Talk:Starship Enterprise

Enterprise E - Dominion War claim

I wonder about the statement it was... an active participant in the Battle of Sector 001 and the Dominion War" in the Enterprise E section. On screen the ship (nor any Sovereign Class starship for that matter) was never seen participating in the Dominion War as depicted in Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. I think it was in books, but as these are generally not considered to always be canonical, I am not sure that it helps to include it - indeed I worry that it may make the casual reader think the Enterprise E did battle with the Dominion in a film or appear in DS9. Dunarc (talk) 22:50, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

"USS Zhukov (NCC-62136)" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect USS Zhukov (NCC-62136) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 28 § USS Zhukov (NCC-62136) until a consensus is reached. Hog Farm _Talk 04:02, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

In-universe template added

Much of the "Depiction" section is written closely to in-universe. Pointing to the "NX-01" example:

"Enterprise was the first Earth-built starship capable of reaching Warp 5. The ship was commanded by Captain Jonathan Archer and played an instrumental role in the founding of several proto-Federation alliances. Enterprise had significant engagements with the Klingons, Suliban, Xindi and the Romulans and played a central role in the "Temporal Cold War"."

This reads like it's out of whatever in-universe Wikipedia equivalent exists in Star Trek's universe. Needs to be re-contextualized to reflect the depiction as seen in the real world we live in. There's a few more examples sprinkled throughout.

I added a tag to the section reflecting such. Unidentifiability (talk) 02:12, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Presentation order

The ships are listed in in-universe commissioning order. I think some of the in-universe concerns might be at least partially addressed by instead presenting (and labeling sections as appropriate) to reflect real-world production order. I'm willing to do that work. Is there any objection or additional support to re-order based on real-world appearance rather than in-universe? --EEMIV (talk) 17:17, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

For anyone interested, I've started drafting a revised article at here. Because it's in userspace, the thumbnails are hidden. As part of a re-order, I'd also suggest that the mirror universe/alt-universe one-off appearances and fleeting mentions be removed as trivial. I also think greater emphasis on the design lineage/processes needs to be added to justify the fair-use rationales for the various ships -- as it currently stands (both in the current article and my draft), the images would in most instances be merely illustrative, and that doesn't clear the fair-use bar. Anyhow - I invite comment here and contributions on the draft. --EEMIV (talk) 02:31, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a stab at this: the article is stupendously bad so it's good to see some improvement. I think there's probably sourcing for the mirror/alt universe stuff, so I wouldn't scrap it entirely, I'd just summarize them and lump them in a "other ships/depictions" subhead at the end (something like the "there's an Enterprise on the 32nd century" stuff is probably fine to lose entirely.) Stuff like the captains, etc. feels like it should be in prose if it's notable, rather than being any sort of list. I'm not sure about the ordering. Obviously chronological makes a lot of sense for TOS to the movies, but when you get to stuff like backfilling in the B and C and the reboot stuff, I'm not sure how it would be best to order. Might be a matter of dumping everything about each one and rearranging how the sources most logically fit. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 19:58, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Okay, I took the plunge. As I look at series/episode articles about the non-notable ships, I'm a little aghast at the lack of production information about the vessels - but, that also reinforces that they probably wouldn't pass GNG as standalones. I've got a looooong week of work coming up starting tomorrow, so disengaging for a bit - but, I'll revisit as time permits. --EEMIV (talk) 02:18, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

pages vandalism

Most recent edit is pages vandalism of summary. 2001:8003:A955:CE01:898D:5D45:634D:CA40 (talk) 13:23, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

Y Fixed. --EEMIV (talk) 14:05, 22 October 2025 (UTC)