Talk:Star Trek: Hidden Frontier: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 05:38, 28 February 2006

The are many dis-satisfied ex-HF contributors. They are persons who were associated with the production team in its early days and then had a falling out with them. Those persons are also complaining about the poor quality of the series and announcing that it clearly violates copyright laws.

It is true that legally, fanfilms violate the copyright of the franchise owners, but most of them (including Paramount) seem to have adopted the George Lucas doctrine that fanfilms are OK under certain conditions. They are fun for the fans and free advertising for the franchise, as long as they don't make money and are not offensive. The HF staff seem to have some such (tacit?) agreement with the powers that be, but dis-satisfied ex-HF contributors continues to promulgate their vitriol at how awful Star Trek: Hidden Frontier is. Regarding the quality of the show, I suggest you watch a couple episodes from season three or later and judge for yourself. You don't need them to tell you what's worth your time to watch.

2005.10.20 18:28 EDT -- Solak

Only factual information in Wikipedia artlces

I edited the article to follow Wiki's rules: namely, that the article itself should convey only factual, non-disputed information. Disputes are for the Talk page. --Carlos 14:00, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"the article itself should convey only factual"-Yes. please.
Mr. Solak, Hidden Frontier Fan, please supply internet links to support your comments with direct facts that can be checked:
Comment #1. "but most of them (including Paramount) **SEEM** to have adopted the George Lucas doctrine that fanfilms are OK under certain conditions."

See the Legal issues section of the Star Trek, fan made productions article--Kirok 13:54, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment #2. "The HF staff **SEEM** to have some such (tacit?) agreement with the powers that be'"

You DO know what tacit means don't you? This is the text of their tacit agreement ... "_______________________________________" >(-v^)--Kirok 13:54, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anything else is just gossipping and passing on MORE false rumors.

Mr. Solak suggests, "Regarding the quality of the show, I suggest you watch a couple episodes from season three or later and judge for yourself."
What's wrong with the first two seasons?

The same thing that was wrong with my first two years at primary school or your first two years at high school. They were learning their craft and are suggesting you see their best work first.--Kirok 13:54, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article merge with USS Angeles

It has been suggested that Uss angeles be merged into this article or section. (Discuss)

Whilst I believe some members of the USS Angeles still take part in Hidden Frontiers and it is true that HF developed from work done in the USS Angeles, the two groups are independant and exist today concurrently. Are you perhaps suggesting that the article for the United States of America should be merged with that of the United Kingdom since the one is an off-shoot of the other?--Kirok 14:18, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, but the difference there is that both the UK and the US have their own identities, and would warrant their own articles, in your example. However, the USS Angeles article doesn't appear to be about the club, per se, but more about their fan videos, specifially the Voyages of the USS Angeles - which did morph into the Hidden Frontier series, and are listed on the Hidden Frontier page. It makes sense for the relevant important information from the Angeles article to me merged into the HF article, with a redirect added on the Angeles page. MikeWazowski 00:59, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I could be flip and change my analogy to the Roman Empire and Italy, but it gets tiresome after a while. My major problem with this is that, from the way I read it, the films done by the USS Angeles 'video production committee' were independant of the two groups that came after - Hidden Frontier and the Redshirt Filmette series - and i think it would be misleading to suggest that. I could be wrong: What do the groups involved think?--Kirok 07:22, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Kirok. As a former staff member of Hidden Frontier, I can assure that today's Hidden Frontier has had no substantial involvement with the Angeles club since HF spun off from Angeles. It did not morph. It went off on its own. That's like saying you should merge Lou Grant’s listing with The Mary Tyler Moore Show’s because one spun off from the other. Add to that that the Angeles videos have never been, and never will be, available publicly. Also, Angeles produced maybe three videos. Hidden Frontier has produced 42. It deserves to be recognized on its own merits. Carlos 05:35, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 05:35, 28 February 2006 edit Carlosp (talk \| contribs) 113 edits →Article merge with USS Angeles ← Previous edit		Revision as of 05:38, 28 February 2006 edit undo Carlosp (talk \| contribs) 113 edits →Article merge with USS Angeles Next edit →
Line 37:		Line 37:
	::I could be flip and change my analogy to the Roman Empire and Italy, but it gets tiresome after a while. My major problem with this is that, from the way I read it, the films done by the USS Angeles 'video production committee' were independant of the two groups that came after - Hidden Frontier and the Redshirt Filmette series - and i think it would be misleading to suggest that. I could be wrong: What do the groups involved think?--[[User:Kirok\|Kirok]] 07:22, 23 February 2006 (UTC)		::I could be flip and change my analogy to the Roman Empire and Italy, but it gets tiresome after a while. My major problem with this is that, from the way I read it, the films done by the USS Angeles 'video production committee' were independant of the two groups that came after - Hidden Frontier and the Redshirt Filmette series - and i think it would be misleading to suggest that. I could be wrong: What do the groups involved think?--[[User:Kirok\|Kirok]] 07:22, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

	::: I agree with Kirok. As a former staff member of Hidden Frontier, I can assure that today's Hidden Frontier has had no substantial involvement with the Angeles club since HF spun off from Angeles. It did not morph. It went off on its own. That's like saying you should merge ''Lou Grant'''s listing with ''The Mary Tyler Moore Show'''s because one spun off from the other. Add to that that the Angeles videos have never, and never will be, available publicly. Also, Angeles produced maybe three videos. Hidden Frontier has produced 42. It deserves to be recognized on its own merits. [[User:Carlosp\|Carlos]] 05:35, 28 February 2006 (UTC)		::: I agree with Kirok. As a former staff member of Hidden Frontier, I can assure that today's Hidden Frontier has had no substantial involvement with the Angeles club since HF spun off from Angeles. It did not morph. It went off on its own. That's like saying you should merge ''Lou Grant''’s listing with ''The Mary Tyler Moore Show''’s because one spun off from the other. Add to that that the Angeles videos have never been, and never will be, available publicly. Also, Angeles produced maybe three videos. Hidden Frontier has produced 42. It deserves to be recognized on its own merits. [[User:Carlosp\|Carlos]] 05:35, 28 February 2006 (UTC)