Talk: Alita class

Name of this class[]

Before there is a controversy, I know that this title is non-canonical and that it comes from Star Trek: Online. I could not think of a better name for this class, which is briefly seen in "Vox". As so far we don't have a named ship associated with this class, I could not use the [name]-type format for this class. Maybe one of you can come up with a better name. For images of this class from the episode "Vox", please see here: [1]Memphis77 (talk) 01:22, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Quite honestly, I think you're well in the clear here...Up until now, every single by Dave Blass confirmed Starfleet shiptype ported over from Online has been officially given its in-game class designation. I for one cannot think of any reason why Blass would deviate from the by now well established practice...--Sennim (talk) 10:53, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Think about it. What's the source? A game. Until Blass or Matalas or the official ST twitter or instagram accounts mention it, this is a fan assumption. There are NO ships designated in Blass' tweet about the ships at the site of this class. This is an unidentified class/ship, and that's it. -- Sulfur (talk) 13:47, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Dave Blass has referenced the class in one of his tweets. It's canon. - [2]. Appalachia Actual (talk) 18:14, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Did you read my entire post, Sulfur? I make it clear that I am aware of the issues involved, and I am asking for suggestions from the community for a more appropriate title until the class name is verified. In future, please take the time, Sulfur, to read my complete post before responding. Thanks.Memphis77 (talk) 18:20, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

First of all, Appalachia, regarding: Dave Blass has referenced the class in one of his tweets. It's canon. This is absolutely not true...it is named by a valid resource, but that does not make it canon. It allows MA to use the name, which is one of several ways we've already bent the rules...if we bend too many more we might as well merge with Memory Beta.

Second of all, Memphis, you (and several others) have been here how many years and still can't figure out how things work or where things go? Indents, precedences on similar subjects, conversations we had about the exact same thing after episode one of the same series? Do you not think it is incredibly frustrating for Sulfur and I seeing what should be considered veteran users be absolutely clueless on how things work, so of course we needn't address every point everytime, because its absolutely tiring to do, week after week after week. Season, after season, after season. When the answers are out there, especially for unnamed classes based on unnamed ships.

It seriously feels like 50 First Dates on MA every few months when another new season of something premieres. --Gvsualan (talk)19:44, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

I think MA will need to update it's guidelines. We didn't use to get reference material such as this back in the day when the site was founded. I think Dave Blass, and Terry Metalas have spoiled us with such behind the scenes info. Also, those LD ships you have linked - They look like they could be the Echelon-class. ;) Appalachia Actual (talk) 00:14, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

I know I am not a veteran editor here, so my opinion means little, but I want to say that; recognizing that the producers of the current shows are regularly canonizing ship designs from beta cannon, referring to them by their beta canon names should be a non-issue. When the ship is canonized, for all intents and purposes its name comes along with it. There hasn't been a single instance yet where that is not true. In my opinion that doesn't make Memory Alpha blur into Memory Beta, because they're only canonizing the good parts (well, that's debatable) of beta canon, and ignoring the garbage which makes up 90% of it. Furthermore, the big, "Unnamed [thing]" lists are unwieldy and design-wise look outdated. There ought to be a better way of arranging that information. I appreciate the Lotus Flower class et al finally getting their own pages. Hunter12396 (talk) 00:51, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

On the contrary, your opinion matters a lot. It's what helps make this page better! Appalachia Actual (talk) 09:59, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

I have no idea was a "Beta cannon" is, but I assume you meant "Beta canon", which a complete oxymoron, and once again, bginfo from the production staff doesn't "canonize" what you see on screen, it supplements it. And again with the indents? As this conversation continues, I still stand behind my last comment 100%.

Additionally, the link to Blass' video absolutely does not show the name Alita class, so nice try, but the name is still not supported by a recognized resource. –Gvsualan (talk) 12:36, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

If we go by your logic and reasoning, than the following classes would not exist on Memory Alpha: Lotus Flower-class, Provider-class, and Wanderer-class. These classes did not have a "recognized resource"; they were from a non-canonical source, namely, FASA. We need a clear policy on this and having pages which have set a precedent which goes against your current beliefs on policy clouds the issue.Memphis77 (talk) 13:16, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

...which came to fruition (the first two) thanks to the completely ignored discussion at talk:Snipe class was posted. Mind you, that was a full year after the fact.

Second, these aren't my beliefs, this is what MA:RESOURCE states. –Gvsualan (talk) 13:38, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

I feel that I am going down a dark rabbit hole with this discussion, and I am bowing out.Memphis77 (talk) 13:45, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Typical. Walk away from the discussion you started, thast why nothing ever gets figured out around here in a timely and rational manner. –Gvsualan (talk) 13:49, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

I feel that your attitude is one of the reasons that discussions are "why nothing ever gets figured out around here in a timely and rational manner." There is a saying I learned last year, which is "Resisting the resistant", and it refers to the situation where both sides in a conflict are not listening to each other. I believe we are in that situation. The best thing to do is call a pause and come back later or not come back at all, if it is in the best interest of one party or the other, which is what I am doing.Memphis77 (talk) 14:02, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

There's no reason to be rude. I highly doubt you have been into star trek for 19 years and have never heard the term "beta canon". Hunter12396 (talk) 14:19, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Actually, until about 3 months ago, I'd never heard the term. I still don't know what it means in terms of Trek. The Star Wars franchise has various levels of "canon" that are well defined by LucasFilm. Star Trek, on the other hand, has "canon" and "licensed material", and the latter is deemed non-canon.

P.S. Don't add your comments in the middle of someone else's comments. Please add them to the end of the discussion. -- Sulfur (talk) 14:29, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

RE: Hunter, first of all, don't weasel replies into the middle of an existing discussion, and second how am I being rude? I'm stating facts, because there is no such thing. "Beta valid" maybe, but "Beta canon" is a complete oxymoron.

RE: Memphis, my so-called "attitude", or rather reason for, was already explained above. The fact no one can seem to "get it" after so many years is beyond mind boggling. If you feel I am being "more aggressive" this time around, it is again, because 1) talk:Snipe class was completely ignored and set a new precedence for today, and 2) if no one enforces or addresses these things today and nips them in the bud... we will be setting another new precedence you'll bring up again for next time. --Gvsualan (talk) 14:40, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

You try to be a grammar nazi to me over "cannon", but don't even bother to get your own grammar right in doing so: "I have no idea *what* a "Beta cannon" is". Canon is defined as "a collection or list of sacred books accepted as genuine", just as there are differing canons of the Bible, there can be differing canons for a franchise; "beta canon" is a valid term, the fact that you do not subscribe to it is irrelevant; I don't either. Based on this and the Constitution II class talk page, it seems that some of the major editors here are completely ignorant of beta canon - oh, sorry, "supplementary licensed material as presented on Memory Beta", I don't want to be a weasel again - which I have no idea how is possible, unless you've only ever watched the shows and never discussed them anywhere, where you would have picked up beta background information like I did. I'm not saying you should have to have a great knowledge of it, it just seems odd you've been into Star Trek for so many years and have completely avoided it. Sulfur, regarding your comparison to Star Wars, the star wars "legends" canon is analogous to star trek's beta canon, it's the canon encompassing licensed works which are not regarded as part of the official story. Gvsualan, I'm sorry you feel ignored re the Snipe-class, probably no one else thought it was a significant issue, or they were content with the way it had been handled already. Like I said before, though I don't think you understood me, IMO the name comes along with the ship design once it appears in the shows, or "alpha canon". And yes I know that's not, or didn't used to be, MA policy. Hunter12396 (talk) 15:15, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Just, wow. Let's call it what it is, non-canon and permitted resources. MA and MB cannot create canon, and canon is already well defined here, so I don't need your interpretation. I, personally, don't *care* about non-canon materials, if in the least, because it helps me help keep MA as bias free as possible from non-canon sneaking itself into our database, because when that happens, crap like this happens. –Gvsualan (talk) 15:27, 17 April 2023 (UTC)