1167: Star Trek into Darkness - Revision history

IdiosyncraticLawyer: /* Trivia */ Adding information

2026-03-28T00:53:05Z

‎Trivia: Adding information

2601:5CF:4100:4FD3:F1EA:B2A4:DC7:AC9B: /* Trivia */ Wording

2026-03-28T00:32:49Z

‎Trivia: Wording

42.book.addict at 17:40, 14 November 2025

2025-11-14T17:40:40Z

Revolutionary girl euclid: /* Explanation */ come on

2025-05-12T23:52:37Z

‎Explanation: come on

TheusafBOT: Reverted edit 369145 by 172.71.147.86 to 367177

2025-03-16T18:42:02Z

Reverted edit 369145 by 172.71.147.86 to 367177

172.71.147.86 at 17:55, 16 March 2025

2025-03-16T17:55:20Z

FaviFake at 17:23, 27 February 2025

2025-02-27T17:23:34Z

108.162.245.247: Added to category CC-BY-SA comics. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikipedia_Star_Trek_Into_Darkness_debate#Image)

2025-02-23T06:02:54Z

Added to category CC-BY-SA comics. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikipedia_Star_Trek_Into_Darkness_debate#Image)

172.69.43.254: /* Explanation */ You broke the link. The {{w}} does the "wikipedia:" bit (that you might put in [[]]s) for you... (The "wikipedia:edit warring"z earlier, is a specific different page from where "edit warring" alone redirects you.)

2024-03-26T18:35:34Z

‎Explanation: You broke the link. The {{w}} does the "wikipedia:" bit (that you might put in [[]]s) for you... (The "wikipedia:edit warring"z earlier, is a specific different page from where "edit warring" alone redirects you.)

Apollo11: Remember, unbiased

2024-03-26T17:10:45Z

Remember, unbiased

@@ Line 38: / Line 38: @@
 ==Trivia==
-After the publication of the comic, the debate continued with full force, complete with {{w|Talk:Star Trek Into Darkness/Archive 5#xkcd Mention|a section of xkcd-inspired suggestions}}. The article itself was soon protected, so that only administrators could edit it. A day later, the title was changed to one including a capital "Into" by the administrator {{w|User:Mackensen|Mackensen}}. (The debate continued on {{w|User talk:Mackensen/Archive20#Star Trek into Darkness move|his talk page}}.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/~*~_StAr_TrEk_InTo_DaRkNeSs_~*~ was a valid redirect link for quite some time, having not been deleted when {{w|Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 January 25#~*~ StAr TrEk InTo DaRkNeSs ~*~|requested in 2015}}, but {{w|Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 May 23#~*~ StAr TrEk InTo DaRkNeSs ~*~|2016}}. The link now redirects to {{w|Wikipedia Star Trek Into Darkness controversy|Wikipedia ''Star Trek Into Darkness'' controversy}}.
+After the publication of the comic, the debate continued with full force, complete with {{w|Talk:Star Trek Into Darkness/Archive 5#xkcd Mention|a section of xkcd-inspired suggestions}}. The article itself was soon protected, so that only administrators could edit it. A day later, the title was changed to one including a capital "Into" by the administrator {{w|User:Mackensen|Mackensen}} (the debate continued on {{w|User talk:Mackensen/Archive20#Star Trek into Darkness move|his talk page}}). {{w|~*~ StAr TrEk InTo DaRkNeSs ~*~}} was a valid redirect link to the movie's article for quite some time, having not been deleted when requested in {{w|Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 January 25#~*~ StAr TrEk InTo DaRkNeSs ~*~|2015}}; it was eventually requested again, approved, and deleted in {{w|Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 May 23#~*~ StAr TrEk InTo DaRkNeSs ~*~|2016}}.
-{{w|The Independent}} published an article about the "[http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/trekkies-take-on-wikis-in-a-grammatical-tizzy-over-star-trek-into-darkness-8475705.html grammatical tizzy]", and the affair as a whole was added to Wikipedia's humorous list of the {{w|WP:Lamest edit wars|lamest edit wars}}.
+{{w|The Independent}} published an article about the "[https://www.the-independent.com/arts-entertainment/films/news/trekkies-take-on-wikis-in-a-grammatical-tizzy-over-star-trek-into-darkness-8475705.html grammatical tizzy]", and the affair as a whole was added to Wikipedia's humorous list of the {{w|WP:Lamest edit wars|lamest edit wars}}.
-The {{w|Wikipedia Star Trek Into Darkness debate|Wikipedia ''Star Trek Into Darkness'' debate}} later received a dedicated Wikipedia article covering it.
+The {{w|Wikipedia Star Trek Into Darkness debate|Wikipedia ''Star Trek Into Darkness'' debate}} later received a dedicated Wikipedia article covering it in {{w|Special:PermanentLink/1051350434|2021}}. In {{w|Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Archive/2022/06#~*~StAr TrEk InTo DaRkNeSs~*~ and ~*~ StAr TrEk InTo DaRkNeSs ~*~|2022}}, ~*~ StAr TrEk InTo DaRkNeSs ~*~ was again made a redirect, but this time to the "{{w|Wikipedia Star Trek Into Darkness debate#Reaction and aftermath|Reaction and aftermath}}" section on the article covering the debate.
 {{comic discussion}}

@@ Line 42: / Line 42: @@
 {{w|The Independent}} published an article about the "[http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/trekkies-take-on-wikis-in-a-grammatical-tizzy-over-star-trek-into-darkness-8475705.html grammatical tizzy]", and the affair as a whole was added to Wikipedia's humorous list of the {{w|WP:Lamest edit wars|lamest edit wars}}.
-There is now a whole Wikipedia page about the controversy: {{w|Wikipedia Star Trek Into Darkness controversy|Wikipedia ''Star Trek Into Darkness'' controversy}}
+The {{w|Wikipedia Star Trek Into Darkness debate|Wikipedia ''Star Trek Into Darkness'' debate}} later received a dedicated Wikipedia article covering it.
 {{comic discussion}}

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 The talk page of a Wikipedia article is used to discuss changes to the article. An {{w|Wikipedia:Edit warring|edit war}} is a dispute about a specific edit to an article, manifesting as a series of edits alternating between making and reverting the change, and usually accompanied by a more-or-less heated debate on the talk page.
-Here, [[Randall]] is referring to a dispute on the Wikipedia article about ''{{w|Star Trek Into Darkness|Star Trek I(i)nto Darkness}}'' (an upcoming {{w|Star Trek}} film at the time of the comic's posting). On the day before the comic was published, the article name had a lowercase "into", and the talk page looked [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Star_Trek_Into_Darkness&oldid=535542349 like this] (rounded off in a friendly way, with the posting of {{w|User:Frungi/Star Trek Into Darkness capitalization|a summary of the arguments}}, and an exchange of virtual hugs). In summary, the debate centers around whether "I(i)nto Darkness" should be treated as a prepositional phrase (as in "Star Trek[king] I(i)nto Darkness") or an unpunctuated subtitle (as in "Star Trek[:] Into Darkness"), whether compound prepositions like "into" should be capitalized in titles, and whether the capitalization of the title in the movie's official promotional material is relevant. The intensity and multiple facets of a debate over one tiny letter is apparently entertaining to Randall.
+Here, [[Randall]] is referring to a dispute on the Wikipedia article about ''{{w|Star Trek Into Darkness|Star Trek I(i)nto Darkness}}'' (an upcoming {{w|Star Trek}} film at the time of the comic's posting). On the day before the comic was published, the article name had a lowercase "into", and the talk page looked {{w|Special:Diff/535542349|like this}} (rounded off in a friendly way, with the posting of {{w|User:Frungi/Star Trek Into Darkness capitalization|a summary of the arguments}}, and an exchange of virtual hugs). In summary, the debate centers around whether "I(i)nto Darkness" should be treated as a prepositional phrase (as in "Star Trek[king] I(i)nto Darkness") or an unpunctuated subtitle (as in "Star Trek[:] Into Darkness"), whether compound prepositions like "into" should be capitalized in titles, and whether the capitalization of the title in the movie's official promotional material is relevant. The intensity and multiple facets of a debate over one tiny letter is apparently entertaining to Randall.
 [[Cueball]] changes the title to "~*~ StAr TrEk InTo DaRkNeSs ~*~" so that every other letter is capitalized, and the title as a whole is framed by tildes and asterisks (a common, but childish and ugly{{citation needed}} way of emphasizing titles online). This is a particularly silly compromise wherein the title is so obviously wrong, both sides will actually agree on something (that being how bad the compromise title is).

@@ Line 13: / Line 13: @@
 Here, [[Randall]] is referring to a dispute on the Wikipedia article about ''{{w|Star Trek Into Darkness|Star Trek I(i)nto Darkness}}'' (an upcoming {{w|Star Trek}} film at the time of the comic's posting). On the day before the comic was published, the article name had a lowercase "into", and the talk page looked [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Star_Trek_Into_Darkness&oldid=535542349 like this] (rounded off in a friendly way, with the posting of {{w|User:Frungi/Star Trek Into Darkness capitalization|a summary of the arguments}}, and an exchange of virtual hugs). In summary, the debate centers around whether "I(i)nto Darkness" should be treated as a prepositional phrase (as in "Star Trek[king] I(i)nto Darkness") or an unpunctuated subtitle (as in "Star Trek[:] Into Darkness"), whether compound prepositions like "into" should be capitalized in titles, and whether the capitalization of the title in the movie's official promotional material is relevant. The intensity and multiple facets of a debate over one tiny letter is apparently entertaining to Randall.
-[[Cueball]] changes the title to "~*~ StAr TrEk InTo DaRkNeSs ~*~" so that every other letter is capitalized, and the title as a whole is framed by tildes and asterisks (a common, but childish and ugly{{citation needed}} way of emphasizing titles online). This is a particularly silly compromise wherein the title is so obviously wrong, both sides will actually agree on something (either agree that Randall's title is wrong or that Randall's title is an acceptable middle ground).
+[[Cueball]] changes the title to "~*~ StAr TrEk InTo DaRkNeSs ~*~" so that every other letter is capitalized, and the title as a whole is framed by tildes and asterisks (a common, but childish and ugly{{citation needed}} way of emphasizing titles online). This is a particularly silly compromise wherein the title is so obviously wrong, both sides will actually agree on something (that being how bad the compromise title is).
 The title text indicates Randall's belief that such arguments are perpetual and will always arise. He suggests that the edit to the Wikipedia page will result in a dispute over variants of Cueballs [[:Category:Compromise|"compromise"]].  One new alternative has the letter cases switched (or shifted, depending on your perspective), one uses a different set of "bracketing" characters (xX_[...]_Xx instead of ~*~[...]~*~), and one uses the original title, but with a lowercase "L" instead of a capital "I" (which appear similar in many fonts).

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 | number    = 1167
 | date      = January 30, 2013
-| title     = ~*~ StAr TrEk InTo DaRkNeSs ~*~
+| title     = Star Trek into Darkness
 | image     = star_trek_into_darkness.png
 | titletext = Of course, factions immediately sprang up in favor of '~*~sTaR tReK iNtO dArKnEsS~*~', 'xX_StAr TrEk InTo DaRkNess_Xx', and 'Star Trek lnto Darkness' (that's a lowercase 'L').

@@ Line 44: / Line 44: @@
 There is now a whole Wikipedia page about the controversy: {{w|Wikipedia Star Trek Into Darkness controversy|Wikipedia ''Star Trek Into Darkness'' controversy}}
-{{comic discussion 1167}}
+{{comic discussion}}
 [[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:02, 23 February 2025
Line 51:		Line 51:
	[[Category:Wikipedia]]		[[Category:Wikipedia]]
	[[Category:Compromise]]		[[Category:Compromise]]
		+	[[Category:CC-BY-SA comics]]