me, but this is still as elementary as it was in 2006. -- Captain MKB 00:11, October 24, 2010 (UTC)
- Seriously Mike -- keep the personal bias accusations out of things. There's no need to bring that up at all and to have a martyr complex here. In terms of the change to the article, it was done some time back, and nobody's changed it otherwise. -- sulfur 00:16, October 24, 2010 (UTC)
- If I decide to change it, then, I guess I won't have to prepare myself for a personal attack against me. You are the bearer of good news. -- Captain MKB 01:07, October 24, 2010 (UTC)
- The big question is... besides the Scotty incident, is there any situation where a redshirt wearing that belt is not a security officer? What were you suggesting that we call him instead of what he is now, or would it be simply changing the note to suggest that he is likely a security officer because the belt was usually worn by them, but there is no confirmation? That might be the better option here. -- sulfur 01:13, October 24, 2010 (UTC)
- We can find the original note from the article history -- it was probably along the lines of "operations division lieutenant - possibly a security officer due to his sidearm" etc., but was later changed to "Since he carried a phaser on a standard issue black security belt, he was a security officer." which seems to be kind of pedantic (and a dig against my comment here on the page). -- Captain MKB 14:09, October 24, 2010 (UTC)
Anyone know what episode?
 The SkyBox CCG game gave a name to a gold-shirt yeoman who was an unnamed TOS character (link to card scan of screencap), but I haven't been able to figure which episode they got the image from - has anyone seen this lady? -- Captain MKB 07:04, September 8, 2010 (UTC)
- is she really an actress from 1960s ? C-IMZADI-4 08:07, September 8, 2010 (UTC)
- The other characters who do not have canon names all seem to be screenshots of familiar extras, so yes, i would assume this to be the same. I believe i recognize the shot of a woman walking across the outer ring of the bridge but am curious as to which episode. -- Captain MKB 22:53, September 8, 2010 (UTC)
- It's from "The Doomsday Machine", check around 1:16 in this youtube clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u27lz8_yAe0 --Myko 07:32, September 10, 2010 (UTC)
yes at 1'15, incredible dear Myko !!! she's going to the scott' station...C-IMZADI-4 18:20, September 10, 2010 (UTC)
- Keen! I could clearly see the shot in my head but you saved me about 79 episodes of searching... -- Captain MKB 00:04, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
Crewwoman a word?
I don't think "crewwoman" is an actual existing word, it might be better to refer to them as female crew members. I understand that there might be the feeling of having it be equal, but I don't think they were ever referred to as crewwomen?! -- OvBacon(Talk) 20:07, May 30, 2011 (UTC)
This page is very cumbersome to work with and takes a lot of time to load, is it concievable to split it into more pages? --Myko 13:07, August 5, 2011 (UTC)
- It's worth considering, though I don't know how it could be done fairly.--31dot 20:15, August 5, 2011 (UTC)
- I can see it broken into "eras". Cage/Menageris, TOS, and movies (essentially). -- sulfur 21:04, August 5, 2011 (UTC)
Or into divisions (gold, blue, red shirts), or positions (medical, security, transporter, yeoman). The latter isn't a very good way, just throwing it out there. --Myko 21:38, August 5, 2011 (UTC)
...by division, so there would be a Unnamed USS Enterprise (NCC-1701) command personnel, Unnamed USS Enterprise (NCC-1701) operations personnel, and Unnamed USS Enterprise (NCC-1701) sciences personnel, with this page for those with unknown or more than one division. This should help with the load times and hopefully the parser will be better able to cope with the smaller pages, as originally suggested by 31dot here. I'm also suggesting this for Unnamed Enterprise (NX-01) personnel, Unnamed USS Enterprise (NCC-1701-D) personnel, and Unnamed Deep Space 9 personnel as those pages are also rather large. - Archduk3 00:11, June 6, 2012 (UTC)
- Support. Bring out the ax and split away. 31dot 12:12, June 6, 2012 (UTC)
- I am not really comfortable with the split of the pages. But you're right that the load times will be faster. Tom 14:58, June 6, 2012 (UTC)
- I presume that there are no crossover people at all? My biggest worry is the cleaning up of incoming links. I know that we're not a big fan of sub-pages, but what about something like 'Unnamed USS Enterprise (NCC-1701) personnel/Command personnel', and then including each of those subpages in the same way we do credits on movie pages? -- sulfur 15:45, June 6, 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, I agree with sulfur. When I worked on this page (a lot), one thing I noticed was that many times the same people were reused in different episodes, wearing different colored uniforms. Most of the extras wore at least two department colors during their tenure on the show. They even did this with recurring characters, see Kyle and DeSalle for example. -- Ltarex 20:54, June 6, 2012 (CET)
The idea was to keep those with more than one division here, so crossover issues shouldn't be a problem. As for including the division pages, we don't need them as subpages to include them, so I would rather not break the "Memory Alpha is flat" rule. If we do want to include the divisions here, we can use the same extension that was added for archived forum pages, which should let us include just the parts we want instead of the whole page. I don't know if we can get that tab thing to work with that though. I was also thinking we could take a look at how we link to these pages by using redirects instead, which would make finding and changing links much faster and easier. - Archduk3 23:23, June 7, 2012 (UTC)
Since there hasn't been any other comments, I'm just going to assume that everyone is at least tentatively OK with this and outline the plan.
- Phase one is to split the pages, but leave the split off content on the main pages until the other phases are done. Additions or changes for the split off sections shouldn't be done to the main pages after this.
- Phase two would be to change the links to these pages to redirects, using the name of the section for them. For example, links to "Sciences crew woman #5" would use the redirect USS Enterprise sciences crew woman 5. This way if these links need to be changed it's much easier to find them. These redirects will point to the final locations, and the section titles on the pages would actually drop the division where redundant because of the page titles.
- Phase three is removing the split info from the main pages and providing links to the division ones. Those with more than one division would remain on the main pages.
- Now after I can see how this should work I have an idea of this. I would love to start with the "Unnamed USS Enterprise (NCC-1701-D) personnel" and split the article into sections. I am not so comfortable with the redirects and the new categories. Is this a required way or can I directly fix the links to the new destination? The new pages, split from the main one, do not have the "division" in their title. Is this intended? Rather "Unnamed USS Enterprise (NCC-1701-D) command personnel" instead of "Unnamed USS Enterprise (NCC-1701-D) command division personnel". Tom 20:23, June 18, 2012 (UTC)
The lack of the word "division" is intended. The division categories use the same wording, like Category:Starfleet operations personnel. This helps keep the tiles as short a possible, and the word division is kinda superfluous in this case anyway, as the meaning is still the same without it.
While you can link directly to the new locations, it makes it impossible to know what section of the article is the destination when looking at "what links here" page, not to mention a large number of the incoming links, on the episode pages especially, have been broken for awhile now since the page has been updated at some point afterward and no one went through all 250+ links to make sure everything still worked, because that's not something we should expect people to do. Using the redirects solves this. That said, what part of the categories are you having an issue with?
Updating all the links is actually why the page wasn't divided and then split, since I though it best to try and keep everything "working" as much as possible while the split is done. I planed to update all the links I could find for the division pages first before removing that content from the main page, and then going through what's left linking there. Those are already in a division section but weren't moved are because they were seen in other division colored uniforms, or have other issues, or I missed them, and the remain people will have to reorganized anyway. - Archduk3 20:14, June 19, 2012 (UTC)