Talk:Star Trek

Focus of article
I've looked back at the early history of this article, and am perplexed how we got where we are now. When it first started, it was — I think properly — an in-universe article. Star Trek exists as a part of the Whoniverse in a way that Doctor Who does not in the Star Trek universe. On MemAlpha, you can only write a DW article from an out-of-universe perspective. Here, though, I think we've got an obligation to write two articles: One called Star Trek, which is in-universe, and one, perhaps called Star Trek (franchise), which is for behind-the-scenes connections. Propose split of this article.  Czech Out  ☎ | ✍  17:11, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Support

 * Seems like a good idea (it's grown, rather a lot since I last looked in at it). --Tangerineduel 17:58, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Article Name
Why was the article name changed from Star Trek to Star Trek: The Original Series, it seems wrong to name it as such? Bigshowbower 06:11, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Obviously the article has since been changed back. It should remain "Star Trek" as it is a discussion of the franchise in general, not just the original series (see the reference to TNG in the Shada webcast, for example, which is listed here). 23skidoo 23:44, January 4, 2010 (UTC)

San Francisco
I've twice reverted an addition to the article which is extremely tenuous. It should not be re-added. The fact that the TVM happens to be set in San Fran is not grounds for establishing a link to Star Trek. Settings alone do not a connection make. Should we say that Daleks in Manhattan is making a subtle reference to "The City on the Edge of Forever"? Obviously not. Is the appearance of a space whale in The Beast Below a reference to Star Trek IV? Again, no. It takes more than a superficial similarity to assert that Doctor Who is actually referencing Doctor Who. 00:26: Sun 06 Nov 2011