is this a real thing? -- Captain MKB 17:31, February 26, 2011 (UTC)

Yes? I suppose it hasn't been named as such, I'd prefer "Prime reality" really, but whatever we call it, we need a page to represent this reality just as much as we do any that are alternate to it, no? --8of5 08:36, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

I suppose I'd wish it to be more in POV also, although I'm not fond of either possible name as they are not derived from any source.

Since we already have an article for the universe, this seems somewhat redundant. There THE universe and then there are alternate universes. Doesn't the universe page represent this reality as you seem to feel this one needs to? -- Captain MKB 15:20, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Oh I agree the article needs work and the point of view to change (It would be an excellent place for us to give background notation on how both the Destiny and Online timelines are considered to be versions of the prime timeline too). If you read the universe article you'll see it incorporates the rather handy explanation of alternate realities from "Places of Exile" into it, which notes that any one universe can contain multiple timelines/realities - so the current page name is confused and inaccurate terminology anyway. This one just happens to be the main timeline we know, but from the point of view of a different timeline it is in fact this timeline that is alternate. This timeline is as individual and definable as any other timeline in the Star Trek universe, and as the main one rather more important than any other I'd say; certainly article worthy, almost every alternate timeline we know of (barring the odd exception like the X-Men and IDW universes) has branched off of the prime one.

As for the source; various real world things (credits, labels on toys, and such) use the "prime" notation to mark the different Spocks apart. The Star Trek Online website uses the term "prime timeline" here, so maybe we should use that? Anyway, I think this article definitely should stay, has huge potential to expand, and should be moved to either "prime timeline" or "prime reality". --8of5 16:42, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

So my remaining question is: What makes the universe different from the primary universe? The subgroupings of the timeline and alternate timeline can both exist as subarticles of the universe, and the universe and alternate universes exist as counterparts to each other as subgroups of multiverse (which contains the universe, alternate universes, as well as other dimensions. Why do we need additional redundancy when it is acknowledged that there is a multiverse, with numerous parallel dimensions, and the universe is one of them, and anything that is parallel to the universe is an alternate universe, and the universe is expressed as a linear nature timeline, and it does contain alternate timelines? This tree I've just expressed pretty much equates the 'primary universe' with the 'universe' article itself, and clearly notes that any other alternate variant already has its own article. -- Captain MKB 17:03, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Ah, I see, you are missing the definition of universe and timeline (or reality) as given in Places of Exile (and explained in the universe article) and in alignment with current scientific thinking. A universe is a unique place, with its own physics and spatial characteristics. Alternate timelines, be it this "prime" one or any other are all facets of any one universe. So thinking that this article on one timeline within the universe and the article on the universe are one in the same is incorrect. This article refers to one specific reality within this universe. The multiverse is not the totality of all timelines within this universe, but the totally of all different universes (which in turn contain many different timelines).

I can see why this would be confusing when we have terms like "mirror universe", "alternate universe" and this current page name "prime universe" being thrown around, but these are all just inaccurate terminology; they are in fact all just different timelines/realities within a single universe. This is the current scientific thinking and is explained by one of our contemporary sources. (Much like many older sources will have referred to Pluto as a planet while we now recognise the modern scientific terminology on that matter as reflected by more modern in-universe sources). --8of5 10:31, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

So perhaps "prime reality" or "primary reality" would be a better descriptor to separate this from that assumption of being a universal relation, and avoid my confusion? I'd be fine with either of those and I think that would clarify things immensely as the article grew and was brought in line with POV. -- Captain MKB 15:59, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

Exactly. I personally prefer "Prime reality". Given the STO website has used "prime timeline" however I'm not sure whether we should defer to their terminology; given I think it is the only official source to have ever named this particular timeline/reality (unless it's been described in a Star Trek Magazine article at some point maybe??). --8of5 06:42, March 18, 2011 (UTC)