Talk:Isaac Asimov

Wiki point of view?
Does an author who never wrote for Star Trek deserve a "real world" article? I understand Asimovs contribution to science fiction, and his round-a-bout influence on Star Trek... but considering all we have on his page connecting him to Star Trek is one solitary mention in an episode, I do not see the reason for a "real world" article on him, but I do see the (slight) justification for an "in universe" article about him. Does that make sense? If a person never did anything "off screen" for Star Trek, they shouldn't have a "real world" perspective article. If a person did have an on screen mention on Star Trek, they should have an "In universe" article about them. If Asimov is a large enough giant that we're making an exception, I not only wont raise a fuss, but I agree. I simply think that had this been Joe Splezonski who was mentioned in one episode, he wouldn't warrant a "real world" article. Remember, one of the cornerstones of Star Trek fandom, and (many times in my experience) this wiki, is that the Star Trek universe is *not* our universe.Hossrex 10:03, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * He held a credit in, "scientific adviser for Star Trek: The Motion Picture." 'Nuff said. -- Sulfur 11:30, 14 November 2007 (UTC)