- I'd think that qualifies, in my opinion -- Captain M.K.B. 23:29, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
relation to Will Decker?Edit
- Unless someone has some other kind of resource citation beyond it being "implied by the intentions of the production staff", I propose that the explicit connection between Matt Decker and Will Decker be removed. I have reviewed the Star Trek II Writers/Directors Guide and the book Star Trek: Phase II - The Making of the Lost Series. The Guide says nothing explicit, just that Decker's forefathers were all Starfleet, some of flag rank. The book appears to say nothing about a connection except a comment from Jon Povill in a December 1, 1977 memo that "I thought it had been mentioned the Decker's father would be the Commodore Decker who died in the "Doomsday Machine" episode." A vague memory of a potential conversation about an abortive idea that never made it to any script or other production material does not a valid resource make. The information can be contained as non-canon commentary at the end as a sort of Background, but should not be in the body of the article. Unless someone has something better as a resource, I'll go ahead and make the change. Aholland 12:57, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
- Good work fixing the article, Mr. Holland! I'd keep Mr. Povill's comment here as a thought for a future expansion, after all, who knows if we'll find another occurrence of an official source confirming the relationship. Until then this is a clear cut case of the "in-universe POV" of the article matching the allowable data -- that is, everything available from the productions themselves. -- Captain M.K.B. 23:29, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
I seem to recall that it was mentioned in the STtMP novel, which was, at least officially, written by Roddenberry himself. -- Clivenlongsight
- Still isn't onscreen, and therefore still isn't canon. --OuroborosCobra talk 21:20, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
I found this page trying to find the correct spelling for "commodore." Good gosh, doesn't seem like it has been editted in a while. But it's right there in the title, the big Bugle looking thing was not a "creature," it was a primitive robot. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 18.104.22.168 (talk).