Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparative Ranks and Insignia of Star Trek

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was - kept, option to merge - SimonP 21:01, May 17, 2005 (UTC)

Comparative Ranks and Insignia of Star Trek

[edit]

DELETE: While a good effort at making an inteesting article, two thirds of this article violates the concept of No original research. With the exception of the Starfleet ranks, and a very small portion of the Bajorian insignia, the rest of the info in the article is based on conjectural information which has only been published on unoffical fan sites. The Cardassian, Romulan, and Gorn insignia are therefore pure theory not supported by any references to the actual producers of the Star Trek series. It would be possible to do a total revamp of the article, but I feel it would be easier to simply delete the existing one and start over. -Husnock 17:34, 9 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep I know the TV show doesn't get too much into insignias and such, but are you sure that most of this is speculative? It seems to me that at least one of the many, many, many official and semi-official Trek books out there would cover it. I mean, there are official books covering everything from how to wish your grandma "Happy Birthday" in Klingon ("Quchjaj qoSlIj") to how many moons orbit the sixth planet of the Delta Triciatu system (four). So it seems hard to believe no official source ever laid out what the ranks and insignia are... surely the show's writers at least have style guides to cover such things for the purpose of continuity. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 18:47, May 9, 2005 (UTC)
    • Further comment After submitting the above, I had yet another thought: there have been plenty of licensed Star Trek paper RPG materials as well as numerous video games, some of which allow the player to play as various non-Federation races. Surely these materials must cover the ranks and insignia. I am now 98% certain that the article could be preserved with official information if someone looks hard enough. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 19:05, May 9, 2005 (UTC)
      • Comment. WikiProject:Star Trek set up the rule of thumb on this which is canon should take precedence, with fanon and conjecture and non-canon being mentioned as trivia. And the official party line from Paramount is that canon is only material seen on screen in a live-action production. So unless a comparative chart of ranks was visible in an episode or movie, or there was considerable on-screen evidence of ranking (i.e. Starfleet), it's very difficult to put together a chart like this that remains within canon. Even official books like the Encyclopedia aren't considered full canon unless a writer makes use of the information therein. 23skidoo 19:59, 9 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Insignias are the frend of the Dalek and must not be desroed, inacuracies should be fixed, no disagreements here. I have no direct access to such official sources, veify my data I am cool with that. --Cool Cat My Talk 18:53, 9 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Furter comment: I think we should use games such as Starfleet Command 3 as primary source. That has Romulan, Klingon, Federation, and even Borg ranks. I am not sure which ranks if any appeared at the armadas. Ill look into this right now. --Cool Cat My Talk 23:07, 9 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - I really dislike the fan-made up stuff being here, and would much prefer the article be completely redone to stick with KNOWN information, not made-up info cause someone enjoys photoshop. That said, i'm voting the topic, not the article, and it should absolutely be rewritten, not destroyed. --John Kenneth Fisher 18:56, May 9, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep but rewrite from scratch to remove non-canon material and fanon, which pretty much means all the Gorn info, to begin with. This chart also looks very familiar ... sure it's not a copyvio of the Star Trek Encyclopedia? 23skidoo 19:54, 9 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Transwiki to Wikibooks assuming this isn't fanon or copyvio (pretty sure about the former, not sure about the latter). A Man In Black 20:10, 9 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Subject to verification, I vote delete as non-notable trivia, tangentially related to a major fictional body of work, and apparently a mix of non-canon fanfic and possibly some copyvio. I believe we should let the WikiProject:Star Trek editors maintain notable material where it belongs and remove unencyclopedic cruft from WP's article namespace. Per WP:FICT, this topic doesn't appear to be major or significant, so even if it were verifiable to be canon, it wouldn't merit an article. Barno 20:37, 9 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge, while I don't exactly question the notability of the information, I do question whether it deserves its own article. Frankly an article with just a table of the ranks doesn't do anything for me and I don't really see how any expansion will fix this. Personally I think the information should be split to the articles about whatever Race/Organization. Meaning the information about ranks for Klingons should probably be at Klingon. The information on StarFleet is duplicated anyway at Ranks and Insignia of Starfleet, which is a much more comprehensive article. Theres no need for an article to make comparisons between races etc. K1Bond007 21:54, May 9, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep Nothing wrong with documenting fan speculation about ranks. Although it may upset trek purists, any rank that has been reasonably widely discussed is encyclopedic enough for us if properly documented. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 00:05, 10 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep cleanup and expand, concur with Starblind. Megan1967 02:03, 10 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - As I have mentioned on the article's talk page, some of the ranks have been mentioned or can be referenced from canon sources like The Klingon Dictionary. I don't think the article should be deleted, as it does serve a purpose, but I definitely agree that it should be cleaned up and more references should be provided. Ben Babcock 03:40, 10 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge with Ranks and Insignia of Starfleet. — Davenbelle 12:00, May 10, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep and remove original research. According to the standards at Wikipedia:WikiProject Star Trek, non-canonical material is considered original research and should be removed. If there's not enough left afterwards for the article, delete. --Carnildo 21:06, 10 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per Davenbelle. Radiant_* 07:44, May 11, 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge with Ranks and Insignia of Starfleet unless Ranks and Insignia of Starfleet becomes too long. Keep otherwise. -- AllyUnion (talk) 03:25, 12 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge I agree with K1Bond007, we should strive for more articles like Ranks and Insignia of Starfleet. This actual comparative table should maybe remain with links to the respective fleets and a basic overview. and we also need to make references to real sources, as Ranks and Insignia of Starfleet does and remove original research -- Rmrfstar 14:10, 15 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Comparative_Ranks_and_Insignia_of_Star_Trek&oldid=1080154706"