This entry was plagarized directly from Memory Alpha. It's also not a particularly useful addition to this wiki, since it in no way connects to any non-canon reference. --Seventy 23:37, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

I was just using it as a place holder, until I could add more information. But so be it they might as well be deleted, not really useful links but several articles link to them. I guess that somebody could unlink them, because frankly I am sick of the attitude displayed by several users on here. So it's good by from me. --Bok2384 00:09, 09 August 2006 (UTC)

The article isn't that big of a deal to me. It's not as if it's a major article, and as Bok says, several articles do link to them. I say keep it. We're all here to have fun, and useless nitpicking over insignificant matters just irks people and drives them away. Bok, I hope you reconsider. Your efforts here are appreciated by all. --Turtletrekker 00:31, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

We're here to have fun? Funny, I thought we were here to create a useful reference tool. --Seventy 02:31, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Well yes, but we should be having fun whilst we do that, otherwise why would we bother to come here?

I think a computer article is very justified in existing, it already has numerous links to it, the article might need bulking out but should exist, computers exist through out Star Trek. -- 8of5 03:06, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

There are 8 articles that link to "computer". Of those:

• USS Titan (NCC-80102) does so because there is a computer specialist on board.
• USS Lexington (NCC-1709) and USS Excalibur (NCC-1664) do so because "M5 multitronic computer" is broken into three separate links.
• A Man Alone and Vortex link here from the credits for the actresses performing as "computer voice".
• Image:Return of the Archons.jpg has a link for computer (although there apparently isn't one in the article for the actual episode).
• Star Trek: Star Charts links because the back cover blurb mentions computers exist.

In no case is the use of the word "computer" in any way unclear.

Meanwhile... take a look at the entry for Death in Winter. Or for The Final Reflection. Or for Tales from the Captain's Table or for any non-canon source at random. Forgive me if this is a minority opinion, but if we want this to be an even marginally useful reference tool, then dicking around with definitions for common household objects is not the way to do it. --Seventy 04:13, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Well I have to partially agree with Seventy on this one. We don't need an in-depth article on what a computer is, but a brief note (not plagarized of course) and a disambig to other computers.

On another note, with regard to Bok2384, I hope he/she reconsiders leaving as he has made some excellent contributions to the wiki, and the Jean-Luc Picard article is one of the best on the wiki. I have also looked back and noticed that the user has added a lot of info for Voyager lately. So instead of dicking around with one article like some users, he/she has increased our range.

Plus, I consider it to be fun to add articles to the wiki, but I also care about how the wiki looks. But I think that we have all done great work over the last six months in taking the site from having just over 1,000 articles in a year, to 4,400 articles. --The Doctor, 05:00, 09 August 2006 (UTC)