16

Memory Alpha is not always correct. For instance, see this question that I asked: What's the deal with "marshmelons"? Read @N_Soong's answer first and then @Richard's. (In case @N_Soong reads this: it wasn't your fault, it was Memory Alpha's!) In my own answers, I use Memory Alpha mainly as "further reading" on episodes that I refer to. ...


15

I'm strongly in agreement with Beofett's answer here, particularly this: Why is it not sufficient to say "if a question is trivial, boring, and demonstrates little to no research, downvote it"? Note that the hover-text for downvoting states quite clearly that a question or answer should be downvoted when it "does not show any research effort" or "it is ...


9

Theoretically, Memory Alpha is a Wikia, meaning anyone can write anything random there. Therefore, mere wording from MA should not be used as canon source, especially specific nuances of wording (Wikia writers on SFF topics tend to have a strong tendency to take a short phrase/fact from canon, and spin a whole wider non-supported narrative around that fact). ...


5

From my experience currently the mods of memory alpha are not letting bad info up on the wiki. Most of the info on Memory alpha also contains references to specific episodes, and interviews, so the vast majority of it is verifiable. Unless we start to see conflicting, or wrong info on the site i believe its a great tool to answer questions. As with all ...


4

One of the questions in the general reference flowchart is, Is the question basic and trivial, or is it complex and interesting? I really really don’t think that “Who is Tom Bombadil?” is in any way a trivial question.


3

Consensus is that we shouldn't be using it, and, as Keen mentioned, any questions closed as General Reference should probably be flagged to be reopened. The official status appears to be "We'll be conducting a more extensive review of this close reason in the very near future, so I'll refrain from removing it here for the time being - but I strongly ...


2

We are working on major changes to the closing system right now, and one of the effects of that work is going to be the removal of the General Reference close reason. In its place, you as a community will be able to set up an off-topic reason, if you so choose, with a description that more clearly defines what sources provide the obvious answer to whatever ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible