Who deleted the entire page? That took MONTHS to fill out! can someone please help undo that edit???Bman14 (Talk) (Contribs) (Edits) 21:38, June 10, 2012 (UTC)

Suggestion for deletion?

Does this page even belong on the wiki? The article outright states it's an unauthorized sequel. If we're going to include this, why not include things like 'Dark Star' (which is essentially Dan O'bannon's precursor to 'Alien'), or Blade Runner (which may or may not be part of the Alien continuity) or literally any fan-fiction ever made? Xenomrph (talk) (Contribs) 21:14, June 28, 2013 (UTC)

Because Dark Star has literally nothing to do with Alien besides being written by the same guy, and Blade Runner being in the same universe has never really been confirmed. Rightly or wrongly, this film was marketed in Europe as a direct sequel to Alien, regardless of what Fox thinks of it. It's not fan fiction, it was a professional movie production (albeit a slightly dodgy one). I'm sure there must be other EU stuff that was never officially authorized.
Besides, it's a fun bit of trivia.--Leigh Burne (talk) (Contribs) 18:54, June 29, 2013 (UTC)
I myself once considered it for deletion before because it was indeed a rip-off but after listening to the page editor/creator's side and noting that even has Alien 2 in the bottom section of the alien franchise page or one of the pages connected to Alien anyway, I decided to allow it to stay and it is probably worth mentioning.
I had to place a protection on the page because it got vandalized a few times I think. It is not a fan-film despite its poor quality, it is indeed an actual film but its an obviously low-budget one and unauthorized sequel at that. The Cruentus (talk) (Contribs) 14:04, June 30, 2013 (UTC)
If it's not authorized by the owners of the franchise/intellectual property, by definition it is fan-fiction, no matter how professional it may be. The Anchorpoint Essays website is very professional, but it's entirely fan-fiction. Likewise, there have been some very high-quality fan-films and the like, but they're still exactly that: fan-fiction. To date there hasn't been any EU that wasn't authorized, because if it's not authorized, it's fan-fiction and isn't EU.
At the very least I don't think we need individual pages for every facet of "Alien 2: On Earth" like the "faceburster" or whatever. Having one catch-all page for "Alien 2: On Earth" might sort of make sense, kinda, but having actual dedicated pages for every unofficial element from an unofficial movie is a bit much. Xenomrph (talk) (Contribs) 05:00, July 1, 2013 (UTC)
That I do agree with. The Eggs from Alien 2 are currently mentioned in a separate section on the Xenomorph Egg page. The Faceburster could easily be similarly incorporated into the Chestburster article. The Faceburster's the only dedicated page I know of outside this main article.--Leigh Burne (talk) (Contribs) 07:43, July 1, 2013 (UTC)
I concur, the info from that article should be merged either with the Alien 2 page with a section saying "differences to the main franchise" or something like that or the page you mentioned, I will then delete the unneeded page. The Cruentus (talk) (Contribs) 11:58, July 1, 2013 (UTC)
OK, I will do exactly that after lunch :) --Leigh Burne (talk) (Contribs) 12:03, July 1, 2013 (UTC)


This film is 100% non-canon, and its article should exist only for trivia purposes only.

Citation of non-canon information on several articles (facehugger, chestburster, egg, etc.)  should be removed from said articles indefinitely.

At very best, the article of the canon sequel film 'Aliens' should have a trivia footnote that links here, and the sections on other pages should be removed entirely due to their non-canon nature. 21:13, November 6, 2014 (UTC)

The sections on the other pages that you refer to are quite clearly marked as non-canon. I see no problem with them remaining. This film is a bit of a special case — while obviously not part of the official canon, it is an interesting side note to the franchise and I see no problem with it being mentioned and evaluated.--Leigh Burne (Talk) (Contribs) 09:01, November 7, 2014 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.