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

  • 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

"Though not officially named on screen" & "There is disagreement" = speculation. - Archduk3 04:23, April 22, 2014 (UTC)

Discussion Edit

Comment - If this orb exists but was unnamed, merging it into Orb might be a better course of action. -- Capricorn (talk) 08:31, April 22, 2014 (UTC)

  • Merge with Orb of Prophecy and Change since that seems to be the one we are talking about, though the uncited speculation that it might be different should be removed; a talk page is not an acceptable citation. 31dot (talk) 09:41, April 22, 2014 (UTC)
Comment. The original poster has endorsed a merge with Orb. 31dot (talk) 21:27, April 23, 2014 (UTC)
Comment - as stated above, i am for merging it with Orb. i don't think merging it with Orb of Prophecy and Change is the best course of action, because the effects of the orbs are clearly different; so i don't believe they are the same orbs. another idea would be naming the article "Unnamed Orb" or something similar. those are the only thoughts i have on it at the moment. EllieNeo (talk) 23:01, April 23, 2014 (UTC)
The "Orb of Memory" is already IDed as the Orb of Prophecy and Change in "The Circle" using information given in "Emissary". If we're going to merge this with Orb and say it's a different orb now, some reasoning should be given for why the information from either of those episodes should be considered wrong. - Archduk3 04:41, April 24, 2014 (UTC)
i don't recall that episode saying anything about the orb, except the name, but i will rewatch it. the reasoning would be that the visions the original orb gives show flashbacks, while the visions the Orb of Prophecy and Change gives show visions of the future. this is even mentioned in the bginfo template box on the Orb of Prophecy and Change page. that bginfo was what prompted me to add the page in the first place; there was originally a dead link in the box. it stands to reason that they are two different orbs, just based on the visions they give to people. EllieNeo (talk) 16:04, April 24, 2014 (UTC)
i just rewatched "The Circle", and the orb in that episode not only gives visions of the future to the people who encounter it rather than flashbacks, but it is a completely different color from the original orb; both the external gem, and the orb itself, are blue, rather than green; meaning the picture in the Orb of Prophecy and Change article is not a picture of the correct orb. it is never mentioned in the episode that this was the orb that Kai Opaka had, so it's more likely that they simply recovered a different orb from the Cardassians without informing the station. we do, after all, see in this episode (as well as the previous and next ones) that Bajor has secrets; the recovery of this orb could simply be one of them. in "Emissary", the orb's name is not mentioned; the Kai just calls it, and i quote; "the tear of the prophet." unless that's the name of it, which wouldn't seem to fit the naming scheme of the rest of the orbs, we have no name for it. they are clearly two different orbs, based on the information we have available to us. we could name this article "The Tear of the Prophet," instead of merging it with Orb, but upon rewatching Emissary and The Circle, i realize now that's the only name that is ever mentioned for the first orb we see. calling the first orb the Orb of Prophecy and Change simply makes no sense, based on what i just watched.EllieNeo (talk) 21:27, April 24, 2014 (UTC)
The reasoning for the first orb being the "second" one seen is brushed upon in your reply, simply that it is known that there is only one orb still on Bajor in "Emissary", and that is never stated to have changed by "The Circle", so the named Orb of Prophecy and Change in that episode is the same orb as the "first" one. Saying that an orb was recovered "in secret" between the two episodes is simply speculation. While the color and effect of the orb are different, the effect of the orbs was hardly set in stone, and the color change is within the acceptable margin of error for it to still be considered the same orb. - Archduk3 04:45, April 25, 2014 (UTC)
i have to disagree. it would not make sense that they are the same one. you say i'm speculating, but so are you; you are speculating that they are the same orb. the other orbs appear that their effects are consistently, at the very least, similar, if not "set in stone," as you said. the first orb and the Orb of Prophecy and Change do not have effects that are even remotely similar. again, clearly, they are not the same orb. EllieNeo (talk) 04:56, April 25, 2014 (UTC)
I'm drawing a conclusion based on the facts as presented in dialog, your doing the same based on the visual representations and your interpretations of the orb's effects. One of those is clearly the writers intent, while the other had other parties involved, which is why "what is said" is higher on the "reference list" than "what is seen". Common sense says that if there is only one orb in the Bajoran system at the time, even if the orb looks different a "year" later, it has to be the same orb.
Also, the "first" orb was involved with a big "change" in Bajoran history and their religion, while the "second" orb showed the "future", aka a prophecy. Why are you expecting the effects for two different things to be the same, even when the the name of the orb makes it clear it does two different things? - Archduk3 05:30, April 25, 2014 (UTC)
if it was called the "Orb of Prophecy and Memory," then it would make sense that it is the same as the first orb that we saw. "change" would imply something other than "memory," so, as you said, since it was said that the second orb is called the Orb of Prophecy and Change, it is, again, clearly not the same as the first one.
i thought that watching those episodes you cited would have showed me your point, since you were so adamant that your evidence was there, but all the episodes did when i rewatched them was reinforce what i already thought; that they aren't the same orb. i don't think we're going to reach a consensus on this issue, as we obviously have opposing viewpoints. i am strongly against it being merged into Orb of Prophecy and Change, based on what i have seen and heard on the episodes that you cited, and you seem to be strongly for it, based on the same episodes. EllieNeo (talk) 05:58, April 25, 2014 (UTC)
I'm sorry, EllieNeo, but I agree with Archduk3. What you are saying is pure speculation. So what the orb changed appearance in different episodes. So do actors, ships and sets. We sometimes just have to go with what we know and in this case, we have to assume that they are indeed the same orb and no go making up a random orb out of thin air. --| TrekFan Open a channel 00:27, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
if we "go with what we know," as you put it, they are clearly different orbs. not just based on their appearance. not only do they look different; again, their effects are also different. while it's true that actors, ships, and sets change throughout the series, the effects of the rest of each orb appear to at least remain similar throughout the series, as we already discussed. the effects of these two, clearly different, orbs, are not even remotely similar. also, i didn't create an orb out of thin air. as i said, i made the page because there was originally a link to a dead page on the Orb of Prophecy and Change page that directed to Orb of Memory. this means that i am not the only one who knows that these are two different orbs. logically, there is no way they are the same orb. based on all the available information, including the evidence from the two episodes that were already talked about, calling them the same orb makes less than no sense. Kai Opaka only called it "the tear of the prophets;" the first orb was not given a name other than that. EllieNeo (talk) 02:05, April 26, 2014 (UTC)

The pilot orb being a different one might qualify as "pure speculation", but saying it's definitely the Orb of Prophecy and Change also seems like a very minor instance of speculation. It's a tiny and (it's argued) acceptable leap, but still a leap. The more elegant way of dealing with such minor ambiguities might be to highlight them in the background note format rather then flat-out state they're the same. Or not, just my two cents after reading this discussion, and I can't say I'm an orb expert. -- Capricorn (talk) 18:57, April 26, 2014 (UTC)

i've been watching some more episodes, trying to find more evidence that they are two different orbs, and i found this; in the episode "In the Hands of the Prophets", Vedek Winn says to Sisko; "the prophets have spoken to me through the orbs, emissary." "orbs," plural. it was said on this discussion that "what is said is higher on the resource references list than what is seen." so, that being said, Winn herself tells us that there is more than one orb that the bajorans have access to. EllieNeo (talk) 06:56, May 3, 2014 (UTC)
  • Been busy, so this is a late reply: We know that the quoted text from Vedek Winn is a lie, if we choose to believe the quote at the top of her page when she was Kai. While I still think this should be merged with the Orb of Prophecy and Change, I'm not as opposed to merge with orb, and all the subsequent work that would have to be done, as I was originally, though the bg note(s), wherever they are located, would have to better explain the issues here, as the waters are pretty muddied. - Archduk3 22:57, August 4, 2014 (UTC)

Admin resolution Edit

Revisiting this old discussion and checking the articles in it it seems logical to merge this article with "Orb of Prophecy and Change" as the almost exact text is already in the background section of the article and on it's talk page. I left the term as a redirect to prevent further creation. Tom (talk) 18:37, April 26, 2015 (UTC)