This article 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 article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Hey, all -- I believe I've done an appropriate job of merging meaningful real-world content from this article into Spacecraft in Star Trek. I'd appreciate some looking-over-the-shoulders (particularly someone who participated at AfD) to chime in, and let me know if a redirect to the aforementioned article would be okay with folks. --EEMIV (talk) 04:22, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
The topic is independently notable so it could have an article. What is the need to redirect this article instead of just cleaning it up? (I noticed you didn't keep the images – I'd like to see at least one of them kept.) – Pnm (talk) 04:50, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
Good questions. There probably is a potential article with stand-alone notability for the original series shuttlecraft: there's real-world production information in the redirect target, and also data on the model's sales. I'm about to drop in a blurb about it being a Christmas ornament, too :-). So, I don't disagree that there's potential. (I did take a look at all the references someone provided at AfD -- most of them mention the vessel in passing, i.e. as part of a plot summary, or verify the subject's existence from the perspective of an in-universe reference source; others I did integrate at the redirect target, and I realize now I missed one and I'm going to toss that bit in, too.)
However, current content is overwhelmingly in-universe, little of it focused on the actual notable subject, and the remaining details focus on two trivial vessels. The redirect doesn't lead the removal of any encyclopedic content (just relocation), and it removes in-universe trivia; I think it's a net gain. However, it would certainly be worth everyone's time for e.g. someone to develop a more appropriate shuttlecraft article in userspace and migrate it over.
As for the images: the two pictures in the article are both of a trivial vessel whose design, concept, etc. are not subject to discussion in the article (here or at redirect target); their inclusion does not aid in the understanding of the topic, and their omission doesn't hurt, i.e. the images don't pass WP:NFCC. The redirect target does discuss the design and production of both the TOS and TNG vessels; images of those franchise shuttlecraft could be worth getting, either for a reconstitution of this article or at Spacecraft in Star Trek. --EEMIV (talk) 13:39, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
NYTimes: Thomas W. Kellogg worked on TOS Shuttle design
I've removed this content because it is uncited speculation that the Star Trek concept of a "shuttlecraft" has any impact on these other vehicles. It is entirely original research to posit a connection, and in some cases goes even further into OR territory with "implications" about origins and use. It's encyclopedic and doesn't warrant inclusion here. --EEMIV (talk) 10:15, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
Agreed. This reads as someone's personal project, with few citations and imprecise, extravagant and impossible claims. For example, the section on the 2009 "Star Trek" film lacks any citations and claims the film features "endless" varieties of spaceships, which is physically impossible.Jtcarpet (talk) 05:06, 24 September 2014 (UTC)