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
Does anyone have a schematic of the internal layout(If it exists...I'm sure I saw one somewhere a few years ago.)?
J.P.Lon15:34, 23 June 2007 (UTC)reply
I added a link at the top of the page, does this work better for you? If you still think a new page would be in order, you should officially request a move so it will be more apparent that there is a proposal for moving.
Ejfetters07:16, 8 September 2007 (UTC)reply
See
Help:Merging and moving pages - there are templates that you can place at the top of the article itself, not the talk page, that will draw attention to the proposed moves, and draw users to comment on it. For what it's worth, I agree with your proposal. Make sure you place appropriate tags on all pages involved in the merger proposal.
Ejfetters04:42, 9 September 2007 (UTC)reply
I actually haven't been able to find any article templates related to moving. All of the templates listed in
Help:Merging and moving pages are for mergers, and none of the articles currently listed in
Wikipedia:Requested moves have any special template on them. It seems strange that merging and moving would be treated so differently, but this appears to be how it works.
Jim05:18, 9 September 2007 (UTC)reply
Hmm, you're right, I never even realized that! But as you said about posting it at Wikiproject:Trek, yeah, that I'd definitely do, then others there will see it. I don't see why it would be a problem. I would place a dablink at the top of the new page, something like, "For the space station of the same name, see
Deep Space Nine (space station) or something like that, that way anyone who did mean to go to the old site, and expected it to be there, would immediately see it at the top. As I don't even think we really would need a disambiguation for it.
Ejfetters05:46, 9 September 2007 (UTC)reply
All right,
Nat went ahead and implemented the change, which seems ok since there's something of a consensus.
Deep Space Nine is now a redirect to
Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, which has a disambig message at the top pointing to this article. A lot of links need to be changed: I've gone through about 60 articles that used to link to "Deep Space Nine" and redirected the links here, but there are still
over 200 articles that link to "Deep Space Nine". I would certainly appreciate some help with this.
Jim23:18, 9 September 2007 (UTC)reply
Nay They are each different space stations...one is a 23nd century Federation built, Federation administered station, the other is a 24th century Cardassian built, Federation administered, Bajorian space station.
nat.utoronto22:45, 30 December 2007 (UTC)reply
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Deep Space Nine (space station). Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
this tool.