Rantings of a sub-editor

November 5, 2010

Ructions in hyperspace

Filed under: Corrections — substuff @ 11:44 am

It is often said that geekiness and sub-editing go together. Why, just yesterday, my current boss revealed an entirely wholesome appreciation of Victorian taxidermy. I’m not joking (although I thought he was, for a good couple of minutes longer than it was polite to do so).

So it’s perfectly fitting that my fellow sub-editor Vinnie B should grace my inbox with a Star Trek story this morning.

It seems News.com.au reviewed the book opposite, in an article called Haynes offers Star Trek fans chance to get inside the Enterprise engine room. Unfortunately, there were several fundamental errors in the article, which prompted a furious backlash from some fans.

I quote here from a thoughtful contribution by Your Mum’s Lunch. (Lovely.)

OMG, could this article be any more wrong. The Enterprise-E did not replace Kirks enterprise. The excelsior class Enterprise-B replaced kirks ship after Kirks ship was lost at the Genesis plant at the hands of the klingons. Upon their return to McKinley station after travelling back in time to get some whales, Kirk and crew were handed command of the enterprise-A, a constitution refit.

That’s only a snippet – you can read more here, if that’s your kinda thing. But I must include his conclusion to the comment: “This article wreaks of failure.” Oh, it does, it does.

The best bit, however, is News.com.au’s correction, An apology to every Star Trek fan ever (that’s the name of the internal link,  incidentally, which I think is much better than the actual headline).

A little flavour for you, but I do recommend a visit to read the whole thing:

There was no intention whatsoever to suggest Captain Kirk may have commanded the Galaxy Class Starships Enterprise-D and Enterprise-E.

Any damage to the Star Trek brand incurred by the use of the term “hyperspace” is regretful.

No malice was intended and a correction to the original article will be made.

We also agree that Patrick Stewart is a handsome man, a sentiment expressed by several readers.

Addendum – We’re also sorry for any errors in this apology.



  1. Funny, but I must admit as a fellow Trekkie, Your Mum’s Lunch does make a valid point…

    Comment by Nadine — November 5, 2010 @ 9:10 pm | Reply

  2. “This article wreaks of failure.”

    Indeed it does. Reeks, shurely?

    O I still really care about subbing that much to be bothered to point that out. Gah.

    [or should that be geeks of failure ahahahaha……]

    Comment by Kit Davies — November 8, 2010 @ 3:07 pm | Reply

    • Was kinda my point, Kitster! And don’t call me Shirley.

      Comment by substuff — November 8, 2010 @ 3:09 pm | Reply

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: