Talk:Admiral Komack

Blanking?
Before this article is blanked and merged into another, I think a consensus needs to be reached. Komack was the first Admiral to ever appear in a Star Trek production making it notable; the personal opinion of one person is not good justification to blank an article with a two year edit history. To the person who blanked the article, I suggest a VfD if you feel that strongly about it. -38.119.112.189 10:53, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Funny that on another article talk page you talk about ownership, ex-Husnock, yet here's the same thing happening about this character. --EEMeltonIV 14:08, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

I have been civil and polite with you and am still looking forward to working on these articles. I never said I owned this article and simply point out that an article with a two year history shouldn't be blanked without a word of discussion. Where is the hostility coming from? You don't know anything about me but have met my comments with negative undertones. There is no reason for any of that. -38.119.112.189 11:07, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

If this doesn't become a redirect:
Add cites for

Unofficial sources, including comments from Star Trek creator Gene Roddenberry, indicate that Admiral Komack's first name may have been "Barry" although this was never confirmed in the episode "Amok Time".

Admiral Komack was named for James Komack, director of "A Piece of the Action".

--EEMeltonIV 20:26, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

A solution to the present dispute would be that this article should be merged into a larger one, maybe Flag Officers of Star Trek or something like that. -38.119.112.188 09:44, 3 April 2007 (UTC)