Memory Alpha


Back to page

38,318pages on
this wiki

Meditation principlesEdit

As my memory fails in some minutiae, the page needs more on Vulcan meditation principles (remember there was much thural explanation from Tuvok in several Voyager episodes, also regarding the nature of the Pohn'Farr memory seems to fail --- Valaraukar

Date of the Great AwakeningEdit

The Great Awakening can be narrowed down to a 700 year time period. I can give you the date of those 700 years, if you answer a little question.

When would you say this statment can apply to Mankind, "We've each learned to be delighted with what we are." Although we are much closer today, I do not think we are there. I think the proper moment would be when we are all united. Either earths' unity in 2151 or the Founding of the Federation in 2162.

The Great Awakening was dated to the 4th century in ENT's Vulcan Reformation arc. -- Josiah Rowe 09:15, 1 Jan 2005 (CET)

40 Eridani Edit

It hasn't been canonically established that Vulcan is in the 40 Eridani system, has it? While it has been recently established to be approximately 16 light-years from Earth, and 40 Eridani is about that far away, I don't think such an assumption should be made yet. --Andrew 13:28 11-28-04

There is enough canon information that 40 Eridani A is the Vulcan sun. See the article page for its appearences. -- Kobi 11:54, 29 Oct 2004 (CEST)
I think that with the 16 LY ref from episode "Home" there is even more certainty about this data point being perfectly true than there was before. -- Captain Mike K. Bartel 12:27, 29 Oct 2004 (CEST)

Vulcans in Starfleet Edit

It has been mentioned that Spock was the first vulcan in Starfleet. Now it seems that in fact that honor should go to T'pol. That said, T'Pol may not be considered the first Vulcan in Starfleet as there is a difference between Earth's Starfleet and the Federation's Starfleet.

It is an urban legend that Spock was the first Vulcan in Starfleet, it was never stated in the show. Moreso there was an entire ship crewed with Vulcans, the USS Intrepid. Also keep in mind that there is a difference between Starfleet and Starfleet (Earth) -- Kobi 20:20, 20 Nov 2004 (CET)

Cardassian and Trill contactEdit

"The Vulcans had both contact with Cardassia Prime and Trill already in the late 21st century or the early 22nd century" anyone have a source on this? - <unsigned>

It is DS9 in reference to Tobin Dax. (Also, please sign, --~~~~, your messages) --Gvsualan 04:07, 24 Jan 2005 (CET)

Vulcan foreheadEdit

"A small minority of Vulcans have a small V-shaped ridge above the bridge of their nose, similar to Romulans (among whom this attribute is common). This may be a vestigial or atavistic characteristic from archaic generations of the Vulcan race. This facial feature is usually not viewed with any prejudice or suspicion."

This also needs citation, so I removed it as it sounds like speculation to explain Romulans. I've never seen a vulcan, with the Romulan V. -AJHalliwell 19:42, 13 Jul 2005 (UTC)

The Vulcan diplomat in an episode of TNG had the ridges. Of course she turned out to be a Romulan double agent, but nobody questioned her forehead ridges at the time. Therefore, at least some Vulcans must have the ridges, or she would have immediately been identified as a Rom. (unsigned)
T'Pel doesn't seem to have any ridges. -- Cid Highwind 20:31, 13 Jul 2005 (UTC)
My Bad - faulty memory on my part. Now I remember she had her ridges restored after she returned to the Romulans. Apologies (155)
Cid Highwind, Is your reference to T'Pol in regards to one of the novels written after ENT went off air? If so, are any of those novels considered conical? I hope they are not because the Star Trek universe is very much a creation of TV first and the movies that followed. The books are, I should think merely, appendages that can be easily done without. Indeed T'Pol's emotionalism can be attributed to her exposure to Trellium D. See also “Bounty”, which episode proceeds her exposure to Trellium D, in which T'Pol is affected by a microbe which triggers a false episode of pon farr and leads her to act in a highly emotional manner.
Sorry, I forgot to sign the above post. ElizabethTlesTucker 14:47, May 6, 2012 (UTC)
Cid may not recall his comment from 2005....31dot 14:54, May 6, 2012 (UTC)


does the term "Vulkhansu" have a canon reference? i removed it from the article. -- Captain Mike K. Bartel 00:19, 27 Feb 2005 (GMT)

Physiology notes Edit

Vulcan Strength ? : Does anyone think there should be a mention of Vulcan's being stronger than humans ? I noticed that wasn't in the article, but thought I'd ask before adding it, as it might be too trivial to mention, but it has always been a canonical fact of Vulcans. Especially on TOS- Spock's strength on whe he fight's Kirk, in "This Side of Paradise", and Sarek's strength when he shoves a Tellarite halfway across a room with a little push in "Journey to Babel" for example. I'm sure there are some examples with Tuvok, but the only one that is coming to mind right off hand is his ability to hold on on the outside of the Maglift carriage in "Rise". --Jadza 03:58, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Vulcan strength is also evident in the Enterprise episode "Fusion", when a visiting Vulcan hurls Captain Archer across his quarters like a rag doll. - 20:12, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
Timeline Sensitivity? : Though to my knowledge it's never touched on again, for some reason Tuvok is sensitive to timeline changes in much the same way a Listener is in the episode "Fury". It would be kind of weird if it was just him, so is this a Vulcan ability? - Kuukai2 19:04, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Vulcan Strength: an incoscistency? Edit

Since TOS the vulcan physical superioriry (specialy their amazing strenght) was completely canon. But everytime a vulcan fight this strenght seems to desapear... its frustrating. Some examples include:

  • Kirk's fight with Spock (with the lirpas). There is one shot that focus on a strugle for the lirpa control (they both are trying to use the same weapon).
  • The ridiculous fight between B'elana and the vulcan ensign on his pon far (sorry I forgot his name).
  • Tuvok's fight with Seven... I simple don't get it: Tuvok had dozens of years of martial arts training AND his "superior physical capabilities"... is THAT the best he can do? If all borg are THAT strong - even with most of the implants remmoved - How can anyone fight them hand-to-hand as we saw in Voyager a couple of times? Just wondering...
  • In T'Pal case, she seems to be different... almost fragile in all her fights. The writers simple invented that she has "super sense of smell" and no superior strenght?

Startrek was aways good on the continuity, but this point bothers me... one of the few fights that I believe was ok was Kirks brief fight with Sybok. he was obviously strong. by Dr_Sage

There was also a reference to Vulcan strength and speed in "Take Me Out To The Holodeck" (DS9)- Sisko mentions it in his recount of the wrestling match between him and the Vulcan captain. Roundeyesamurai 07:34, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Re strength, inconsistency: Its possible to be stronger than someone and still be outclassed in a fight by them, you know. There is the matter of leverage, grip, etc. (Re: Amok Time) Also, we know Klingons have great bone strength ("Ethics"), as well as superior physical combat training -- explaining B'Elanna fighting Vorik. Also, it has been established that Seven still has a lot of Borg technology supplying her system. She still has nanonprobes, doesnt need sleep, and had to take a long period of time to eat food again, meaning she also relied on Borg implants for nutrition and energy long after being unassimilated. T'Pol i dont have any examples of her skills -- her mirror duplicate held her own unarmed in a knifefight, which seems superior in my opinion. -- Captain M.K.B. 14:06, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Spock was weak in "Amok Time". That was stated at least twice during the show (by McCoy).
The "canon" about Vulcan physical superiority has always both interested and frustrated me, due to the noted inconsistency. It's not unlike the case of vampires in the Buffyverse: Their strength basically comes and goes depending on the dramatic needs of the writer.
Physical superiority is strongly implied in "Bread and Circuses," where those who "know" about Vulcans -- Kirk, the proconsul, and Merrick -- all fully expect Spock to easily defeat his gladiatorial opponent... which he does. It's also implicit in "Mirror, Mirror," (TOS) where Mirror-Spock very nearly overpowers multiple opponents. It is made more explicit in "Return to Tomorrow" (TOS), where Hennoch wonders why Vulcans, with superiority in strength and other physical attributes, never conquered humans, and even more so in "This Side of Paradise" (TOS).
It's a bit muddled in "Amok Time" (TOS). Spock shows superior strength when he angrily pounds the comm. monitor into a crumpled mass, and when (in contrast to Kirk) he seems unfazed by the weight of the lirpa. But during the actual combat, he seems no stronger than Kirk.
In the Trek movie, "The Search for Spock," "teenage" Spock showed super-strength by throwing a Klingon like a toy.
I think the first time Vulcan strength was "quantified" was "Take Me Out to the Holosuite" (DS9).
In regard to B'elanna (sp.?) and Vorrik (sp.?), I seem to recall the dialog established that part of the reason Vorrik chose her was that her Klingon physique was more durable than a human's, and would better endure the rigors of mating with a Vulcan.
I am fairly certain the "Rise" episode of VOY made explicit reference to Tuvok's superior strength relatively early in the ep., before he had to hang from the exterior of the craft. But for most of the series, his strength seemed no more than human. Since it is implied that all Vulcan males receive some training in Tal-shaya ("Journey to Babel," TOS) and are trained with such weapons as lirpa and ahn-woon ("Amok Time," TOS), and since as a "security and tactical" officer he would have had additional training above and beyond both those Vulcan skill and the typical combat training of a Star Fleet officer, Tuvok's... "ordinariness" in combat situations is a bit surprising. --NorrinRadd 09:57, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
This is ridiculously past the discussion date, but I don't believe the battle between Torres and Vorik was all that bad. Klingons (and half-Klingons) are also stronger than humans, and (half-)Klingons tend to be aggressive, an advantage in a fight with an opponent of roughly equal strength. (Also, aggressive people get into fights a lot, which is good training if you survive.) Kimera 757 (talk) 22:12, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
In T`Pol`s case you should take for consideration fact that during the whole season 3 of ENT, they are actually travelling through the expanse which is unhealthy for Vulcans. Also should remind fact that T`Pol during that flight was exposed to Trellium D which seems to be extremely dangerous for Vulcans. I would recomend you to watch again all of the episodes about Xindi problem, then you should find explanation about T`Pol`s behaviour. --Okrach 23:10, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
The Delphic Expanse is unhealthy for everyone, not just Vulcans. Just thought I'd point that out. :) --From Andoria with Love 09:37, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Despite the fact that your species is extremely passionate and illogical...)Your argument is correct. Okrach 13:07, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Vulcan Beards Edit

Vulcan Master

Vulcan with beard.

I removed...

It could be that Vulcans in the mirror universe have the capability to grow facial hair while Vulcans in the "prime" universe do not. However, it is more likely that the Vulcans of the mirror universe simply do not have the same qualms about outward appearance as the Vulcans in "our" universe, considering Tuvok was seen shaving in "Year of Hell, Part II".
The photo in question also suggests that Vulcan males do not have vestigial nipples, as do the males of many other mammalian species such as Humans. It could be that Vulcan evolution has eliminated such vestigial organs that have no biological function in males.

(not directly next to each other) The "They may have facial hair but they may not" seems redundant. A Vulcan monk (see Unnamed Vulcans from Gravity ((EDIT: Or, see picture right))) had a beard, and Tuvok was shaving, seems saying they might not have had facial hair would be pointless. And maybe Leonard Nimoy had subtle tipples or they were covered by hair, or that picture is just low quality; because when Tuvok had a dream that he went to the bridge Naked in "Waking Moments", he seemed to have them. - AJHalliwell 01:26, 2 Sep 2005 (UTC)

A discussion on Vulcan body hair and nipples. Only on Memory Alpha. Anyways, how about we just say "Vulcans have the ability to grow facial hair, as evidenced by yada yada yada." As for the nipples... let's just imagine that topic never came up, shall we? ;) --From Andoria with Love 04:29, 2 Sep 2005 (UTC)

(Sigh) I'm almost afraid to bring the nipple-discussion back up, but the Vulcan execution from "Amok Time" (TOS) certainly isn't shy about them. File:Vulcan executioner.jpg. - AJ Halliwell 18:47, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

== Well, just for fun, I thought I'd add in my two slips of latinum's worth on the nipple thingy. This pagehas some good screencaps from "Waking Moments"... including a good shot of Tuvok's nipples. Scroll to the bottom of the page...

As for the facial hair issue, I think Sybock, and the Monk on Gravity answer the question. Vulcan's just don't tend to wear beards, I think, more for reasons of grooming- what logical function would a beard serve beyond cosmetic vanity is what I'd expect Tuvok to say --Jadza 03:58, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Vulcans definitely have nipples. Just check out this picture. -- Sci 22:46 10 DEC 2006 UTC
T'Pol is female, not male. 00:37, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
As much as people may hate the movie, Star Trek V: The Final Frontier is considered canonical, and Sybok very clearly had a beard.
I'm wondering if some mention should be made in the physiology (anatomy portion, specifically the Vulcan Brain section) about the apparent ability of a Vulcan body to continue to function as a moderate level with no brain in it at all. Mention is made that the Vulcan brain has direct control of many autonomous body functions, but no mention is made about the fact that a vulcan can walk around without a brain at all.
It may be another case where people grit their teeth about canonic-ness, but 'TOS: Spock's Brain' is sadly canonical, too, and it hardly seems fitting that a section regarding vulcan brains should manage to sneak past without any mention of an episode specifically titled after the most famous vulcan's brain.
I always thought Spock's body was kept alive, and made mobile, by the device McCoy hooked him up to to keep him going until they could get his brain back. And that when he was walking around sans the brain, he was virtually a "radio controlled Spock". --Jadza 03:58, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Vulcan Beards Revisited Edit

Okay, I just finished watching STIII on Comcast On Demand (they're on sale and all available this month, Jan 2006), and noticed an inconsistency.

STV indicates that a supposedly pure-blooded Vulcan (Sybok, though his status as pure-blooded is in question, even by Roddenberry) is capable of growing a full Charlton Heston style beard, not even just a goatee.

However STIII shows young spock growing at an accellerated rate on the Genesis planet, going through puberty and his first Ponn Farr and growing all the way into Leonard Nimoy. The whole time this happens, he doesn't get a beard or even scruffy.

Of course, on the other hand, he also doesn't get really long-ass hair and nails, which would be expected by such a growth rate.

It could be conjectured that, since hair isn't alive, the Genesis effect wouldn't inspire its growth -- but then the newborn-and-grown Spock body should be completely bald, which it isn't.

Granted, the Genesis effect seems to be selective, since none of the other people on the Genesis planet during the growth stage get any older, 'more alive,' or more evolved, yet microbes on the surface of the torpedo shell (which somehow survived reentry) seem to have evolved into what appears to be sushi, and then something long, wormy, and hungry for Klingons. Presumably there would have been microbes on the transported individuals, as well -- filtering out all living organisms except the transportee would cause serious issues with the transportees digestive tracts and other internal organs that rely on symbiotic microorganisms, and besides, THe Trouble With Tribbles showed that anything on the transporter got transported along with the intended transportees, by accidentally transporting tribbles along with Kirk and Spock, so there should have been staphylococus and streptococus on David's skin evolving, plus who-knows-what weird crap grows on Vulcans and (especially) Klingons.

However, it seems odd that it would be selective enough to force Spock to have the same haircut and beard growth he had when he died in the previous installment.

(Yes, I know I'm being picky, but...)

So yeah, there's something goofy about the vulcan facial hair.

so...if i farted like seconds before i got transported, would ya smell it on the planet? lol just kidding, i think if tuvok shaves then they grow hair, thats all there is to it, i suppose you could say that the "black"(for lack of a better word,???african vulcanins???) vulcans might grow hair while the cacasoid vulcans dont, but then there sybok who.....screw it, its in the script and that good enough for me lol Its Time For The White! =/\=Talk=/\= 19:43, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

I know I'm late with this, but Spock was technically dead when he landed on the Genesis planet, so I would guess the microbes were also dead upon reentry and both Spock and the microbes were revived and the microbes then evolved (microbes tend to evolve faster than non-microscopic life in real life), so this would explain why none of the other people were effected. They weren't "revived" by the Genesis effect. Now as for the hair growth and nail growth aspect, I don't have an explanation besides it was probably money and time related.-- 03:30, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Saavik was looking after him while he was growing. Maybe she shaved him and cut his hair periodically, or gave him a hair-growth inhibiting compound to keep him from getting dirty and matted? 06:41, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Something I don't understand Edit

There seems to be an inconsistency between history and physiology regarding the suppression of emotions. Historically they just decided, culturally, that they'd start acting logically. That's why the Romulans split off, etc etc. However, it seems that Vulcans are not just culturally repressed, they're genetically repressed too, as is made mention in the section on the brain (so why aren't the Romulans?). Also, for example, if it was something purely cultural, it wouldn't explain why Spock would be any different to Tuvok regarding his emotions (unless it was owing to his human mother's upbringing). Well, is there any consistent answer? I don't think one can say the Vulcans evolved to be logical, because that would require some system of natural selection for logical vulcans while non-logical ones perished. But that seems unlikely, and it's not as if continual hordes of Vulcans, fustrated by the culture, run off to the Romulans. One way of framing my question would be, if you brought up a full-blooded Vulcan in human society from birth, would it still be logical/repressed? ... Well I just read the Wikipedia article, which seems to think the repression is all cultural, and there are lots of special rituals that Vulcans go through to prove their self-control. That means Vulcans are basically lying when they say they don't feel emotion, which is what the Wiki article says. But would Vulcans lie? Kirk says thing's like "You seem irritated, Mr. Spock?" (TOS "SpaceSeed") and Spock replies in disbelief, "Irritation?" As if he barely understands the question. Why doesn't he say, "Yes, of course I am, I just don't display my emotions since it's better to get on with job, as you know".

The answer is astoundingly simple: Anyone who says "I never lie", is probably the most frequent and ardent liar you'll ever encounter.
We know that the Vulcan society conceals quite a bit about themselves, including physiological and psychological information. Recall, for example, the Voyager episodes where The Doctor states that there is virtually no information in Starfleet medical database regarding pon farr- and, as The Doctor astutely notes, it is quite illogical for the Vulcans to conceal medical information about their species, and ignore a basic biological function of reproduction. The fact that Dr. McCoy made similar statements in TOS, and Phlox (a non-Starfleet physician who worked in close proximity with Vulcans often in his career) had no knowledge of pon farr, confirm that this discrepancy is intentional, not accidental (i.e. an oversight in Voyager's database or The Doctor's program).
The Vulcans are a demonstration of a paradox: Their quest for logic is, itself, an illogical exercise. In the quest for perfect logic and an absense of emotion- Kolinahr- they engage in a wide variety of absurdly illogical and emotionally-driven activities, for example:
1) The denial, suppression, and concealment of basic biological, physiological, and psychological needs, conditions, and processes;
2) The indulgence in (and need for) chanting, rituals, quasi-religious practices, and so forth, for the purposes of re-affirming the quest for logic- and all of which, the Vulcans hold in disdain when performed by other races;
3) Demonstration of behaviors which serve a non-logical purpose.
For example, veganism is widely practiced among Vulcans- however, Vulcans appear to have evolved to be as omnivorous as humans (they have the ability to metabolize animal products, they have omnivorous teeth which closely resemble human teeth, etc.). I think if one were to delve deeper, one would find that Vulcans supplement their diet in some way in order to gain the nutritional qualities of eating animal products (much in the same way human vegans are recommended to take multivitamins to make up for the nurtients their diets lack).
For another example, the notion that "Vulcans do not touch food with their hands" is also illogical- a logical individual would realize that there is negligible risk of contamination with simple handwashing. It isn't logical to, for instance, chop vegetables solely through the use of utensils. Although it may be accomplished, it take significantly more time and energy to do so, with no practical benefit. A logical being wouldn't expend greater effort without being able to justify the expenditure.
In sum, it is fair to say that the Vulcans are *religious* about their quest to eliminate emotion and perfect their logic- in much the same way that communists are religious about their desire to eliminate religion and "equitably distribute" resources. And as any purely logical person would attest, religious (and quasi-religious) motives are not logical. They are emotional. Roundeyesamurai 10:04, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
Wonderfully stated, Roundeyesamurai. As a big "Vulcan fan", I loved your analysis of their quest for and devotion to logic. Your statements are... most logical ;-)--Jadza 03:33, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

To Roundeyessamurai and Jadza too. First of all looks like you are not following behind "the path" of logic but also that Roddenberry`s great concept of the Vulcans is too complex for you. 1. So...the idea of the biological evolution which took place after the decision of taking the path of logic. In theory it is possible. Not only on the pages of the s.f book but also on Earth among humans. For instance Basque people are living since the very early history in the Pyreenees mountains along what is nowadays Spanish-French border. According to medical examinations and DNA surveys that population shows unique abilities such as e.g untypical eye reactions which are not registered among any other population in the World. The time of the Basque division from the rest of the people is actually much shorter than time between Vulcan Awakening and the TOS or Enterprise times. shouldn`t worry about different evolution line among Romulans and Vulcans due to suppression of emotions among Vulcans. After such a long time it already SHOULD have impact on their physiology. 2. I don`t know from where the idea that Vulcans don`t have any emotions at all came to you???Definitely not from the canon.The ONE and ONLY thing which we can discover about Vulcans from the canon is: The emotions are considered as bad by Vulcans since Surak`s awakening and since that time Vulcans are TRYING to be as much logical as it is possible. Nothing more nothing less. It is some kind of pity to be described as a "emotional" by fellow Vulcans. It was never said that Vulcans don`t have emotions at all. Spock as a proper follower of the Surak`s path would never answer on Kirk`s question in the way you mentioned above: "I just don't display my emotions since it's better to get on with job, as you know" because that is simply bad answer in the society in which he grew up.(and that is why Kirk asked this question wondering what would be Spock`s reaction). If you don`t understand that simple joke means that you shouldn`t watch ST at all.In other words, your question: "One way of framing my question would be, if you brought up a full-blooded Vulcan in human society from birth, would it still be logical/repressed?" Nobody would be repressed. Biologically this child wolud stay Vulcan with typical abilities e.g telepathy and so on, but without rituals and trainings all of this abilities wouldn`t be so strong and useful. 3.Why do you assume that religious rituals and practices are all illogical??? 4. There wasn`t a proper information about pon farr because there was no need for that. First of all: Vulcans never assume that pon farr may take place outside Vulcan. They probably also never assumed that one of their "guys" will find himself on the deck of ship which is lost in space maybe even forever (Tuvok`s case). Phlox is not a member of starfleet (and T`Pol neither)it is actually very probable that this was first mission when Vulcan and Denobulan were on board together with humans so it was still rather experiment (give Vulcans some time to learn what konwledge is needed for their people to get on board swiftly among different races, ok?).In Spock`s case situation is a bit different. Spock as a hybrid seems to doesn`t know exactly is his biology is fully Vulcanian or not. It seems that his father Sarek and other Vulcans (T`Pau) same as doctor McCoy are also not certain about that. (Try to remind the episode of the TOS when Spock urgently needed a transfusion and when he had ritual duel with Kirk or the behaviour shown to young Spock by the healer in TAS "Yesteryear"). Anyway i don`t see any illogical behaviour from Vulcans here. Perhaps mistakes but is never said in the canon that Vulcans cannot be mistaken even when they are following the path of logic. Probably you`ve confused them with "the Popes from Rome", different alien race from different story...) 5. Why do you assume that any kind of idealism (e.g vegetarianism) is illogical??? That is bit strange for me. Imagine situation when users of the Esperanto language are going to abandon using this just because other people considered that illogical. In the same way you`ve assumed above that Vulcans are not logical because many of them are vegetarian. If they have found it logical coz` it may not harm animals so they have decided to not eat animals. Where is inconsistency in this statement??? It could be considered inconsistent only if one assumes that any kind of idealism is wrong and illogical by its nature.

Eventually, your comparision to communists seems lack logic for me. I think that tibetan buddhists, taoists or japanese shinto believers who are actually following the way (tao) are the closests ideological counterparts for Vulcans.

P.S Especially for Jadza. Vulcans are the most complete and complex culture in the ST. In my opinion the Roddenberry`s idea of creating race like them was one of the most brilliant and most succesful in his entire work. Okrach 23:14, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

On the contrary, it is illogical for many reasons. The denial or repression of destructive behaviours regardless of their naturalness through strict discipline is entirely logical in that the purpose of Logic is to seek Order and avoid Chaos.
Hatred, for example, is innate but it can lead to the most destructive atrocities, to which human history attests. With an emotional species like humans, it is quite logical to conceal the Vulcan capacity for emotion as long as possible to avoid potential conflicts until such time as the human species finally devote themselves to Logic. It is for this that Vulcans seek out new cultures, in order to encourage Logic in species around them and in order to maintain and increase Order.
When dealing with emotional species such as humans and considering their current lack of devotion to logic, it is illogical to be completely open and upfront about Vulcan culture, physiology, psychology, etc. so that any impact from sabotage that will inevitably take place by the more erratic individuals of their kind can be optimally minimized. Thus, indeed it is most logical for the greater good of Vulcan society to deny and conceal many things that humans are not yet ready to understand.-- 03:17, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Vulcan SmellEdit

Female Vulcan possess a heightened sense of smell. Serious question. Why is difficult to smell a Romulan? No diference. --unsigned

I am not sure how to interperet your question. I'll do my best. You may be asking why Romulan's don't smell as bad as humans. Well, they aren't human. You may be asking why Romulan women can't smell as well. Do we have any reference that says that? if so, then the answer is the same as the different facial features of Romulans, they have had evolution since they left Vulcan. --OuroborosCobra 04:30, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Come to think of it, the heightened sense of smell also was not limited to women. --OuroborosCobra 04:36, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Checking my facts in a script, I find that I am wrong, it is limited to women. --OuroborosCobra 04:42, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
I seem to remember a male vulcan monk asking T'Pol how she can stand the smell, in an episode of Enterprise. 05:58, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
As to the above, you are right. The epsiode is "The Andorian incident". 16:37, May 6, 2012 (UTC)

Beta Quadrant Civilization Edit

This is perhaps a stupid question, but where has it ever been established that the Vulcans are a Beta Quadrant civilization? Time and time again throughout the TNG-era series they have been described as being from the Alpha Quadrant. I am aware that it is considered canonical to say that the Federation is spread out across both the Alpha and Beta Quadrants (I believe the concept was invented to explain why the USS Enterprise-B in Star Trek Generations was the "only ship in the quadrant"), but I've seen nothing to support the assertion that Vulcan is on the Beta Quadrant side of that line (aside from Geoffrey Mandel's Star Charts, which is not canon). I think it would be much safer to go with the on-screen--and therefore, canonical--statement that Vulcans are an Alpha Quadrant race than to use this specious Beta Quadrant arguement. --Antodav 20:33, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree, what's the source? - Kuukai2 21:58, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Sector 001 is set at the intersection between the Alpha and Beta Quadrants, though I've not been able to find it, I would think that with the area of the Beta Quadrant that the Romulans currently control, there's more than enough suggested evidence that the Vulcans are a Beta Quadrant species. We know that the smaller part of the Federation extends into the Beta Quadrant, Vulcan has never been said to control areas of space and as they're part of the Fed, they're in the Beta Quadrant.Lightningbarer (talk) 00:32, March 23, 2014 (UTC)

Adepts of T'Pel Edit

Does anybody know if this guild of Vulcan assasins was referenced outside of the novel Memory Prime? Or, for that matter, the Pathfinder AIs?

Color of Vulcan blood Edit

In a thread at's forums (namely [1]), it was claimed that in "Journey to Babel", red blood flowed through McCoy's equipment from Spock. Would any one care to comment? Will (talk -- contribs) 19:42, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

It is quite green flowing through the equipment. Not red. Can be seen here--20:38, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Protection Edit

Someone seems determined to add non-canon (possibly fanon) nonsense to this article, so it's been protected until further notice. --From Andoria with Love 22:11, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Actual was paraphrased from yext of The Way of Kolinahr: the Vulcans, which is from Parimount Pictures - so how is mentioning the other 2 Philosophic offshoots fom Surok's revolution non-canon? Must just be because YOU don't recognize. Sys-Op with god-complex?
Also it is from conventions when Gene was still alive that "Originally they were meant to be homogeneous after the culling of their wars and reemergence from such a small gene pool." came from. And saying that some fans speculate that the change was made due to PC reasons is perfectly vaild.
Only been a fan since the begining of it all; was trying to help.
Please sign your comments. In any event, The Way of Kolinahr: The Vulcans, while it may have been authorized by Paramount Pictures, is non-canonical. The canon is defined as the material from which derivative materials originate. In other words, the live-action Trek episodes and films, and nothing else.
While I agree that Memory Alpha's canon-only rule is silly and needlessly restrictive, it is, nonetheless, MA's rule. I would suggest that you want to check out Memory Beta, the Star Trek Wiki which encompasses both canonical information and information from licensed sources (novels, games, etc.), if you want to share your info from Way. -- Sci 22:33 28 NOV 2006 UTC
Ah, so this is from an actual source and not just made-up nonsense? Wow, my mistake – it was the Vulcan karate or whatever that threw me off. In any case, as Sci said, the information is non-canon as it comes from an RPG guide and is thus not acceptable on MA, which you would have known had read our policies and guidelines – specifically our content policy – before editing. As has been proven many times on this site, just because someone has been with a franchise longer (even since the beginning) does not mean they know better. Oh, and one more thing – could you have maybe brought this up on your first talk page before I protected it, rather than ignoring it and editing the article again, requiring its protection? Just a thought... ;) --From Andoria with Love 04:15, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Development of Warp Edit

The italics paragraph discussing a statement by Quark in "Little Green Men" discusses when Vulcan's likely first developed warp travel. Specifically:

  • The Vulcans might have had warp drive at least a hundred years prior to the 9th century BC, when the P'Jem monastary was built on a planet presumably several light years from Vulcan, however this trip could theoretically have been made using only impulse drives, possibly in sleeper ships.

Since the entire thing is conjecture anyway, would it perhaps also be prudent to mention the possiblity of a ship using solar sails, similar to the Bajoran lightship seen in "Explorers"? - Ugliness Man 00:31, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I think that sentence verges on a nitpick. What are these "numerous other sources"? -- DS9 Forever 19:01, June 18, 2011 (UTC)

Vulcan Naming Conventions Edit

I have heard that the T-prefix to a Vulcan female name signifies that the individual is betrothed or married, but I can't remember where. Can anyone confirm or deny this? I also heard that the reason so many male names began with S was in honor of Surak, but again, I cannot recall where I heard it. If these 2 statements can be confirmed I would guess they would make nice little additions to the Culture and Tradition section. -- eekee

I do not recall any 'canon' mention of this, nor anything background-related. It may be something from a novel or reference work, but I am uncertain. - Enzo Aquarius 22:55, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, definitely not canon. I believe it came from "Spock's World", or one of the other major Vulcan (planet) novels. - AJ Halliwell 23:00, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Ah, fair enough. I might have got it from Sarek (novel), I haven't read Spock's World. Does anyone know of any canon info that actually contradicts this naming convention?
I've got one: Tuvok's granddaughter is named T'Meni, after her great-grandmother (Tuvok's mother). She was given this name at birth. But Vulcan children are not betrothed until age 7. Therefore, the T thing probably doesn't have anything to do with betrothal/marital status. Little Fuzzy Cygnet 18:56, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
According to the Vulcan Language Institute, the T' prefix means "of." Thus "T'Pring"= of the cloth, etc. – 12:30, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Unfortunately, that is also considered non-canon unless there's on-screen evidence (which I doubt) ;) - Enzo Aquarius 13:06, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
The earliest citation I have is Inside Star Trek #5, November 1968, p. 2. It isn't signed but looks to be by Bjo Trimble. "Men from Vulcan have names beginning with 'S', and women have names beginning with 'T'. In effect, the prefixes act much as do our titles 'Mr.' and 'Mrs.' or 'Miss'." No mention of it indicating a person's marital status. --KTJ 06:26, February 5, 2011 (UTC)

Removed text Edit

I removed the following text:

  • Technically, for a wine to be Port, it must be a fortified wine from the Douro Valley in the northern provinces of the Earth nation of Portugal [1]. While many other areas, such as Australia, South Africa, India, and the United States, produce wines like Port, they are imitations and not genuine Port. Therefore, the term "Vulcan Port" is a colloquialism; This suggests that the production of Vulcan Port, and perhaps Vulcan alcoholic beverages in general, are an imported practice not native to Vulcan culture.
  1. " Port Wine" Retrieved 2007-02-04

Speculation, and improper citation format to boot. -- Renegade54 19:49, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Citations Edit

I re-added a bunch of {{incite}}s to this article, since it's not properly cited. Proper citation on this wiki is a citation for each statement of fact, typically each sentence or short paragraph. It is not proper citation to have a series of uncited sentences or paragraphs followed by 8 or 10 citations - how is the reader supposed to figure out what piece of information came from which episode? -- Renegade54 16:32, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Do Vulcans hide their emotions?Edit

Do vulcans only hide their emotions. Because in a couple episodes I see some vulcans kiss and my friend told me that spock cried in one episode (even though I don't think spock really did). Can somebody explain?--Windu223 20:38, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Vulcans suppress their emotions, but still technically have them, buried beneath the surface. --OuroborosCobra talk 22:24, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
For the record, Spock cried in "The Naked Time" when he was infected with the Psi 2000 intoxication. --From Andoria with Love 23:43, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
And Spock laughed. At least once. ----Willie 13:05, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
He did laugh, but that was in "The Cage", which was the original pilot (and thus, errors are expected). He also laughed in "This Side of Paradise", but that was due to a spore influence. Spock was also emotionally affected by the death of many Vulcans on the USS Intrepid in "The Immunity Syndrome", but that was due to the immense number of Vulcans killed. I think I did catch him laughing at the end of one episode though... - V. Adm. Enzo Aquarius 13:30, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
It was "Amok Time". It was more of a smile and outburst at seeing Kirk alive, but it still counts. He also cried in Star Trek: The Motion Picture.----Willie 18:18, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Nah, it was another episode where he laughed. Kirk made a witty remark with the senior staff around him, Spock did a small laugh. :) - V. Adm. Enzo Aquarius 20:04, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Keep in mind, spock is half human, so any discussion of vulcan emotions centering around him wouldn't be representative of the average vulcan.--Cyno01 19:57, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
There are a number of episodes where Spock shows some emotion; generally there are odd circumstances surrounding this, though. For example, Spock grins in "Amok Time" after realizing that Kirk, who he thought he had killed in his plak tow bloodwrath, wasn't actually dead; he also shouts and throws objects (a tureen of plomeek soup, if I remember correctly) earlier in this episode, when he is suffering from pon farr. He is somewhat emotional in "The Cage", but as someone already mentioned, that was a pilot episode and his role as unemotional was not yet solidified. He also shows emotion in "All Our Yesterdays", when he has traveled 5000 years back in time and regressed to the stage of other Vulcans at that point in time-- Vulcans did not adopt logic and unemotionality until the time of Surak, around the third century AD. Likewise, when Spock cries in "The Naked Time" it is under the influence of the Psi 2000; in "This Side of Paradise", his emotion is also prompted by an alien substance. Keep in mind that Vulcans do have emotion, they just believe that it is best to keep it concealed at all times. Spock becomes rather bashful whenever he slips up, as at the end of "Amok Time" or after returning to the present in "All Our Yesterdays." – T'Pishek 21:05, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Another note- while Spock IS half human, he was raised with the Vulcan ideology, so his human blood shouldn't really affect his ability to conceal his emotion. Humans have emotion, but remember, so do Vulcans!– T'Pishek 12:20, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Also many times it is mentioned that Vulcans have emotions the are much more extreme that what humans would experience, hence it should actually not make any difference that he is half human. Because his human half would have emotions that are less extreme that of what a Vulcan would usually have to deal with and suppress.--Alphapie2 10:36, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes, they do. In VOY: "Gravity" there were flashbacks where young Tuvok questioned why Vulcans where born with emotions, only to be suppressed.-- 10nitro 23:13, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
Vulcans have emotions, they simply suppress them. One of the main reasons have been explained to their extremely violent (even by Earth standards) tendencies. However, they have expressed them, some by choice, some under some sort of influence. T'Pol. and her mirror counterpart would be an example of both. When Picard took on Saraks emotions, he was crying, and yelling for Spock and his wife, insisting that he loves them, and regrets never having said so. T'Pol once cried when she though Archer was dead, or going to be dead. It all depends, in the person, and the situation, I guess. --Terran Officer 23:24, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
they do..seen the expanse?vulcans there went crazy,and let their emotions out.kissing,killing,and happiness(a guy laughed when he killed someone),fear(of being killed)and others.--Sect.oficer danuis 00:52, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
The Vulcan weapons runner (working with the Maquis) in DS9: "The Maquis, Part I" at least reacts to Quark's attempts to court her while making a business deal. She expresses interest in him (which she's on too tight of a schedule to pursue at that time) and appears more to be keeping her emotions subordinate to her logic and purpose rather than to not have them at all MultiplePOV 19:39, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
I think the general consensus on this is that Vulcans are not emotionless creatures, but choose to control them. There have been several instances where damage to neural pathways in the brain have led to emotional outbursts. These outbursts wouldn't happen if they didn't have emotions. Spock, being half-Human, doesn't have the control over these emotions that a full blooded Vulcan would have. The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

A little decency Edit

Okay, is it absolutely necessary that we show the naked backside of a Vulcan female on a public access site? I mean, honestly - it does nothing for the article (we can infer that Vulcans have basically humanoid physiques without it). No one's going to notice or miss it if it gets removed (except for pervs who surf the Star Trek wiki to look at naked Vulcan backsides). However, many people are going to notice it if it stays, and it could offend a whole lot of people (including myself). And little kids are going to look at this. Come on, let's not be scientific snobs who pretend to be above all this, and show a little human decency and morality. The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

So let me get this straight, you are criticizing image you disagree with on a "public access site" that originated from show that was broadcast on a "public television station"?, what's the problem again? --Alan 05:35, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
Oh ya, 'cause everything on public television is really moral and decent right? Censors in this country need to do a better job and that's no excuse. ( 22:00, 8 April 2008 (UTC))
This reminds me of that ridiculous scenario in Florida where one person complained about the title of The Vagina Monologues appearing on a marquee so the theater owner changed it to The Hoohaa Monologues until they realized it was stupid (and also that the play could only be produced without censorship, particularly stupid censorship). The moral of the story is that women have naked backsides just like they have vaginas. That's life. Get used to it. We're not prudes here, and it's not like it's pornography, anyway (which is what little kids are more likely to see rather than a Star Trek encyclopedia.) --From Andoria with Love 09:23, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
I completely agree that it should be removed. It contributes nothing to the article and is only there for the stereotypical sci-fi nerd pervert. If "Andoria with Love" can tell us exactly what that picture's function is towards the article, instead of insulting people who are trying to contribute, then I think we would be far more satisfied with his/her administrative work at this site. ( 21:58, 8 April 2008 (UTC))
Mr. Anon, so far you have been the only one being insulting. We have a rarity among Star Trek races to show an area of anatomy not usually seen. Guess what, Wikipedia has pictures of human backsides. They have penises too. Vaginas! Oh my! If your life is somehow ruined by one page on the internet having about one inch of rear cleavage, then I think you need some counseling. Well, I guess I've now been insulting, unlike the administrator you accused. --OuroborosCobra talk 05:36, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
"If "Andoria with Love" can tell us exactly what that picture's function is towards the article..." It shows a part of Vulcan anatomy, hence why it's in the "physiology" section of the article. That is the sole purpose of its inclusion here; if you are getting any "stereotypical sci-fi nerd perversion" out of it, please keep that to yourself. --From Andoria with Love 20:22, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
You failed the explanation just like I knew you would. The area shown contains no difference from Human anatomy and therefore there is no point in including the picture other than for pervs to wank themselves off it. There is no other picture on this entire site of a part of an alien's anatomy that is shown wherein the difference from a Human is non-existant, because the purpose of the photo would be none. -- 19:32, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
I reverted your removal, as the discussion has not concluded, despite your insistance. You are not the moral guardian of the Internet- if you do not like something you see, do not look at it. You are also not the sole arbiter of whether an explanation "fails" or not. I guess you have a lot of time on your hands if you wish to delete "into eternity". There are page protections that can be insituted if you make that necessary. --31dot 19:43, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
I fail to see the logic in your emotionally driven responses and actions. I've locked the page for two days to let this childish game simmer down. Our policies on decency are the same as those allowed on TV and related films, as this site is a product of what we viewed on said TV series, meaning you are going to find stuff about sex and profanity. --Alan 19:57, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
I don't give a crud whether or not it's indecent!! I know that kind of stuff will be on this site. But, this incident could EASILY be avoided because the picture contributes nothing to the article. It's only there for perverted reasons. I've emailed both creators of the site. They can handle it, but if that picture remains I will cease to contribute to this site because that picture and the way you people are acting is completely unprofessional. I expect better from an administrator of a website. But, I am aware that most act like that unfortunately. That's no excuse though. ( 20:03, 12 April 2008 (UTC))
Which insults have been levied against you? I don't see any here, certainly nothing to warrant the action you seem to want. It has been explained to you what the picture contributes. If you reject that explanation, that is your choice, but that does not give you the right to remove it. If you think a bare back is perverted, that is also your choice, but you do not have the right to impose that choice on the rest of us all on your own. --31dot 20:09, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
For the sole explanation I've heard of why the picture is there, then I am also going to add the following pictures to the article as well: a picture of a Vulcan's wrist, a picture of a Vulcan's elbow, a picture of a Vulcan's knee, a picture of a Vulcan's big toe, and a picture of a Vulcan's fingernail. All pictures would be as irrelevant as the one of a Vulcan's ass so when the lock on the article is removed, prepare for 50 pages of irrelevant Vulcan pictures. And, I don't want ONE complaint from any of you because I am simply working within the parameters you all are setting for what is relevant. Have fun with this. Haha. ( 20:15, 12 April 2008 (UTC))
You say "pervs like you to wank yourself off it" yet we are rude and insulting? Just to humor this matter, why go to an article page when you can go to the image directly? Why even come to this site if you want porn? There is an internet full of it out there. Indeed, the only "problem" I see here is some random anon making threats to everyone who disagrees with her reasoning...hmm. --Alan 20:21, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
I removed the parts of my posts that were intended to insult individuals. I lost my temper and I'm sorry. I still hold fast on my opinions but there was no excuse for the insults. I just get tired of my voice on this and other similar sites never being heard. Sorry again. ( 20:34, 12 April 2008 (UTC))
RE: "I've emailed both creators of the site." I doubt either will care or, at the very least, will be wondering just like the rest of us what the big deal is. Despite your insistence that the image is there for perverted reason, four people – including two administrators – have told you otherwise. Therefore, as it stands now, you can believe what you want, but the image remains. As explained above, you are not the moral authority on the internet; if you have a problem with the image, don't look at it. It's that simple, and that's all you will be able to do in this matter. RE: "If that picture remains I will cease to contribute to this site because that picture and the way you people are acting is completely unprofessional." Since you have apparently not contributed anything short of this time-wasting discussion, I can safely say that will be no big loss. As for us acting "unprofessional," we only seem to be acting unprofessional to you because we are not agreeing with you or doing what you want (namely, removing the image). Basically, we're allowing the image of the naked back side of a woman to be allowed on the site despite your insistence it be removed, so we are "unprofessional." Sorry, mate, but it doesn't work that way. RE: "I am also going to add the following pictures to the article as well: a picture of a Vulcan's wrist, a picture of a Vulcan's elbow, a picture of a Vulcan's knee, a picture of a Vulcan's big toe, and a picture of a Vulcan's fingernail." Let's not get ridiculous, now. Also, please try to maintain at least some level maturity. Also, I wouldn't recommend flooding the page with images to prove a point, as that will only serve to get to blocked from adding anything to the site at all. We understand you do not feel there is a reason to have the image on this page, but everyone else believes otherwise. You can't just say the explanation's not good enough: what other explanation is there for an image of a Vulcan's bare back (male or female) to be in the physiology section of an article? And no, you can no longer use "perversion" as an argument as that has already been refuted. So, we now have one good reason to keep it and zero good reasons to get rid of it. If you have any other reason why the image should be removed, please add it here. Otherwise, you're done wasting everybody's time and this discussion is finished; either accept the image's place and move on or don't accept it and go away as you have threatened. There's only so many times we can go around in circles explaining to you again and again why the image is there and then being insulted by you because you don't believe us, so methinks it all ends now. --From Andoria with Love 21:13, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Well, I'm not really arguing to keep it one way or the other, it's more of the "personal crusade" vs. "freedoms of the site" debate I am focused on. This is hardly worth the issue, as the inclusion of this image is really no different than having to repeat Data's "oh shit!" comment or anything else, but I guess there is a point where you have to stop being "oversensitive" and bring yourself to the point of having the need to "buck in up" a little. I don't care one way or another about it being here, yeah, it is kind of pointless, but so is the sight of Spock's bare chest, (EDIT) which I thought was once on this page, but has since been removed and kind of ruins my point (?). In all fairness to anon's argument, (and please register anon, it makes this convo that much more "personable"), perhaps we should readd that Spock picture, or in the least discuss why one is relevant and the other is not... turning back from my complete 180... "decency crusades" from someone who have never posted outside this discussion, which I think has a lot to do with this, verses the inclusion of other viable examples (Spocks chest) into this "why and why not" discussion equals a more balanced chance at viable solution. --Alan 21:30, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Hmm... good points. Why was the image of Spock's chest removed, anyway? I thought it had something to do with pointing out something ridiculous, like nipples or chest hair. I agree, though, if the T'Pol image is removed, it would make little difference, I just think it's stupid for it to be removed for prudish reasons. If the T'Pol image is kept, though, there needs to be a good reason not to have kept the Spock image, as well. Personally, though, I'm tired of this whole thing and would much rather forget about it entirely. :P --From Andoria with Love 21:47, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
I think this picture is useless. The article already makes it clear that the external appearance is similar. Besides, why is the vulcan naked anyway? The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).
Oh not this crap again. I call for this talk page to be locked. We don't need more of this every time some prude comes along. If it was good enough for the censors, it is good enough for MA decency. --OuroborosCobra talk 04:17, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Geez, all this for an image that has already been seen in millions of homes worldwide? Eh... just ignore them. If the image is really that offensive to them, they can just stop looking at it. If they remove it, we just revert it and protect the page. If it is deemed unnecessary to the article by consensus (meaning by everybody), then it should be removed. Until then, it stays, and there's little they can do about it until everyone else starts falling in agreement with them. --From Andoria with Love 16:27, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
I can`t see anything wrong in showing nice Vulcan back. If somebody is considering that as an act of pornography...well shouldn`t use internet at all.Although this discussion has nothing in common with ST it`s anyway...fascinating Okrach 17:14, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
(Didn't know how far to indent it, heh) Sorry to beat an ld horse, but to comment, I always thought it was there to prove the back is similar, externally at least, when an "X-ray" (Whatever that Rajin person did) revealed the skeletal structure to be way differnt. Perhaps that picture should be close to the one of the bare back? Maybe comparing the two, captions of something along the lines "Skeletal structure of a Vulcans back" and then "external appearance of a Vulcans back" Just a thought, maybe its a stupid one, IDK. Again, sorry for bringing up a rather...heated topic. --Terran Officer 07:19, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Vote Edit

The above comments have devolved into a flame-war. It is simply a matter of whether or not the "Vulcan Posterior" is necessary. Myself, I must say No. We can already assume that there are no differences between human and vulcan posteriorities. Besides this, the scene the shot was taken from was highly sexual in nature. It is not indecent to any great extent but it is beyond what is necessary or even desirable for an intelligent, detailed article, in my opinion. I am going to end this informality now and put it to a vote. I move that the image be removed. Will anyone challenge or second the motion WITHOUT repeating this pointless arguement? Brandonrc 06:11, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Clearly the vote is to keep except for a few anons who don't really go to this site. It's acceptable for the airwaves it's acceptable here. Period. — Morder (talk) 06:14, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Has this been discussed recently, or is the year-old discussion above the only thing this is based on? In any case, no, we do not need to remove this image. -- Cid Highwind 06:21, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Nope, this is the first time anyone's brought it up since August of 2008. With the exception of two or three seemingly prudish anons (or one or two, assuming one is the same person), everyone agreed it should remain. As for the "vote," yeah, that's already been taken care of in the comments above. The image stays. Now, unless there's something to add to the discussion that has not been covered above, I vote to end this discussion once and for all. --From Andoria with Love 06:58, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Agreed. Discussion is over. — Morder (talk) 07:04, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

My apologies, I failed to check the time and date of the above posts. Brandonrc 08:45, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I had to jump in a year later to say that anyone who advocates removing any picture of that particular Vulcan posterior really, really sucks. The world, let alone Memory Alpha, cannot possibly have enough images of that beautiful butt. Although, from a purely scientific point of view, I suppose it could lead the uninitiated to believe that Vulcans are known for having the galaxy's finest posteriors. PS: "Not indedent to any great extent..." What's wrong with you?! It isn't indecent at all. It's a butt. 09:56, July 18, 2010 (UTC)

Alcohol and VulcansEdit

I am confused here, in reading around I see what could possibly be conflicts on what they do and do not drink. Wasn't there some sort of mention some place about how alcohol does not have effects on Vulcans? I could be wrong, I suppose I just feel like I had heard/read/seen that some place. --Terran Officer 17:09, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

In "Requiem for Methuselah" (TOS), McCoy is surprised when Spock somewhat atypically accepts a glass of brandy. --NorrinRadd 10:05, 5 March 2008 (UTC) NorrinRadd
In a TOS episode (Conscience of the King, I think), Spock declines a drink, saying "My father's race was spared the dubious benefits of alcohol." Little Fuzzy Cygnet 17:42, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
I thought about this for a while. Perhaps T'Pol was generalizing a majority of Vulcans, and Spock was talking about his father's race as in his father's family. Or at least those of his family's area of Vulcan. Like how the British can be called a race separate from the Chinese. --Gaeamil 12:03, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
When Tuvok talks of joining Janeway for a glass of wine maybe he is thinking of something like Waard a popular wine substitute in Islamic countries. Lt.Lovett 20:11, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Odd behavior of Vulcans in ENTEdit

What's the deal with vulcans being all emotional and arrogant in ENT? Sure vulcans are always funny-behaving, and there are always some flaws in their logic, but in the new show it's hard to believe that they even try to conceil their emotions. Specifically distracting are the ambassador and T'Pau, both being syrannites. They should be the most controlled people, but instead they are yelling around, being all condescending, then arrogant, then hissing around. Is it to make the shows more suspenseful (i.e. it's hard to be dramatic without raising your voice and making facial expressions), or is it bad acting, or is there actually an in-universe reason? Ant6n 05:36, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Enterprise didn't create the emotional and arrogant Vulcan, it merely expanded upon it. There were certainly numerous precedents of Vulcans appearing arrogant and feeling superior. In TOS, there was always Spock's arrogance towards Human history and behaviour (consider "Mirror, Mirror" for example). In return, half of the episodes ended with McCoy and Kirk mocking Spock's logic. In DS9, there was "Take Me Out to the Holosuite", which portrays Sisko and a Vulcan Captain as carrying a long grudge. The Vulcan Captain does all he can to humiliate Sisko because he believes Vulcans are superior. Is any of this logical? No. Is it emotional. Heck yeah.
So even before (production-wise) Enterprise there has certainly been cases of antipathy between Humans and Vulcans, with both sides acting smugly and arrogant. I certainly think this is emotional behavior. So Enterprise's portrayal isn't that out of left field. Without a doubt, I think the ENT Vulcans can easily become the TOS Vulcans, especially considering that ENT Vulcan society was built on widespread misinformation and lies. – Cleanse 06:29, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Also should keep in mind that even though T'Pau was a Syrannite, she still did not have access to the Kir'Shara ust like the rest of her society. Sure, she had access to Syran, and that was quite evident in how much different and more "Vulcan" she behaved compared to many others we saw in ENT. --OuroborosCobra talk 06:55, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Those are very valid and good points, but it is still a little odd that the actors _portrayals_ are so emotional (i.e. it's not only what they do and say, but how they do it). But maybe its true (well, in-universe) that the society was a little rattled and needed another century to get back to being more Vulcan-y.Ant6n 08:40, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea why actually so many Trekkies like to criticize ENT so much. The mainstream of the critics dislike the way in which Vulcans have been shown in ENT. In my opinion most of the Vulcan characters like ambassador, T`Pau and T`Less has been portrayed properly and their behaviour is not violating canonical standard of the Vulcan behaviours.It looks like Vulcans of ENT, are bit affraid about contacts with emotional species (especially humans). It is obvious when you remind that from ENT you may discover that they haven`t travel often and far from and their planet and also that on earth they are actually living in separated compound in/near San Fransico. I agree with Cleanse that ENT Vulcans may easily become TOS Vulcans but it has to take place somehow. Remember that during TOS, Spock who is a Vulcan/Human hybrid is already adult person, he has been growing up on Vulcan, his mother is still living there despite the fact that she is not a Vulcan.It seems that she hasn`t got any trouble with this (looks like it is Sarek, Spock`s father who`s got more problems with dealing with that).So hyphotetically Sarek when met Amanda Grayson and asked her for marrying him had to already knew at least few things which are simple but important:
1. It is possible to stomach with human woman despite all of the cultural differences.
2. Interbreeding between Vulcans and Humans is possible.
3. It shouldn`t be a problem in finding place to live together without problems.
4. Despite of the probable "conservative" Vulcan opposition he and his wife may live safely on Vulcan.
5. His social position on Vulcan won`t be changed due to this marriage.
6. Their children may grow up safe and sound on Vulcan.
So...since ENT times Vulcans and Humans had to discover:
1. It is not only possible to hybridize but also that it is possible to "cooperate" not only on profesional ground...oops hope you know what i mean...).
2. Vulcans had to acknowledge that humans are not a dangerous species (looks like they treat other "emotionals" eg. Andorians as a possible threat)despite their emotions. They had to discover that contacts with humans will not destroy their way of living.
3. They needed to come up with the idea that cooperation with Humans in federation may gain more profits to Vulcans than separation.
I think that all of the points above should be good enough to explain "odd Vulcan behaviour" in ENT. They had to come to the conclusion mentioned above somehow. ENT times are situated in timeline exactly in times when Vulcans were seeking answers for that questions which were crucial to their culture. In my opinion that is why they sometimes behave odd in ENT...
...But, is much different in T`Pol`s case. Here I`ve got to agree with the critics.Looks like the authors of ENT had a lot of difficulties with her and they`ve made plenty of inconsistencies also.First of all they took a great risk on their back by trying to create a credible (for fans of course) romance between T`Pol and Trip Tucker. In my opinion they failed totally on this. Honestly after seeing Vulcans and Humans in earlier productions it is just impossible to believe that romance like this could go on in this way on board of Enterprise. At the beginning okay...but later on it was worse and worse. Simply I`don`t know what exactly happened to T`Pol in The Expanse but...Vulcans don`t behave like that even when they have trouble with surpressing emotions, they would never attack anybody in the shower with sexual desire ( remind Sarek`s behaviour when he suffered from Bendii disease in TNG "Sarek" episode).I wouldn`t blame actors for that coz` in other situations both of them were allright. These are writers who completely screw it up. Even the simple situation like T`Pol`s proposal to Tucker about joining her in visiting Vulcan was ridiculous. She even hasn`t mention that this is a logical idea from her point of view to ask Trip to join her(just a few simple words could help this scene...)Instead of this she behave like something had bite her somewhere...)that is just one simple mistake but unfortunately there`s much more and also more serious. Perhaps... my opinion is too hard for ENT creators but when you remind Sarek`s behaviour toward Amanda and Spock then it is really impossible to believe that Trip`s romance with T`Pol could happened at all. I see just two possibilities when romance between Vulcan woman and Human man would look more probable. One is when woman (in this case T`Pol) would consider such a emotionally driven creature like Trip as a disadvantaged and then it would be logical to take care of him. Second option for human guy who like to try...would be to save a life of Vulcan woman at least few times than she would might to start consider such a man as her saviour and it could be logical to bond with him. Neither of this situation hasn`t happened in that`s why this romance looks so incredible.Anyway...the Vulcan/Human "romantic relations" are in my opinion very difficult to sort out on screen but I hope that future ST productions can do better than ENT on this subject. The most difficult will be to create a Vulcan person who is still logical as every proper Vulcan but is "convinced by the logical arguments" to romance with a human."Enterprise" writers haven`t done that at all.Instead of it they`ve just made poor T'Pol less Vulcan than she should be. The only good thing about it was fact that Blalock actually added a pinch of sex appeal to Vulcans. Eventually Vulcans and Humans had to... at least try somewhere...)otherwise they wouldn`t have known that is possible and safe at all...) Okrach 19:01, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
This is really deviating away from anything to do with changes to the article. Talk pages shouldn't be used for multi-paragraph essays that are being continually edited over days, and probably won't be read by much of anyone. --OuroborosCobra talk 19:45, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
Ok I can delete anytime and if you think it should be deleted you can do it too. Call it essay or not but isn`t it a paragraph about odd behaviour of Vulcans in ENT.[[[User:Okrach|live long and prosper]] 21:36, 2 August 2008 (UTC)]
I think it is worth noting that in Enterprise the Vulcan philosophy pre-dates that of all the other series. It is worth noting that Suroks teachings are challenged many times in this series and later discovered to be misinterpreted. I suspect the differences are intentional to allow the vulcan philosophy to evolve into what we see in the other series. Also it is mentioned many times some vulcans carry their emotions much closer to the surface than others (T'Pol's mother makes this observation about her when she returns home to vulcan in a later epsidoe) as not all vulcans fully master suppressing all emotion. In TOS it is not until much later (it wasn't until one of the feature films if I recall) Spock attempts to complete the ceremony to suppress all emotion and actually fails to do so from memory. --Lu 09:55, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Vulcans and nitrous oxide Edit

As it currently stands, the article contains this phrase:

One weakness of the Vulcans is their inability to metabolize nitrous oxide. After only a few minutes of exposure to the gas, a Vulcan will pass out. (TAS: "The Practical Joker")

Actually, humans can't metabolise nitrous oxide either. It passes in and out unchanged. We lack any sort of enzymatic or metabolic pathway for nitrous oxide. It takes considerably less than a few minutes for a human breathing nitrous oxide to pass out.

For humans (and, I suspect, Vulcans), nitrous oxide must be mixed with a little oxygen. In humans, breathing pure nitrous oxide is fatal in a minute or two. A mixture of 70% nitrous oxide and 30% oxygen is about the maximum safe concentration for sustained periods of time.

I wasn't sure how to fix this line, since I haven't seen the context of the use of nitrous oxide gas in the episode in question. However, I think I will give it a go. Vivienne marcus 16:40, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps this was meant any exposure at all? Like, no matter how diluted it is, a Vulcan will still pass out. --Terran Officer 07:25, 13 August 2008 (UTC)


Are siblings common in Vulcan families? A part of me would say yes, for...obvious reasons, yet I can only recall two instances (Well, more technically, but two) where there was a sibling relationship, Spock's half brother, and Tuvok's children. Has there been anymore that anyone knows of? --Terran Officer 07:25, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I think it just comes down to the number of Vulan families even seen or mentioned. If a majority of them have siblings or multiple children then I think a 'yes' would be in order. But if you don't see them or they're not mentioned at all then you can't really say. – Morder 08:20, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

No Sodium Chloride in Vulcans: The Evolutionary Conflict Edit

In TOS: "The Man Trap" Spock clearly states towards the end of the episode that Vulcans have less sodium chloride in their bodies. He also states that this lack of salt owes to the fact that humans and Vulcans evolved in "different oceans." On the other hand, a canon source has established that humanoids have similar origins due to the ancient humanoids, not an evolutionary coincidence. TNG: "The Chase" Does anyone want to speculate about this discrepancy? Could it be that the ancients placed enough genetic material on the various planets so that intelligent life would evolve into a roughly humanoid form, but early enough in an evolutionary process so that the life form would acquire traits suited to that planet? Or did the ancients tinker with the genetic code on a case-by-case basis for each planet, in order to help that life adapt to the new environment?

Since Spock says that Vulcans don't have sodium chloride (salt) in their bodies, one might ask what Vulcans have in its place. One possibility is potassium chloride. Since the role of salt in the human body is to regulate the pH balance of the blood, many substances could substitute for sodium chloride. Other candidates include ammonium, calcium, iron and magnesium. (See: Salt (chemistry)#Nomenclature) Vulcan physiology might not even use salt as an electrolyte. (See: electrolyte)

Cheers Winn cochrane 07:33, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Idle speculation that has no place on Memory Alpha. Sorry to be so harsh, but you can imagine, that it hasn't been the first time on this site, that somebody speculates about the origin of something or tries to explain away mistakes in an episode with his own theories. The trekbbs would be a good place to discuss such matters, not our talk pages. --Jörg 10:30, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Vulcan bruises Edit

"Vulcan blood is copper-based and is copper- or rust-colored when deoxygenated in the veins and green when oxygenated in the arteries. Bruises and dermal abrasions therefore take on a green color."

I have a problem with this. The vast majority of human bruises are, in fact, varying shades of blue and purple - deoxygenated blood or a mix of deoxygenated and oxygenated. This would, in Vulcans, translate to coppery or yellowish (I'm not sure what exact colour the mixing of copper and green would create) bruises. Green bruises would be present, but not as common, just as red bruises are present but not as common in humans.

Of course, following this chain of logic, we can also come to the conclusion that Vulcan hickeys would be green. Ah, science! ;)

-- 08:35, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

I removed this line from the main page: Commander T'Pol revealed, regarding Vulcans and the planet Vulcan, that "we evolved for life on this planet." (ENT: "The Forge") The quote is incorrect. Standing in the desert, T'Pol and Archer discuss the heat and glare from the reflected sunlight from the sand. Archer takes off his sunglasses and offers them to T'Pol to protect her eyes. T'Pol says "My inner eyelids will protect my vision. My species evolved on this planet."

I've fixed the quote and restored it.--31dot 01:02, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Emotional controlEdit

One thing I'm not clear on; is the Vulcan form of emotional control a kind of repression, like putting a finger on a faucet, or is it something more analogous to Buddhist Nirvana, a letting go? Wratched 19:10, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

It seems to be a bit of both, but then again, one would have to ask a vulcan. - Archduk3 21:03, 1 July 2009 (UTC)


Vulcans are known for their high degree of honesty. They are extremely reluctant to tell a lie, and indeed it is said that "Vulcans cannot lie". However, they will do so for what they perceive as logical reasons, though they rarely refer to their dishonesty as "lying." Should i add that this was shown in the new Star Trek movie when The older Spock lyed to Kirk ~ 04:31, 12 May 2009 (UTC) ~

Vulcans lie all time. Why do we need a list of every episode they lie in anyway?--Hribar 17:44, 14 May 2009 (UTC)?
They lied all the time during the Enterprise series. --Jaguartalon 06:16, April 12, 2012 (UTC)

Vulcan SurvivorsEdit

When Spock stated that only about 10,000 survived Nero's attach was he clearly refering to the entire species or just to Vulcanites (natives of Vulcan)? I would guess that there could easily be tens of millions of Vulcans left given how long they had to colonize the galaxy.--Hribar 17:38, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Movie states 10,000 and again at the end of the film he states "there are so few of us left..." there about 10,000 left. — Morder 17:40, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
In addition, most established Trek stuff from the period shows that the Vulcans generally didn't colonize the galaxy. Hell, until Spock came along, they didn't even often join Starfleet. --OuroborosCobra talk 17:46, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, I don't recall hearing anything about Vulcan colonies- though you think it would be logical for them to spread out on to more than one planet(in case, you know, the planet is destroyed)--31dot 17:51, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, but how often does that happen? :) — Morder 17:54, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Tuvok was born on a Vulcan colony. P'Jem was a colony, although small. Also, we were given the impression that the Vulcan High Command in ENT was rather territorial and aggresive to boot. You also have to figure that between the various vulcan ships and space stations that would have to exist that they would have well in excess of 10,000 living in space at any given moment. I don't know, 10,000 seems a little low for the ENTIRE race. Maybe they'll elaborate more on this one day.--Hribar 18:01, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

One person being born on a colony is a poor example, it gives us no idea on the size or population of that colony. P'Jem is a great argument against what you are saying, because we actually saw it, and saw how next to no one actually lived there. The Vulcan High Command from Enterprise is another poor example, as it was disbanded during the show and the entire Vulcan species entered into a period of greater "enlightenment" and adoption of Surak's ways, to the point that during the Romulan incident they could not even find enough people willing to go offworld and crew their ships. --OuroborosCobra talk 18:05, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't completely buy into all of what you're saying because we really don't what the state of a lot of these things were in 2258 or what the legacy effect of the things like the High Command would have been. I just stated these examples to contest any assumptions people might have. Besides, I think we're going off on a tangent here. Too speculative. My original thought- are we absolutely certain that Spock was irrefutably referring to the ENTIRE Vulcan species with his 10,000 number? If not, then we should shy away from stating that.--Hribar 18:29, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

It doesn't matter, what was stated in the film is that there are estimated fewer than 10,000 surviving vulcans left...that refers to the entire vulcan species unless stated otherwise. — Morder 18:31, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
I very much doubt that there are only 10,000 total surviving Vulcans left. It is never stated in the film that, that number reflects TOTAL population of the universe. Instead it is stated when discussing the loss of the Planet Vulcan. Also of note is that Vulcan has other colonies then Vulcan itself... could it be reasonable to assume that these other planets contain less than 10,000 total Vulcans? I think not.
I saw a Q&A somewhere with the writers that said the number was only from the planet, not the total number, I'll link it if I can find it again. - Archduk3 15:48, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Link here. - Archduk3 16:13, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Vulcan Sayings Edit

Not entirely sure how to add these, or even if they should be added... however there are many strictly Vulcan sayings that reflect on the Vulcans as a people. Examples are, "live long and prosper," "May your death bring you the peace you never found in life (a Vulcan prayer Voyager Basics 2) and so on. By my count there are about a dozen of these. I will leave it others considerations. The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

vulcans and romulans, do they have any ancestor relations?Edit

ok i know at this point in evolution that they are different, but is it possible that a more advanced race took some primative vulcans to another planet, and the transferred vulcans evolved into romulans? (Megahypernova 16:06, December 22, 2009 (UTC))

Nope, the faction of Vulcans that became the Romulans were on Vulcan as late as the 4th century before leaving the planet. --Pseudohuman 16:44, December 22, 2009 (UTC)
Megahypernova, have a look at Romulan history, Star Trek canon did actually cover the issue of the ties between the Vulcans and the Romulans--*Jasper* 04:00, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

Vulcanians Edit

I searched for "Vulcanian" to find out about the difference in usage between "Vulcan" and "Vulcanian". I ended up here, with the only mention to the term I searched for being "(rare: Vulcanian)" at the top of the page. I think this belongs in the article -- even if it is not reason in cannon but in production.

Obviously, as I searched for it, I do not know about it, so I cannot be the one to add it. *Jasper* 03:06, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

The reference comes from "Court Martial" and "A Taste of Armageddon" and the only thing we know is that the word was used a couple times. — Morder (talk) 03:13, January 18, 2010 (UTC)
...and "Mudd's Women" and "This Side of Paradise" and "Errand of Mercy". One of those things kind of like Bajora. --Alan 03:20, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

And like Bajora is mentioned on its page, it should be mentioned on this page. While it is somewhat like Bajora, it is also on a much different scale - I'm almost through the first TOS season ad I have not yet heard the term Vulcan...

As such, we do know more, we know that originally the term was used instead of Vulcan (production-wise at the very least, one could argue that perhaps Vulcan was used off-screen). Anyway, even it is a single line, it should be mentioned on this page. At least, that's my opinion.*Jasper* 03:50, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

Alright, I'm getting more...

In "This Side of Paradise", Kirk says "A Vulcan never lived who had an ounce of integrity", which I am pretty sure is the very first time that the word Vulcan is used, while the word Vulcanian is used earlier in the same episode. Then, in "The Devil in the Dark" (the next episode, production-wise) the word Vulcan is used again, be it as an adjective. Lastly, "Errand of Mercy" (again, the next episode production-wise) again both words are used, with the episode's article stating that it was the last time the term Vulcanian was used.

If nobody disagrees, I will think of a nice way to put it and add it to the page. *Jasper* 08:15, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

"The Naked Time" was the first time the species was mentioned as "Vulcan". Obviously it was used interchangeably for awhile while things were still being established. --Alan 13:46, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

Vulcan appearances in TNG FilmsEdit

As far as I'm aware, no vulcans appear in "Generations," "Insurrection," or "Nemesis." But the appendix at the end of the article says that they do. Perhaps there were Vulcan extras in these films? The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

Here you go

Vulcan body temperature Edit

A background addition to Vulcan physiology:

Average Vulcan body temperature is 91 degrees Fahrenheit (32.78 Celsius), according to the Star Trek: Star Fleet Medical Manual (1977). Vulcans evolved such that their blood vessels are considerably larger than a Human's, helping to cool their bodies.


Sorry if this isn't the right place for this. There's no editing option for the article on Vulcan physiology (though I see the option to edit on other pages). I was told I could add this as background information to this article using a certain template, but I haven't the first clue how and I can't even try to edit in the first place. I'm such a newb. I'll keep looking around.--DB2020 23:01, June 18, 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure why it wouldn't be letting you edit,(there should be a tab at the top of the page and a link at the relevant sections on the right) but to explain the template to you- you should type the following- {{bginfo|Your information here}} to put non-canon information in the article. Some articles have seperate Background sections for this purpose, but don't worry about that just yet. If you make a mistake, don't worry, others will fix it and explain it to you.--31dot 23:41, June 18, 2010 (UTC)


it states that Vulcans and Humans can have children without difficulty, this is not true. Gene Roddenberry even has a recorded talk between himself and Mark Lenard, portraying Sarek, about the difficulties that occurred to insure Spock's survival. Not to mention what happened with T'Pol's Clone daughter. The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

The conversation between Gene and Mark, if it's something that actually happened, would have no bearing on the canon as portrayed onscreen of the live action Star Trek series and films. As for what happened to Elizabeth, that was explained by Phlox that a flaw in the cloning sequence (or whatever it was) was the cause of her death.--Terran Officer 19:08, June 21, 2010 (UTC)
Something like that did happen, look online you can find several mp3's of it. and why wouldn't it be considered cannon since it is Gene Roddenberry who wrote the script used in the conversation with Sarek (Mark Lenard) regarding his son Spock. ENT has a lot of information that goes against true cannon, this is another time i'd cite that. There is no reason it used just be a single statement that contradicts the truth behind Spock's birth. The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).
First, check the "cannon" policy for what constitutes canon here. Second, there is no "true cannon". Third, there is a different between a cannon and canon. - Archduk3 03:55, November 15, 2010 (UTC)
anon, you lost me. How is Elizabeth T'les Tucker's untimely death related to Spock? --ElizabethTlesTucker 20:32, May 6, 2012 (UTC)
anon, Sorry for the lack of clarity in the above question. What I am confussed about is your statement that there were problems or difficulties in insuring Spock's survival. What relationship does that have to Elizabeth T'les Tucker's situation. After all, she was made up of T'Pol and Charles Tucker’s DNA. She certainly was not conceived—was not born. Also, out of curiosity, what are some examples of ST : Enterprise’s use of non-canonical storylines? --ElizabethTlesTucker 20:49, May 6, 2012 (UTC)

Redundant sentenceEdit

In these sentences: "Vulcans are on average three times physically stronger than Humans, and have considerably faster reflexes. This also means that Vulcan are somewhat stronger than Human males on average." The second sentence is unneeded and even misleading. I'd remove it myself but for some reason I cannot edit this page. CloakedWarbird 04:30, September 5, 2010 (UTC)

I will change it. Please review the discussion above entitled A little decency for the reason for the protection but in short, images were constantly being removed from this page and as a result it was protected from editing by new and anonymous users. After a time you should be able to access it. --31dot 08:25, September 5, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks and thanks, that clears things up. CloakedWarbird 04:54, September 7, 2010 (UTC)

Vulcan Vegetarianism Edit

The article states (twice) that most Vulcans are vegetarians, which is well documented.

However, in VOY 3x02, Tuvok is preparing to eat eggs prepared by Neelix (before a power surge burns them). It seems safe to assume from this that Vulcans are ovo or ovolacto vegatarians. The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

It could be, but we shouldn't put the term in the article unless it was used in canon(which it wasn't). Real world information such as that should be kept to a minimum in articles when not said in canon.--31dot 01:19, June 28, 2011 (UTC)
It also might be a personal preference of Tuvok, and not something that all Vulcans do(just as some Vulcans ate meat in "Fusion")--31dot 01:20, June 28, 2011 (UTC)

Pna explanation Edit

Some of this page is formatted very strangely. Should it really have two bg info sections (one of which stands out very prominently amid the in-universe portion of the article)? --Defiant 14:40, September 28, 2011 (UTC)

Green blood probably not hemocyanin Edit

Hemocyanin is blue when oxygenated and clear when deoxygenated. Their blood probably has some other copper based respiratory pigment that is green when oxygenated or some other compound. 00:07, March 14, 2012 (UTC)

That's fascinating, but I'm not sure what that has to do with changing this article, which is the purpose of article talk pages.--31dot 00:13, March 14, 2012 (UTC)

Perspiration Edit

Vulcans do indeed sweat. Tpol was sweaty in a number of episodes of Enterprise. I think that section is incorrect. --Jaguartalon 06:23, April 11, 2012 (UTC)

If I'm reading this right, the "no sweat glands" is in a background note, because it is mentioned in a non-canon reference book (the Star Fleet Medical Reference Manual). It is not a part of the main article, but is valid background information. 31dot 10:11, April 11, 2012 (UTC)

I guess I just confused it with canon information. --Jaguartalon 06:13, April 12, 2012 (UTC)

Borg species designationEdit

I remember hearing in the episode VOY: "The Raven" a specific Borg designation for Vulcans was given by Seven of Nine. Please could somebody find out what this designation was, and thenadd it to the article. Thanks. 20:18, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Done; for future reference it was on Borg species designations. 31dot (talk) 20:23, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Age of Onset of Pon FarrEdit

The section on Pon farr implies Vulcans go through it starting in their teens or twenties, and Spock, going through it in his thirties was an aberration (and that in Genesis, going through it in his teens was more normal). However, evidence of every other Vulcan in the series would suggest the opposite. Sarek was in his 50s-60s for his first Pon Farr with Sybok's mother, T'Pol has not married or undergone her first Pon Farr before 'Bounty' when she is around 60 (and doesn't marry Koss, who has not undergone pon farr either by season 4). Tuvok married in his 40s. Tuvok's eldest son had a child from his first Pon Farr, and likely was around 60, assuming he was born before Tuvok rejoined Starfleet.

We don't know the age Vorik was on Voyager, but it is unlikely he is younger than 25 based on his rank and experience, but could be older.

My guess is that 35 is early (but not unusually so) which is why Spock (and likely T'Pring and Stonn) are caught by surprise. Genesis, showing Pon Farr in teen years, is likely the aberration. -- 07:47, February 7, 2015 (UTC)

Vilcan makeup (orange pigmentation) Edit

I have noticed that around 1998 Vulcans have started to be portrayed differently. Actors now wear some makeup of yellowish-orange hue, like for example Solok (and the other non-speaking Vulcans of DS9: "Take Me Out to the Holosuite") as well as the replicant Vulcans of VOY: "In the Flesh" like Kinis. The actor who portrays Sturek (β) in the cutscenes of the video game Starfleet Academy (also from 1998), also wears this makeup.

It's possible that these two episodes mark the very first appearances of these orange-colored Vulcans, although I am not certain if they appeared already in immediately preceding episodes. What I am sure about is that no such makeup was used in previous seasons of DS9 and VOY, nor in other Star Trek incarnation. Notably, this make up is not used again in ENT, either.

This seems to be a change similar to that of the Romulans between TOS and TNG eras, where they wear ridges. Unlike in the case of Romulans however, this noticeable change is not addressed in any article. Therefore I plan to add this information into the article so that you can develop it accordingly, hoping it's not trivial.

For the record, I speculate that this new makeup is supposed perhaps to portray the greenish hue Vulcans are supposed to have (which however is never confirmed visually on-screen), but resulted to a yellow rather than green effect in practice. Tiki Mo'ai (talk) 12:44, May 21, 2015 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki