SGCommand
mNo edit summary
No edit summary
Line 6: Line 6:
 
:::::I'd go with just Star Trek until we know for sure he was in Star Wars.
 
:::::I'd go with just Star Trek until we know for sure he was in Star Wars.
 
::::::It was an obvious Star Trek reference and it's apparent to anyone who has watched the show. Take our word for it. —[[User:Ka'lel|Ka'lel]] 23:07, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
 
::::::It was an obvious Star Trek reference and it's apparent to anyone who has watched the show. Take our word for it. —[[User:Ka'lel|Ka'lel]] 23:07, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
  +
:::::::First of all, user 217.27.168.94 there's no reason to insult Star Trek. It's not Gene Roddenberry's fault that you have poor tastes and even if it were there's no reason to point it out here. Second, Ka'lel is right that it is definitely Star Trek. Picardo played a major role in Voyager and anyone who's seen the show knows that an organisation specifically called the Federation played a major role in every Star Trek series (with the technical exception of Enterprise, although like many Star Trek fans I prefer not to talk about that). Even without the connection to Voyager the term Federation is as synonymous with Star Trek as beaming up, phasers and Kirk sleeping with alien women. Besides, the description given in the episode clearly matches with the Star Trek version but is really nothing like any of the Star Wars groups with Federation in their name.

Revision as of 11:28, 16 June 2010

Every time I add that the Woolsey's comparitaion to a federation (in the background notes) could also be a reference to Star Wars and not just Star Trek, someone removes it. And I'd like to know why. Iaselar 12:58, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

It was a Trek reference, not a Wars one. Last I checked, Robert Picardo was in Trek than Wars, and when the word "federation" is used, people would instantly think "oh, they're referencing Star Trek" because the Trek federation is more well known than the Wars federation (I heaven't heard that Wars federation being heard as often in the movies). In other words, it's a Picardo thing. -- Matthew R Dunn 17:53, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
But it's Sheppard that says that "the federation had ships", and as far as I know he hasn't been in either, so I think that we should have it as a reference to both until someone actually says it was a Star Trek reference and not Star Wars. And actually, I never knew of the federation in star trek, since I never watch that crap. 217.27.168.94 07:23, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
He was in Star Trek Voyager where he played the Doctor. He was pretty funny in that show. He was also in First Contact for a minute, but when was he supposedly in Star Wars.--User:WarGrowlmon18 16:09, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Still, I think that we should have both until an actual source says otherwise. Iaselar 17:52, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
I'd go with just Star Trek until we know for sure he was in Star Wars.
It was an obvious Star Trek reference and it's apparent to anyone who has watched the show. Take our word for it. —Ka'lel 23:07, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
First of all, user 217.27.168.94 there's no reason to insult Star Trek. It's not Gene Roddenberry's fault that you have poor tastes and even if it were there's no reason to point it out here. Second, Ka'lel is right that it is definitely Star Trek. Picardo played a major role in Voyager and anyone who's seen the show knows that an organisation specifically called the Federation played a major role in every Star Trek series (with the technical exception of Enterprise, although like many Star Trek fans I prefer not to talk about that). Even without the connection to Voyager the term Federation is as synonymous with Star Trek as beaming up, phasers and Kirk sleeping with alien women. Besides, the description given in the episode clearly matches with the Star Trek version but is really nothing like any of the Star Wars groups with Federation in their name.