Memory Alpha:Pages for deletion/Hall of Ancient Thought

This is a page to discuss the suggestion to delete "". In all cases, please make sure to read and understand the deletion policy before editing this page.
 * 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".

Deletion rationale
Linked to katra, yet seems to having nothing to do with canon trek. --Alan 06:12, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Keep. I've greatly expanded and improved the article since it was nominated for deletion. I will continue to work on it. --Vulcan Loremaster 08:09, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: The hall was originally to be seen in but the scenes were cut. In  we see a hall, but it's called katric ark and not Hall of Ancient Thought. In Enterprise, the katric arks were the small receptacles that contained the katra, in the new movie, it's the whole room that is called katric ark (though "Hall of Ancient Thoughts" would have been the better name given it seems to have the same function as the room from the Star Trek III deleted scene and several novels where it is mentioned). When/If the script of the movie is released and it is explicitly named in it, we can keep it. If not, we should delete it and mention the Hall of Ancient Thought on the Star Trek III page. --Jörg 08:29, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Redirect to katric ark article. --Vulcan Loremaster 11:51, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as noncanon, but keep in mind to be undeleted if new information comes to light. I personally think a redirect is unneccesary but I won't oppose it.--31dot 18:19, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Admin resolution
Redirected to Katric ark. --- Jaz  21:43, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Was it ever called that in canon? How does this redirect make sense? --OuroborosCobra talk 21:46, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I would disagree that the consensus was to merge, aside from Cobra's comment about its canonicity.--31dot 22:24, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
 * MA:NC. -- sulfur 22:37, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Non-canon names have is the past been used as redirects. This is no different. --- Jaz  23:04, 7 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Considering another admin who would well know that (Jorg) still voted for delete, I'm left wondering if the non-canon connection is enough. Usually the connection is something like "we know that name was for the specific unnamed Romulan commander" or "that was the exact ship in the game, here is what they called it there." This isn't quite the same, this is "something vaguely similar to this was in a novel." We aren't entirely sure these are the same thing, I think, and if I had to hazard a guess that'd be why Jorg voted delete. This isn't as clear cut as the others. --OuroborosCobra talk 23:06, 7 June 2009 (UTC)