This is a page to discuss the suggestion to delete "Memory Beta".

  • If you are suggesting a page for deletion, add your initial rationale to the section "Deletion rationale".
  • If you want to discuss this suggestion, add comments to the section "Discussion".
  • If a consensus has been reached, an administrator will explain the final decision in the section "Admin resolution".

In all cases, please make sure to read and understand the deletion policy before editing this page.

Deletion rationale Edit

This follows:

It was my understanding that Memory Alpha is not a directory for other websites, sister sites, or otherwise.

If indeed it is felt that a non-canon redirect is necessary for the novel reference, then this could be turned into a redirect to Memory Prime, but I'm not sure that is something we should start to encourage. --Alan 00:46, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Discussion Edit

  • I'm mixed on this. Memory Beta is practically a sister project to Memory Alpha. Remember that they even changed their name in homage to us. This is one that I would rather keep. It isn't an unrelated website, like --OuroborosCobra talk 01:00, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
  • What about creating a page Memory Alpha:Memory Beta, which explains that MB is our sister project, and whatnot? --- Jaz 01:03, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
  • We link to Wikipedia more than any other site, that practically makes them a sister site too. Jorg, Bernd and several other contributors here contribute to both Ex Astris and Trekmovie on several parallel topics, just like MB does with MA, but that doesn't matter. My point is: we have a link on the Main page for Memory Beta, and we have an About page that we could easily make reference to our sister site on. It's not like it's being totally ignored, nor that there isn't a more appropriate place to reference it that is not in our primary namespace. --Alan 01:16, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Linking to Wikipedia doesn't make Wikipedia a sister project. Contributing to Ex Atris doesn't make it a sister project. --OuroborosCobra talk 01:56, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep. As Cobra said, it is not simply a link to an ordinary Trek-related website(which would merit a deletion), but a related project. It also could serve as a way to direct users to the correct place for their noncanon articles that they might post here. It could be a Memory Alpha page as Jaz suggests, but I don't think it should just go away.--31dot 02:05, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Well... "Practically" a sister project means what exactly? Correct, it means "not" a sister project... not because it is a bad site, but because we don't have any official sister projects at the moment. That means that, where "notability" in our main article space is concerned, MB is "just another" Trek fan page and not different from any of the examples already given. To be honest, even if a site would be an official sister project, I don't know if that should mean we have to give it an article here. So in short, I don't see how we really can keep this and continue to delete others - which we were doing for a reason. For the moment, I'd say delete this. (Note: Nothing here is meant as an insult towards MB. PLease don't interpret it as such.) -- Cid Highwind 08:05, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete. I love Memory Beta. Its a great resource, but I don't think that necessarily means we should have an out of place article simply out of some sense of obligation. Memory Alpha has a very specific mandate, to create a resource of all canonical information, from the perspective of a future historian. Of course we have a handful of "real world" articles, but they really should be restricted to people who helped produce Star Trek, and the episodes they helped produce. Hossrex 00:08, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Wait. The link Alan provided for had a keep resolution...Where was the vote to delete that page? – Cleanse 08:58, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Here. It came post-policy decision. The first one (above) came pre-policy decision. -- Sulfur 10:43, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Thanks for that. I didn't doubt there was a discussion, just couldn't find it when I searched "". :-) I think Delete. MB already has their attractive logo and a link on our main page. It should probably also get a link in "partner sites" on MA: About. But a page is hardly needed.– Cleanse 10:58, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete. I too love Memory Beta. I use it as much as, if not more than, Memory Alpha. And there should definately be a link to it from Memory Alpha because of how closely the two projects are related. But as long as there's a link on the Main Page to it, I don't see the need to have an article about it. Between the main page link and the links at the bottoms of so many pages, it's not as if the article is needed for people to find Memory Beta, nor does the page contain essential information that couldn't be learned from a quick glance at Memory Beta's main page.– Mste0819 05:25, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Admin resolution Edit

  • The general consensus was for deletion, despite a couple of opinions to the contrary. Articles/links such as these do not belong in the main namespace. -- Sulfur 13:38, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-NC unless otherwise noted.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Stream the best stories.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Get Disney+