memory alpha
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Rigel system article. For general discussion, go to Memory Alpha's Discussions or Discord. Consider enabling EasyTalk to improve the usability of talk pages.

Merge with Beta Rigel

In the 2150s star chart from Star Trek: Enterprise, the star system that would be called "Beta Rigel" in star charts from the 23rd and 24th centuries was identified as "Rigel". Based on this evidence, I am suggesting that these two pages, "Rigel system" and "Beta Rigel", be merged.Memphis77 (talk) 06:03, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

I copied my original post at Beta Rigel and pasted it to here, as I feel more people would visit the Rigel system page than the Beta Rigel page.Memphis77 (talk) 02:52, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

I don't remember off top my head, but was it listed as Rigel (Beta)? If so I would assume Beta is the system and Rigel is the planet? ‐ Yaroze86 (talk) 03:22, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

It's (Beta) Rigel.Memphis77 (talk) 17:22, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

Support. ‐ Yaroze86 (talk) 13:08, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Support. LauraCC (talk) 23:02, 16 February 2026 (UTC)
Support as long as we can get a side-by-side comparison of the star charts to confirm it's the same star.
It's worth noting that the stated production intent of the "Beta Rigel" name was to split all the Rigel references in two: let the remote Rigels (like Rigel VII) be at the real-world Rigel hundreds of lightyears away and keep their feeling of remoteness, and let the nearby Rigels (like the Rigel X that NX-01 visited) be at a new nearby Beta Rigel and comply with the less-than-90-lightyears restriction of "Two Days and Two Nights".
We can't really make that split happen as archivists, because production intent isn't the same as canon evidence, and anyway we wouldn't know which Rigel is which. (For example, no way to know whether Geordi's Rigel III is Rigel or Beta Rigel.) But could we at least rewrite the article along the lines of, "Rigel is the name of one or more planetary systems..." to leave in the possibility of the two-Rigels interpretation? Atosen (talk) 10:21, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
Canon evidence is that Federation space has become smaller in Kurtzman Trek and the area of explored space is much smaller than what was depicted in Berman Trek. As proof, the Galactic barrier is depicted on the star chart seen on the Athena bridge as a region that is no longer at the galactic rim but is located within the Alpha and Beta Quadrant.Memphis77 (talk) 06:55, 24 February 2026 (UTC)
Here's a new wrench to be thrown in the works. In the File:Athena Operations Star Chart.jpg, "Beta Rigel" is shown, as well as a new entry - "Rigel 1". In the big "UNITED FEDERATION OF PLANETS", Beta Rigel is straight down from the F in "Federation", and Rigel 1 is straight down from the F in "OF". Just far enough away from each other to definitely be two different systems. -Mtmerrick (talk) 04:45, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
So doing the chart. I am 99% sure Rigel1 is using a Starbase symbol. Yaroze86 (talk) 15:29, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
I believe we have to be careful when weighing the evidence from the star charts seen in "300th Night" and "Rubincon". The errors are numerous - multiple systems, starbases, and arrays given the same name or designation and labels assigned to the wrong locations. Beta Rigel is one such casualty of this error prone chart. The Deneva system is mislabeled as "Orion (Pi³ Orionis)", while the latter system's location is labeled as "(Beta) Rigel". As for Rigel1, it has the circular symbol reserved for a star system. This location has been labeled either as this (the Star Trek: Enterprise chart, Stellar Cartography reference work) or as "Beta Rigel" in the Star Trek: Star Charts and several charts seen in the canon.Memphis77 (talk) 16:46, 18 March 2026 (UTC)