Talk:Cardassian starships

RE: Hybrid

Isn't the inclusion of the Hybrid from Bridge Commander a little... random? Bridge Commander is not canon, so the mention of the Hybrid seems a little irrelevant in an article about canon Cardassian warships. 195.188.221.191 (talk) 12:57, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I would agree on this. Other games also include other Cardassian ships that are not listed here (e.g. Star Trek: Armada and Star Trek: Armada II). This page should only include ship types appearing on screen in shows or movies. John Darrow (talk) 01:22, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

RE: Vetar

How can the article even suggest that the Vetar was destroyed in the Badlands in "Caretaker"? Tuvok clearly said after it was hit by the plasma storm that the Vetar was "sending out a distress call on all Cardassian frequencies". Not quite the work of a destroyed ship. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.129.63 (talk • contribs)

The article notes that "The Vetar was either heavily damaged, disabled, or destroyed by a plasma storm ", which seems fairly accurate. We know from dialogue that it sustained a "hit on its port blade", after which they "sen[t] out a distress signal on all Cardassian frequencies". We also know from dialogue that ships of the Vetar's size don't tend to enter the plasma storms, Chakotay noting that "Gul Evek must feel daring today". We know they were damaged. We know that they were sufficiently damaged they sent out a distress call on all Cardassian frequencies. There is no direct evidence that it was destroyed, but we never again saw Evek, and in order to have survived, either another vessel must have entered the storm, or else Vetar must have made her own way out. Neither of these are impossible, but the last VFX we saw of the Vetar had her listing badly, and we know that even at full strength, she had been unable to maneuver to avoid the plasma tendrils. Therefore, with no conclusive proof either way, and a fairly dire situation for all on board the Vetar, stating the possibilities the way the article does seems the fairest thing to do. It's also worth noting that in "The Voyager Conspiracy", Seven brought up the image of a Cardassian ship, allegedly the one that had been persuing the Maquis, and saying that the Caretaker had sent it home. If that's the case, their chances of survival may be either better or worse, given that (1) it's possible he sent them back not inside a plasma storm, and (2) ships hit by the displacement wave were badly damaged, even when they were hit when they were at full strength. All in all, we just don't know for sure. --Mnemeson 16:19, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

nerds

Why don't you guys go look up "sex" and learn something —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.68.10.93 (talk • contribs)

There's nothing like that warm, fuzzy glow you get inside when people so obviously take the meaning of WP:CIVIL to heart... I will, of course, assume good faith, and thank you for your kind suggestion of what next to reference.--Mnemeson 09:29, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Cardassian Dreadnought.jpg

Image:Cardassian Dreadnought.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:07, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Split suggestion

I have suggested to split Dreadnought vessel in a different page as Cardassian Dreadnought. If nobody has problem with this, I will proceed this way in a few days. --Luca Mauri 11:18, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I think it would be a bad idea. Several of these ships used to have their own articles but were merged here -- for obvious reasons (e.g. not being able to sustain an individual article). As it stands not enough information is known (OOU or even for that matter in-universe) to warrant splitting the Dreadnought. These pages are presently in a bit of a state, you should concentrate your efforts on trying to clean them up, rather than splitting. Matthew 11:26, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Hideki class.jpg

Image:Hideki class.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:16, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Cardassian freighter1.jpg

Image:Cardassian freighter1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:23, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Keldon class.jpg

Image:Keldon class.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:10, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Assessment

I have added a quality assessment rating and importance rating to this article. Feel free to change them as the article improves! Also, feel free to add more issues to the list below, and strike them out (strike) when they're completed. — OranL (talk) 18:48, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Notable issues

• The article needs many more references, especially for the real-world design information.
• The article could use some more real-world information about the designs, if this information is available somewhere.

Redirect

This article does not offer the subject any kind of real-world treatment. I am redirecting to the species article. --EEMIV (talk) 20:32, 24 January 2012 (UTC)