This template is within the scope of WikiProject Star Trek, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to all Star Trek-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the template attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Star TrekWikipedia:WikiProject Star TrekTemplate:WikiProject Star TrekStar Trek articles
This template is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
This template is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites articles
Latest comment: 4 months ago6 comments3 people in discussion
@Frietjes: I stumbled across this template when I noticed the link generated at "The Begotten" article was dead. I then notices the two examples in the template documentation are dead links. Thanks! Is this template still relevant? GoingBatty (talk) 19:13, 15 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
that sucks, it looks like they changed the website again :( I will poke around to see if this is saveable. Frietjes (talk) 19:21, 15 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
I switched it over to use the webarchive version. a google search of the site isn't returning the episode summaries anymore. Frietjes (talk) 19:28, 15 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
Not relevant. They change their website at maddening and random intervals. They do update the material (when available), so Wayback is a poor substitute. This has happened before, it is not really our task to run after their every whim. It is their website, so they have every right to make all the changes, insertions, deletions they want – but not to up to us to chase it. Most importantly, the wiki articles themselves, which our fellow editors have curated and cared for, already provide details of the plot or character. The Memory Alpha (long solid and reliable) external links provide further details of the plot or character. Not sure why we need more and more summary details of the plot or character - it is there already, it is done. Now see some editors adding another rehash of the plot with an Ex Astris Scientia external link, and another summary via an external link to rewatch by Keith R.A. DeCandido, and another summary via an external link to rewatch by The A.V. Club. Apparently no need for our fellow editors to bother doing a proper summary in the article – just move the five external links up to the "Plot" section and delete the existing summaries we and our colleagues have written.
Show wiki editor summary, live external links (like Memory Alpha), done. WP:NOTDATABASE, not a link-fest to everyone else’s website who has their own summary. Jmg38 (talk) 22:14, 15 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
in that case, we should probably send it to WP:TFD? Frietjes (talk) 17:36, 18 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
.svg){kind=icon}
