Pages suggested for deletion

  • Aliens, Amarillo Design Bureau, Weapons. Articles about a card game, not in any way canon. Alex Peckover 20:07, Sep 6, 2004 (CEST)
    • Keep Star Fleet Battles - notable early Trek game, inspiration for the Starfleet Command PC games - but clean-up. Delete the rest. -- Michael Warren | Talk 20:20, Sep 6, 2004 (CEST)
      • Okay, I withdraw Star Fleet Battles from nomination as it is, I guess, just as valid as any of the video game articles. Perhaps the content from the other articles should be moved over to make one larger article ? Alex Peckover 13:52, Sep 7, 2004 (CEST)
    • Keep Star Fleet Battles, delete the rest. -- Dan Carlson | Talk 16:50, Sep 7, 2004 (CEST)
      • I'd defend Star Fleet Battles and Amarillo Design Bureau also. It's a meta-trek article, and they are responsible for releasing a licensed Star Trek product. These fit into the larger picture of listing companies that have had a place in Trek history because they were licensed to release a Star Trk product. -- Captain Mike K. Bartel 19:46, 9 Sep 2004 (CEST)
    • Mike makes a good point. Change my vote to: delete Weapons, keep the others. -- Dan Carlson | Talk 16:17, Sep 10, 2004 (CEST)
  • List of non-sentient lifeforms. Recommend deletion. I've moved the content to much more accessible Xenobiology page. -- EtaPiscium 18:28, 9 Sep 2004 (CEST)
    • Delete, the mentionded lifeforms are indeed better placed on the Xenobiology page. a seperate page is unnecessary -- Q 19:54, 9 Sep 2004 (CEST)
    • Keep. According to our guidelines, articles that are just lists of items should be named "List of X". Additionally, a list of non-sentient lifeforms is not exactly what I'd expect at Xenobiology. Suggestion: Move content of Xenobiology to this page. Then either create a link to this page on Xenobiology (preferred, a definition of "Xenobiology" might be added later), or REDIRECT Xenobiology to this article (like, for example, Races and Cultures). -- Cid Highwind 11:08, 10 Sep 2004 (CEST)
    • Keep. -- Dan Carlson | Talk 16:17, Sep 10, 2004 (CEST)
      • What then would Xenobiology consist of? I don't think it's appropriate to redirect it to Races and Cultures, because non-sentient organisms don't have either race or culture. Maybe it should redirect to List of non-sentient life-forms instead? Also, there are a number of current lists that violate the "list of X" rule, such as Language, Government and Politics, and Religion. -- EtaPiscium 18:27, 10 Sep 2004 (CEST)
        • Sorry, I was being a little ambiguous. What I meant was that Xenobiology should eventually redirect to List of non-sentient lifeforms, just as Races and Cultures redirects to List of Races and Cultures. You are correct in pointing out the other articles. Those should either contain original content, or redirect to a "List of ...". -- Cid Highwind 14:26, 11 Sep 2004 (CEST)
      • Keep this article. Xenobiology should have a disambiguation, or list of related articles which will include lists of non sentient life-forms, sentient ones, plants, etc etc. -- Captain Mike K. Bartel 19:33, 10 Sep 2004 (CEST)
  • Interstellar law. Content currently duplicates the Diplomacy and Law page. I've placed a list of actual laws on the Diplomacy and Law page; I don't see a need for a separate page for laws. -- EtaPiscium 19:15, 10 Sep 2004 (CEST)
    • Keep, as "Interstellar Law" seems to be a separate document though (with quoted articles), as referenced in Star Trek VI. All other codified documents like that rate their own articles, such as each individual documents referenced by Cogley in Court-Martial. Unless there is more solid proof that this is a general term, as opposed to the specific document title i am interpreting it as being. --Captain Mike K. Bartel 19:33, 10 Sep 2004 (CEST)
      • OK, if Interstellar law is actually a document then it should be added to the list of other laws in Diplomacy and Law. The article does need to be rewritten to reflect the fact that it's a document and not an umbrella term for all interstellar agreements. -- EtaPiscium 00:57, 11 Sep 2004 (CEST)
  • Grub Worms - This is an un-wikified sub-stub, and I believe it's non-canon besides. If I'm not mistaken, the contributor confused "grub worms" with "gree worms" or "tube grubs". I ran a complete search of the scripts for DS9, and there's no canon reference of "grub worms". -- Dan Carlson | Talk 23:19, Sep 13, 2004 (CEST)
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+