I'm not particularly sure this article is needed. However, if it must stay, it needs some serious clean-up as well as more references. But, like I said, I don't think this page is needed so what it may need is deletion. Anyone got any ideas? --From Andoria with Love 12:31, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
- Well I realise I am only a Trek fan etc. but I would have thought we needed an article to collect all of the myriad references to in-jokes that the Trek universe contains... There are a lot of in-jokes, a lot of fans like them, and if non-Trek online collections even list them, I thought Memory Alpha would need a page on them.
- I am a new contributor to Memory Alpha but I already find it a little bizarre that fundamental Trek articles about subjects (such as IN-JOKES) that actual Trek creators reference repeatedly don't exist, but fractured English articles containing pseudo-science run two to three pages... --Goldfish 2099 13:13, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
Well, I did only I say I don't think the page is needed... ;) --From Andoria with Love 13:15, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
- I don't think a dictionary-like entry explaining what exactly an "in-joke" is can be considered a "fundamental Trek article". Shran is right, if this is supposed to stay, it needs work. However, I don't think we need an extensive list of all possible in-jokes, because we already add them to individual articles (where appropriate) as background notes. We shouldn't outright delete this article, either, but really think about its usefulness in whatever form... -- Cid Highwind 13:22, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
- Well, I guess first of all, the main thrust of MA is supposed to be that of an in-universe, canon encyclopedia, so that would explain why there are so many relatively long pseudo-scientific articles (but not explain the fractured English, which we don't encourage and some of us actively work to eliminate). Secondly, even though the focus is on in-universe subjects, there is still room for articles from the production, or real-world POV (there are plenty of those here, too, as can be see by the rather ubiquitous "realworld" template on many pages). I guess it really boils down to having a balance, with the balance rather weighted in favor of the in-universe articles. -- Renegade54 13:31, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
- ME am to being writing all science articles now! -- Captain M.K.B. 15:25, 12 September 2006 (UTC)