Memory Alpha:Pages for deletion/Monchezke

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
Not mentioned in a canon source. -- Captain MKB 21:09, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Discussion
Like or unlike Efrosian? --Alan 21:10, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Unlike Efrosian, Alan. Efrosians were named by the makeup artists or publicists working on the ST4 film. Apparently Monchezke was named by the webmaster of the Intel website, which is not a canon production, but a licensed source created outside of the film itself, like any other comic, novel or game.


 * That is, unless you know of another source. The page says that Monchezke was only mentioned on the Intel website. -- Captain MKB 21:15, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

I actually didn't know the credentials of the website, that's why I was asking, just in case that was the type of oversight we needed to not have more "unnamed X species" pages than necessary. --Alan 21:18, 9 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Conversely, I'm not sure how we know some of the backstage info, or if the actual movie's website itself has much in the way of allowable data. For example, Jellyfish (ship) is named based on the name the producers gave to it, and cites the movie site. But is that canon? -- Captain MKB 21:21, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Like Shran said: permitted. --Alan 21:25, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Can we get movement on this? There seems to be agreement from two admins that this isn't from a permitted resource, while Jellyfish might be. --OuroborosCobra talk 20:02, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't see a consensus. Alan never stated the website isn't a permitted resource. Mike seems to be wondering the same thing. The only consensus is that Jellyfish comes from the producers which is permitted.
 * "...if the actual movie's website itself has much in the way of allowable data..."
 * Sounds like nobody has decided anything...Based on Alan's last comment the movie site may be a permitted source - or he's referring to the producers...the two who started this should come to a decision or you can post your own decision and get this discussion started again. &mdash; Morder (talk) 21:29, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Like Morder, I haven't acted because I don't see a consensus here. If no one else responds I'd be willing to simply resolve it as a failed deletion attempt, as it can always be brought up again.--31dot 21:33, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Let me step in, then... ;) Some viral website alone is not something we should base article content on. Maybe the content there has been taken from some production notes - maybe not. We don't know. If we did not delete the article in question, we would still need to tag it with several PNAs. Deletion (and potential later undeletion) seems like the better choice at the moment. -- Cid Highwind 21:49, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Alan stated the movie website was a permitted resource, since it had involvement of the producers. The source for this article is not the movie website, it is the Intel promotional website. Alan did not state that was a permitted resource, only that he did not know what the involvement of the producers was, which was clarified to him by Mike to state that it was not within policy. Something Alan did not question. --OuroborosCobra talk 21:58, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Admin resolution
OK, since it seems that the only source for this is a non-permitted source, I will delete the page. If we find a canon source later, it can be undeleted.--31dot 20:18, 26 June 2009 (UTC)