This article is within the scope of WikiProject Star Trek, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to all Star Trek-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Star TrekWikipedia:WikiProject Star TrekTemplate:WikiProject Star TrekStar Trek articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Media franchises, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics related to media franchises on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Media franchisesWikipedia:WikiProject Media franchisesTemplate:WikiProject Media franchisesmedia franchise articles
Based on the "Films Section" section above, I am assuming the coloured lines that are used in the reception charts have been around for a long time. I was wondering if anyone knows the decision making behind them? I personally feel that if there is going to be coloured lines used to differentiate the sub-franchises then yellow for TOS and blue for TNG would make more sense, but I also know that we tend to avoid using colours like this for film articles. The fact that we don't use colours in the film overview tables so the charts don't actually correspond to anything is also weird. If no one knows how these colours came to be then I would recommend we remove them or have a discussion about using more logical colours and in a more consistent way. - adamstom97 (talk) 03:34, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I recently went ahead and added an infobox to the article and was reverted by David Fuchs who said "I don't think the infobox adds much here". I'm confused by this rationale, as no infobox should really be "adding" anything to an article. The point is to provide a quick summary of the key points that are already in the article per MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE. I know it isn't required, but it is generally expected and certainly useful to those who may want to see the key things without searching through prose. - adamstom97 (talk) 11:44, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's a diffuse film series covering decades with drastically different cast, creative teams, etc. I don't particularly see the utility of deciding the most important elements of the franchise are a based on credit, production company, and cumulative grosses without any context. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchstalk18:11, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It is a summary of the details in the article, no infobox has context. I didn't try to cram the different producers, actors, and production companies all into the infobox so I just included the elements that apply to all films. - adamstom97 (talk) 21:41, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There also seems to be some question as to whether the origin movie is set in The Kelvin Timeline. However, during CinemaCon Paramount confirmed that the movie is set decades before the 2009 movie (see reference).--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 06:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That source does not confirm what timeline the film is set in, you are making an assumption. Before the 2009 film could be in the 24th century of the Prime Timeline, and it could also be early in either timeline since that film is the divergence point. Plus, we have a reliable source saying the film could be a prequel to both timelines. We need to wait until we get further clarification about the setting. - adamstom97 (talk) 08:03, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I really am not assuming as additional reliable sources (here and here) identify the movie as taking place prior to The Kelvin Timeline, and identifying the movie as a prequel to those films. DisneyMetalhead (talk) 01:50, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Those are not "additional sources", they are repeating the reports that we already have. And if you look at the sources that we have listed in the article you will see that there is conflicting information about which timeline the film will be set in. We need further clarification before we can confirm if it is a Kelvin film or not. - adamstom97 (talk) 08:16, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lastly, the topic regarding the specification of "TV film" for Star Trek: 31 -- it has been stated that the movie is "a TV movie". My argument would be that this specifier is misleading to the average leader, given that the term is generally used for a movie that airs on broadcast television. Wouldn't some other statement be more helpful/effective in this article? The movie is developed for a direct-to-streaming platform.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 06:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Series created for streaming, including the modern Star Trek series, are called "television series". There is consensus at WP:TV to generally avoid the term "streaming series" as it suggests that there is a difference between series created for streaming and series created for traditional television networks. It also suggests that series created for streaming are more like web series. The same principles apply for films created for streaming. - adamstom97 (talk) 08:07, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with DisneyMetalhead that including made-for-TV movies (or the modern equivalent) on a "List of Star Trek films" when all the others were specifically created for and shown theatrically is a bit off. Section 31 is its own thing and I don't think should be included here, especially since a lot of the other common discussions (like grosses, CinemaScores, what critics are likely to be covering the film for reception) are not going to be the same. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchstalk16:15, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think DisneyMetalhead said anything about that. This section is discussing whether the term "television film" is appropriate for a film that is made for streaming rather than traditional television. As for whether it should be included in this list, it is still a film and this is not "List of Star Trek theatrical films" or "List of Star Trek feature films". It would also be way too early to discuss splitting it off to its own list since there is only on TV film so far. Maybe in the future if we get more then that could be a possibility. - adamstom97 (talk) 16:25, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]