Wikipedia:Peer review/Memory Alpha/archive1
This is a wonderful site I use regularly for information related to Star Trek, and I want to return the favor by giving it a great page on Wikipedia. I have put a good deal of effort into summarizing its history, structure and canon policy, but I am particularly interested in hearing opinions on the completeness of the article. For example, should there be more detail in any given section, should I add a section on something else, etc. Thanks! Narco 21:29, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
- Well done. I can't think of anything major in terms of sections to be added, but maybe the issue of fan fiction, fan films, etc and MA's expanding mandate (e.g. it's covering stuff now it wouldn't have before, like the parodies page) would be good. You could also use a citation or two about the debate over featured articles; Solbor's nomination and that of "Crossover" are good examples of this. "Crossover", in particular, could be used as a segue to the question of whether or not unanimity is a viable policy; I know Wikipedia wouldn't survive a day with that policy. :) --Vedek Dukat Talk 01:08, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
- It's a nice surprise seeing an article for this website, which I, as a trekker wannabe, find a very interesting project. However, it shows that it was written by a fan. I removed some POV statements, like saying that the site "grew exponentially". I would like some reference for the claim that there is competition between Wikipedia and Memory Alpha. Also, the article should deal with any "bad" aspect of the website. For instance, was there any significant fight that threatened to disrupt the project or caused a fork? Or is there significant criticism towards the wiki's administrators? JoaoRicardotalk 06:58, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
- {{Infobox Website}}would be needed. Circeus 08:04, 1 January 2006 (UTC)