User talk:Lancer1289

Welcome to My Talk Page. If you don't find an issue that you have brought up with me in the past, then please check my archives because I have moved a lot of it to there. However I ask you to NOT edit there, just drop me a new message to bring up the discussion again. To leave me a message, please click on the "Leave message" button above, rather than just editing the whole page. That way I know what to look for. Thanks.

Please do leave me a new message unless there is a conversation that is already in progress that you wish to comment on. If you have a question that has no bearing on a conversation that is under a heading, then please don't edit there. Just leave me a new message. For example, if you see a section called Help, but your question doesn't relate to what the conversation was about, then PLEASE don't edit in that section, just leave me a new message. The comments will be moved to the end and I'll create a new section for it.

Missing Title
please message back there is something that has popped up
 * Ok what has come up because it would be much more helpful if you had explained everything, and left a new message at that.
 * Ok now I know for a fact that leaving a new message is now impossible. Really, is clicking the "Leave Message" button so hard instead of editing the whole page? I ask people not to do that and it happens anyway. Lancer1289 20:43, January 18, 2011 (UTC)

Categories
If you wouldn't mind, could you add the DLC category to the two DLC pack articles I just created? I'm using the Firefox 4 beta, so a lot of the Javascript-reliant stuff on the wiki won't work for me; for the time being, it would seem I can't add categories to articles unless I switch to another browser. Thanks. -- Commdor (Talk) 21:40, January 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * Sure no problem, and please do see your talk page. I have two questions I do need answered. Lancer1289 21:42, January 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * Just a minor note: You don't have to rely on JavaScript - just add  at the bottom of the page. --silverstrike 21:59, January 18, 2011 (UTC)

Female Turian
Check out Issue One of Mass Effect: Evolution, page 16 in the first frame the human cuffing the oddly-shaped turian. He even says "God, even the women look like him. How do you skull-faces stand it?". The turian looks clearly different from the turians we know and love. That's a turian female. PARAGADE74 02:55, January 20, 2011 (UTC)
 * Heh, I was just typing this very thing. But yes, it is strong implied that Lieutenant Abrudas is a woman given by, I believe, Ben's line upon capturing her and also a distinct difference in appearance from any other turian we have seen as of yet, notably (and strangely) lacking a fringe. --The Illusive Man 02:59, January 20, 2011 (UTC)
 * (Edit conflict) I can't say I'm convinced. The diaogue is a bit vague, and maybe guess work, and frankly did you ever consider that visuals can be misleading? Just because someone looks different, doesn't mean they are female. There really is no other evidence to support this, so mention of "she", "her", or any variation. I'm pretty sure they would have made that more distinct. Maybe the Lt. is a differnet kind of turian, a differnt type. Lancer1289 03:02, January 20, 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh and just saying, "strongly implied" =/= fact. Maybe it will be resolved in issue two. Lancer1289 03:05, January 20, 2011 (UTC)
 * There isn't really any cause for Ben to say what he did besides the realization that the Lieutenant is a woman. Perhaps future issues will verify or dismiss it. --The Illusive Man 03:14, January 20, 2011 (UTC)03:13, January 20, 2011 (UTC)
 * Perhaps but he could also have been making a joke. I'm sure you've see military movies where drill sergeants call their male recruits "women", and I'm sure Spart probably has a story or two. Maybe not, but this can also apply to real life, and other movies, TV shows, books, and I can go on. Now I need to kill a Thresher Maw. Lancer1289 03:21, January 20, 2011 (UTC)

I agree Lancer1289 tries too hard to assume this is not a female turian Turianfiend 21:08, January 31, 2011 (UTC)Turianfiend
 * There is no need for petty jabs like this on my talk page or anywhere for that matter. I stated my reasons and there are more than a few problems. I'm not trying hard to assume anything, I'm merely pointing out that there are more than a few problems and maybe it will be resolved later. I'm hoping that it does as we have no knowledge of what turian females to in their society. Since turian culture is based off of Roman Culture, and in Rome, women didn't serve in teh military. Just saying... Lancer1289 21:18, January 31, 2011 (UTC)
 * But in the Turian Hierarchy, women do serve in the military. This is a case where we know turian culture deviates from Roman culture (which it was based on, not copied directly from), so I can't see the relevance of the lack of women in the Roman army. SpartHawg948 04:25, February 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah I forgot about Orinia. Since I am clearly outnumbered on this argument I concede and I'll make the adjustments to the turian and Abrudas articles. Lancer1289 04:36, February 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * Even more support. I too forgot about Orinia. I was actually thinking of the female turian Garrus mentions serving with in ME2. The one where Garrus had reach, she had flexibility. SpartHawg948 04:43, February 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * I forgot about that one. I have made the adjustments as appropriate, but they could probably use a look over.Lancer1289 04:46, February 1, 2011 (UTC)

If we ever are proved wrong, we can always edit it back. That's the beauty of it, the universe is dynamic. Turianfiend 04:50, February 1, 2011 (UTC)

Kasumi does know about Morinth
Regarding your revert of 142.59.79.244's edit of Morinth's page, Kasumi does know if Morinth replaces Samara. It's even mentioned in the page itself:
 * If Morinth has replaced Samara, Kelly Chambers, Joker, and Kasumi Goto notice a change in her behavior, suggesting that her impersonation of her mother isn't perfect. In fact, Kasumi will mention her by name after completion of the suicide mission, urging Shepard not to be enticed by her, as he/she will die. [Emphasis mine]

--Swooshy 21:17, January 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * And what? That is a trivia note so why exactly are you bringing it up? It is talking about the moment when you complete the loyalty mission and the fact Kasumi mentions it should be mentioned in trivia as they all have suspicions not fact. They all notice a change in behavior, nothing more. Kasumi mentions it because you had to kill Morinth and it is most likely she doesn't believe what happened actually happened. It is a trivia note saying that it may not be perfect, but the facts are that only Shepard knows the truth. Lancer1289 21:27, January 21, 2011 (UTC)

Let's talk
I think you have misread me as an obstinate trouble poster, so I'll assume that I misread your actions as well. The justification for deleting my addition as being "unnecessary" confuses me. As I had stated, trivia is literally defined as something unnecessary. The connection I listed was actually of more importance to their raison d'être than the other numerous connections, yet still trivial. -- Shoggoth1890 21:29, January 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * No some trivia is worthy of note and belongs in articles. Trivia is interesting points where clear parallels can be drawn and there are multiple examples of that. Trivia as a whole unnecessary, I would have to say no as there are some trivia bits around that are not only interesting, but relevant to mention. My favorite on is on the quarian page and it definitely deserves to be there.
 * Your trivia it seems, has problems as Spart has pointed out. The quote is apparently not only vague, but contradicted in future works, making the quote not only out of date, but inaccurate. You had to cherry pick what you presented, and directly from Wikipedia at that, to make it true. Yet as Spart said "Lovecraft's mythos is so convoluted and contradictory that statements like what you are adding really only apply if you selectively pick and choose bits of the mythos. If you take it in its entirety, they cease to have relevance." I tend to agree. Something is unnecessary when it connects two things that are not only a stretch, but incorrect or come from vague statements. Lancer1289 21:40, January 21, 2011 (UTC)

This discussion is split between several pages. I realize that I made a mistake in not posting on the Sovereign talk page. Any particular way you suggest we consolidate it? Going to avoid making anymore counterpoints till we can make this discussion less cluttered, so I don't bloat the activity page. -- Shoggoth1890 21:49, January 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * I really don't see what there is to consolidate, nor how to consolidate the information any further. Or what to consolidate for that matter. Lancer1289 22:00, January 21, 2011 (UTC)

Ok, some points were addressed on the other page. I have not cherry picked anything from Wikipedia, that quote is directly from "The Call of Cthulhu", minus an aside.
 * No you cherry picked what you were pulling from. You pulled from sources that were rendered obsolete by new information, which means that it is no longer canon, and the statement means nothing. Spart stated his opinions on the subject and has many things that counter what you are saying. I am monitoring the conversation on his page, and I'm already out of my league so we will have to continue this once that is over with. Lancer1289 22:29, January 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it's confusing stuff. Multiple authors, and authors contradicting themselves and each other, and all sorts of good stuff. I've even got my copy of the Necronomicon right next to me and even with that, my head's swimming here. Trying to do too many things at once, I suppose. SpartHawg948 22:35, January 21, 2011 (UTC)

Agreed it's confusing and full of seeming contradictions. I am a bit more of a Lovecraft loyalist, and dislike anything other authors make as they just make things worse and Derleth was pretty well known for his liberal assumption of the Mythos. Despite my dislike of it, it exists and is quite popular. As such, I would not deny a comment in a game about "Hastur's squidface brother" as a reference to the Mythos. I found this connection interesting considering it relates the central plot of the game to the Mythos. You may not have, but I'm sure others would, and the point of my arguement was asking why it should be deleted if it didn't actually harm anything about the integrity of the article.
 * Because it's a fairly subjective piece of information, as we can clearly see here, depending on the selective reading of parts of the mythos, which you almost have to do because of how convoluted and contradictory it is. Further, the item you are adding doesn't really seem to conform to site trivia policy, and this episode is honestly making me reassess the whole Cthulu trivia item. SpartHawg948 23:27, January 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * Then feel free to remove it, but if we could continue this elsewhere as it is starting to get off topic, and like I said, I am really out of my element on this argument. The knowledge I have already has been used up, but from what I understand, it is confusing and contradictions abound. Lancer1289 23:30, January 21, 2011 (UTC)

Clearing some confusion
Hi.

I noticed that you changed the Legion profile page of the wikia back to its previous state a few minutes after I made some alternations to it. I suspected this would happen, so instead of going back and changing the sentence, I thought it would be a good idea to explain my reason. During my recent playthrough, I heard Legion say “I” for at least five times during the game (I can mention its exact lines too, if further proof is needed).

Anyways, thanks for your contributions to the ME wiki. The activities of dedicated people like you are what keeps this Mass wikipedia in its impressive state.

Regards

MMight 22:25, January 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * First, thanks for the compliment, as those tend to be hard to come by. We do try our best. :)
 * Anyway if you could provide the lines, what mission/assignment, and context, then that would be a good thing. A link to a video, please don't upload it as we have a policy about uploading videos, would be even better if you can find it. This might be something that has to be changed but I can only remember that one time, so if you have others, then please do bring them forward. Lancer1289 22:33, January 21, 2011 (UTC)

I believe I have a save right before activating Legion. That should make it easier to replay the game and record his/its dialogues.

The ones I can remember are once during its loyalty mission, when the player is given the option to choose “Activate defenses” and “Yes”. The first one prompts Legion to say, “Yes, I can activate the turret […]” (I have to check this one. I’m completely sure it says “I”, but may use a different verb to convey it.)

The second one I noticed is when the mission is over and they are back on the Normandy. Questioning it about the fate of the Heretics eventually leads to Legion saying “In the time it would take you to voice a question, I can review all my time aboard the Normandy.”

The other three I heard were during the suicide mission. I was deliberately waiting a little before opening the valves to hear its responses. First it said “Path is blocked. I am unable to proceed.”, then a few minutes later: “I am unable to preceed again, Shepard.” … Personally, I think they are deliberate. Its use of “I” and “Shepard” (instead of Shepard-Commander) get more frequent when it is in danger. I am sure I heard Legion say “I” during regular battles as well, but I have to replay the game to state its exact words in those sentences. :)

MMight 22:53, January 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * Legion is an it, no gender.
 * Well the one on its loyalty mission is confirmed as I found a video saying "I". If you could check the rest and get back, then we will have something. Right now even that is enough to change, but now the wording is a problem. If you could check that and get back as quickly as possible. My current saves are a little far from this mission. Meaning I would be playing for many hours before I could check these. Lancer1289 23:09, January 21, 2011 (UTC)


 * My bad. The 'he' slipped after reading some fanfiction. And I checked the lines I mentioned. "In the time it would take you to voice a question, I can review all my time aboard Normandy." is correct.


 * And this is getting interesting. This time in the suicide mission it said "Path is blocked. I am unable to proceed." and "I am unable to continue without your assistance, Shepard." I wonder if it has other dialogues for that ventilation shaft part with more “I”. I used FRAPs to save it this time. Should make it easier for me to watch it again with more attention.

I still haven’t finished most of the side missions, LotSB and the Overlord DLC in this playthrough. I will let you know if it prompts anything remarkable.

Thanks for your cooperation. :)

MMight 23:36, January 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * Sure if something is inaccurate, like this, then it does need to be changed. Right now it is the wording that needs to be hammered out. If anything comes up, then feel free to mention it. Lancer1289 23:39, January 21, 2011 (UTC)

These are two of the dialogues which we couldn't find on Youtube. I extracted this part of sound file from my playthrough video:

http://www.4shared.com/audio/yOkJJqKb/L1_online.html

http://www.4shared.com/audio/RbDFgvtk/L2_online.html

Regards, MMight 14:45, January 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * Apologies for note getting back quicker, but i had something I had to deal with, and then class. I would have to say that there is enough now to say that Legion does say I more than a few times. I'll adjust the trivia accordingly. Lancer1289 16:54, January 25, 2011 (UTC)

No need for apologies at all. And thanks for helping. :)

MMight 18:40, January 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem. Lancer1289 18:41, January 25, 2011 (UTC)

I have some questions...
Hey, Lancer1289, I am a huge fan of Mass Effect 2, and I was the user who debated with you about Ashley and her belief with God. Thank you for clearing that issue up for me. Knowing that you are very smart about alot of Mass Effect Materials, I wondered if you would answer some questions I have:

1. In Mass Effect 2, I realize that if you choose the wrong and/or unloyal biotic party member on the long walk/run part of the suicide mission, one of you squad members will be carried off by the seeker swarms. However, I have never seen Grunt or Kasumi be carried off. Is it possible for Grunt and Kasumi to be carried off by the seeker swarms? (Note: I have figured which party member will die. Whichever member jumps onto the barricade and says something about proceeding quickly after Shepard moves ahead will be the possible victim if something goes wrong. For my friends and I, it was the second party member in order that we chose. For example, After choosing the next leaders, At the squad selection, we chose Zaeed first and Garrus last. Garrus was the one who talked about moving quickly but then was carried off.)

2. I was told by a friend that, if Shepard and only ONE of the final team Shepard chose to go to fight the HUMAN REAPER were the only ones that survived, Shepard will die. But, when Shepard jumps onto the ship and tells them to tell about the reapers, it will be the one and only squad member that is still alive that will say unique dialogue to Shepard and yell something as he falls, instead of Joker. Is that true? If so, what is the unique dialogue for each party member? (Note: My friend did this with Grunt, and can only remember Grunt saying something like he wouldn't let his battlemaster die. He doesn't really remember because this was a year ago, but he was sure he said something like that.)

3. And, if it's possible, could you or someone you know here do a video and show the results or post them on unique dailogue sections? I can't find these anywhere on Youtube so I don't know if they're possible.

Thanks for letting me ramble about on of the coolest things ever. Please respond to this message if you can.
 * Let's see...
 * I believe it is random who is carried off, but since I avoid killling off squadmates, I wouldn't know about Grunt or Kasumi. Perhaps they can be, but I have no idea. Also I have seen instances, via YouTube and other places where the first party member selected is carried off.
 * If you have just one squadmate alive, whether in the final squad or not, Shepard will survive, or at least that is what I have read. I'm not sure about the dialogue, and we don't have it noted, but even then we do have multiple accounts of people suriving with just one squadmate.
 * I really don't make videos and I'm not sure if anyone here does. But any unique dialogue does go into their individual dialogue pages.
 * That is about all I've got I do hope I did answer your questions. Lancer1289 21:27, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

Thaks for responding. The reason the first question was important to me was that half of my friends claim that Grunt is so big and heavy, that is must be impossible for him to be carried off. Kasumi I just have never seen.
 * I'm fairly positive that anyone can be carried off. While we know krogan do weigh a lot and have a lot of weight in armor, I forget the actual numbers, but I know it is somewhere, I think that Grunt could still be carried off. I again state that I believe the person chosen is random. Lancer1289 21:59, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

HEY I HAVE YET ANOTHER QUESTION. When you are on the mission trying to save Garrus from the merc band, but his vital sign bar completely runs out, if he dies, is that a critical failure game over, or does it mean Garrus is not recruitable for the rest of the game and Shepard can still continue through it?
 * I'm assuming you mean Dossier: Archangel, I have never had it happen but I think that if the bar gets depleted, like every other time that appears, its "Critical Mission Failure". That's my guess as I've never had it happen. Lancer1289 03:21, January 24, 2011 (UTC)

HEY I HAVE YET ANOTHER THING. In Mass Effect 2, on Dossier: the Justicar, in the police station near the crime scene, there is a turian who looks exactly like Nihlus, with the same facepaint and armor. I tried to put that on Nihlus' trivia, but an unnamed contibuter took it down. I know this is a fact, because everyone of my friends who played the game noticed this turian looking like Nihlus. Do you agree with me putting this on the trivia page? Could you put it on so it isn't taken down? If not, explain why and where it can go. Thanks.


 * First of all, I'm not sure how you could miss my name. The article history and Recent Changes make it pretty clear that I undid your edit. Now to the point, the info you added is not trivia-worthy. You're saying a random turian on that particular mission looks like Nihlus. How is that relevant to Nihlus? The only thing the two have in common is their appearance, and even that isn't particularly notable. From an out-of-universe standpoint, BioWare may have simply reused character textures. In-universe, we know that 1). Phantom armor is not one-of-a-kind, if Shepard can buy it, so can other people, so there are very likely other turians aside from Nihlus with that armor; and 2). turian facial markings represent the colony a turian hails from, and unless Nihlus is the sole member of his colony, there could be thousands of other turians out there with the same markings. I fail to see how pointing out that there's another turian out there that looks like Nihlus is relevant to Nihlus, or at all notable. -- Commdor (Talk) 01:09, January 30, 2011 (UTC)
 * Indeed. First it wasn't some unnamed contributor, it was Commdor who has a long history of good edits. Second, had I not been at Mass, I would have taken down myself. This has been brought up on multiple pages and dismissed multiple times as not trivia on any page. Commdor has presented information that I would have otherwise presented, given that I was attending to other matters. I will not readd the trivia and I oppose its inclusion on any page given the facts presented above that I now don't need to type. Again. Lancer1289 01:16, January 30, 2011 (UTC)

Whoa, didn't mean to make him angry. The edit log said it was an wikia contributor when it first showed up. It didn't say Commdor at all.
 * It sometimes catches and displays like that. And I don't see anyone getting angry or at least not based on comments. Lancer1289 01:28, January 30, 2011 (UTC)

Okay, glad nobody's angry; however, ANOTHER TOPIC: You may want to edit your "INTERRUPT" section. You are missing the interrupt if the player attempts to bring Legion onto the Flotilla during Tali: Treason. The Quarian captain and his soldiers will point a gun at Legion. A RENEGADE INTERRUPT comes up; when triggered, Shepard steps in front of the captain and orders him not to intimidate him. When the captain asks, "Or what?" Shepard replies, "Or I talk off my mask/helmet and breathe germs over your nice clean ship."

If there are other RENEGADE INTERRUPTS WE both missed, here is a link for compilation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9TgTLJXoD_o

Just wondering if I could help or maybe it's a brand new page; let me know if I can be of assisstance!
 * If we are missing something, then please add it in. You can't expect others to do the work for you. :) No the page is not new, but obviously it doesn't have everything listed as there are plenty of other things that are missing from the page. Lancer1289 04:19, February 9, 2011 (UTC)

Okay, well, I HAVE A PROBLEM! I just tried to edit that page( Inserting detail into Miranda's loyalty interrupt and tried to put up a brand new one), and then a Mass Effect Wiki User took it all down! I'm getting annoyed. That's the fifth time that's happened. Is it because I am a guest that they don't think I have "legit" things to add? What's going on? Do I need an account to put facts up and not get it deleted? Please, you gotta work with me here, I need your help.
 * I was the one who removed it because it was unnecessary as it pertains more to walkthrough information than part of the actual interrupt. Why does everyone assume that when their content gets removed it is because they feel they are being persecuted/ That is never the case. There are many reasons content gets removed, which can be checked via looking at the edit summary. People add things all the time, yet it does get evaluated and if it doesn't meet the standards we have, then it gets removed, and usually an edit summary is left explaining why. Sometimes I will admit that some people don't leave summaries altogether, and other times it just gets accidently left out. I am curious why sometimes an unregistered contributor complains about their content getting removed, it is always they are being persecuted because they aren't a user. Again that is never the case, there is always some reason behind it. I've even added content and had it removed before, and I don't take it personally because I know there is a reason it was removed. Again if you want to see why a piece of content was removed, then check the summary because there is usually a reason why. It is never because "oh they are an Unregistered Contributor, they don't matter, they don't have anything legit to say, and they won't add content that is informative and necessary. URs add necessary, correct, and relevant content all the time, however content is removed without considering who added it, it is based on what was added and if it meets standards. If it doesn’t, then it doesn't matter who added it, it will get removed. Even the admins remove content added by each other from time to time. It doesn't matter if you are unregistered or registered, if something is added to an article that doesn't meet standards, then it will get removed, regardless of who put it there. Lancer1289 04:51, February 9, 2011 (UTC)

Totally understandable, but the edit on Miranda I did, I thought it was good info because if you don't trigger the interrupt, you fight that whole merc squad, but when you do, you only end up fighting just one merc. I understand what you say, sorry I'm one of the billions who though I was 'persecuted'; I'll do better next time.
 * It's not you, it's just that argument keeps coming up when some people, mainly URs, get their edits reverted, and frankly after a while, and I'm sure you know the felling, it does tend to get annoying. I meant no offense by it, and if there was some inflicted, then you do have my sincerest apologies as I was just trying to explain the situation and not offend anyone. If you do have any questions about why something was undone, check the edit summary, and if that still doesn’t answer your question, then fell free to ask the user why the edit was undone and I'm sure they will be happy to answer. Lancer1289 05:07, February 9, 2011 (UTC)

Cool. But do you believe me about the edit and why I thought it was crucial? Could you tell me why it is not relevant or whatever? P.S I put a bit of input on the section where some jerk was angry about getting banned. Check it out!
 * I can see why you did, however at the same time it is more along the lines of walkthrough information, which is already mentioned in the appropriate article, than something that belongs in the interrupt article. Also it seems to be structured along the lines of the Morality Guides which just has the dialogue. Lancer1289 05:30, February 9, 2011 (UTC)

Oh, alright! Gotcha! that's it for now! Thanka for all you hard work and patience with me! I have my account up now; maybe my name will show? I dunno
 * To get your name to show up you need to sign your comment at the end with ~ . Lancer1289 06:23, February 9, 2011 (UTC)

Man, you are awesome, you know everything! MrAwesomeMatty 07:14, February 9, 2011 (UTC)

Yo, saw that you deleted my Jacob Taylor/ Unique dialogue eidt. Can I ask why? I mean it was spontaneous and it did belong to Jacob. Or does that pertain to Mordin instead? MrAwesomeMatty 01:57, February 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * No it didn't. See Mass Effect Wiki:Manual of Style/Unique Dialogue Page. Lancer1289 01:59, February 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, I'm really tired. Could you please explain? MrAwesomeMatty 02:03, February 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * "Only put dialogue in this section if you talk to that individual squadmate directly. If they are in the squad when you talk to another squadmate, then put it on their unique dialogue page." From the section above it, but the same thing applies. If they did not start the conversation then put it on the page of the person who started the conversation. Lancer1289 02:06, February 21, 2011 (UTC)

Squad Members Guide edit
Hey Lance, my bad on editing ur edited... but I undid a user`s wholesale delete of the page and I thought that that word was left over from that contrib`s edit, so which is why I did so.... but now I see you`re the one who put the code word there. H-Man Havoc 21:48, January 23, 2011 (UTC)
 * No harm no foul. The tocright template puts the Table of Contents in an article on the right hand side. Useful in very long articles, or ones with a lot of headings.
 * Also note that admins and bureaucrats like myself and Spart respectively, along with some other users, have a function called "rollback". This function leaves the edit summary: "Reverted edits by ___ to last version by ____". Rollback is a handy tool can be used to quickly undo vandalism, or revert unconstructive edits, however the former is used more than the latter. This is what I did in this case. The function reverts edits by one user and puts it back to the last editor before that and usually restores the original before the vandalism. There really isn't a need to undo when a rollback is done, however sometimes it is necessary to fix things manually. Lancer1289 21:59, January 23, 2011 (UTC)

Hey friend
Just for you, I'm going to label what each section of this comment is, so you're not confused.

[quote] 'Finally how do I render myself guilty? This is something I’d like to know. Lancer1289 22:04, November 19, 2010 (UTC)' [/quote]

[critic] You banned me for saying derp, incorrectly thinking I was call you anything. No language, no culture has ever used derp as a term of offence. It is an Internet word like lol or Problem? You took any reason to shut me up because your feelings where hurt, and you couldn't just deal with it, to deal with someone elses choice of words. You justify your irrational feelings on a lack of knowledge of your own belief system. There's such a thing as not being a over sensitive, and you lieing that you explained yourself when you did not, and putting words in my mouth just testifys to your adminship of a wiki. I can't explain to you again what you've done, since you won't listen, and you lack the humility to look back and look at what you wrote down those 3 months ago. This is for me and anyone else reading this frustrated over this dictatorish behavior. [/critic]

[opinion] You sir, are a fool and a egomaniacal child. [/opinion]

P.S. Banning me for three months on one wiki hasn't changed my life. I haven't lost sleep nor thought over how I can't edit. Besides, Wikis aren't even factual half the time.
 * Wow you are back for all of a day and you are already on thin ice. I banned you for a good reason, your frequent edit warring, insulting of other users, and repeated violations of the Community Guidelines. I did not van you to shut you up, but I banned you for the reasons I listed.
 * I will not engage in another long discussion with you about your behavior, which you already betrayed as you care for no one but yourself, and that isn’t just my opinion. I will warn you for the last time, you have already insulted me again, and if you cross the line again, you will be banned permanently. I suggest if you which to continue editing here, then either shape up, or ship out. Lancer1289 15:23, January 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * I am greatly entertained by your ability to make a mountain out of a mole hill. And why do you alway say I'm on "thin ice" when you say it every response you make to me? This ice you keep referring me to is very odd, it's always thin, but I can walk on it until I say derp.
 * No you have violated the language policy and insulted me. Two violations of the Guidelines, which everyone has to follow, that are taken very seriously. I am not making a mountain out of a mole hill, you are as I am performing my duties of an admin to say that you have violated the Guidelines and telling you that you did.
 * Also you are on thin ice due to your past actions, and your past behavior. Again, shape up or ship out. Lancer1289 16:50, January 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * "I dont want to continue another discussion"

Continue discussion.

It's my duty as a user to point out your logic makes no sense.
 * I may be mistaken, but I was under the impression that, in common usage, derp is an insult or, as you put it, a "term of offence". And it doesn't take a genius to understand that "fool" and "egomaniacal child" are insults, and as such are clear violations of site policy, regardless of whether or not you surround them with /opinions. Funny story - despite your allegations of dictatorial behavior (the proper term, as "dictatorish" isn't a word), no one has ever gotten banned for following site policies. If you don't go around constantly insulting people, (big shocker here, you might want to site down) you won't get banned! Maybe you should work on that? SpartHawg948 17:17, January 25, 2011 (UTC)


 * Hahahahahaahahhahaha, oh man, you're too much. You really are trying to find anything to make you feel powerful, aren't you? There is so much wrong in that post right there, I can't put into words your foolishness. And the worst part of it is I can't properly tell you two off because you are admins, and therefor, have a louder voice than me or any other user. Derp is not an insult, it is a statement of something obvious by ordinary people on the Web. And the Urban dictionary is not a valid source of information due to definitions being voted by popularity. This was even ruled true in the court of law.


 * http://jezebel.com/5310877/urban-dictionary-ruled-not-a-reliable-source
 * To quote you, good sir: "Hahahahahaahahhahaha, oh man, you're too much." Rather, I should be thanking you. Why? Because, in attempting to "refute" my post, you actually helped make my point for me. Let's see what you said: "Urban dictionary is not a valid source of information due to definitions being voted by popularity." (emphasis added) Sounds like exactly the sort of source one would turn to in order to determine the common usage of a word, doesn't it? Nor is the fact that Urban Dictionary is not admissible evidence in a court of law relevant, as I was not trying to prove anything in a court of law. Talk about a statement of the obvious. So again, thanks so much for undermining your own position and helping make my point for me. If only everyone were so considerate. :) SpartHawg948 00:20, January 26, 2011 (UTC)


 * I used the event as an example of the foolishness of using a system based on popularity. If 400,000 people voted the words Christian and Jesus as offensive on Urban Dictionary, then by your definition, it would be true that those words are offensive if used in everyday usage. So, now I know if I gather over 9000 brothers in arms to vote up this new definition, then you'd follow this action as valid if you had no knowledge of manipulation. "Sounds like" is something I would expect from a person that is admin of a wiki, and another getting offended from someones use of words is typical as well. Herp a derp, good sir, and may you wurp as much as you durp, and help you find insult in nonsensical words.
 * Negativ-o, good sir. Were you to try any such thing with Christian and Jesus, well established words whose definition has been clearly know for centuries, I'd never know, as there would be no reason to consult the 'net for definitions of words whose definitions have, again, been known for many centuries. Made-up words, on the other hand, don't have the same centuries-long history, and so common usage is key. And given that the common usage of words like that is on the internet (as opposed to words such as Christian and Jesus, whose primary common use is of a non-net variety), the system based on popularity is a pretty decent way of determining common usage. As for your example, it would probably have helped if the article you cited said something (anything) along the lines of the point you were using it to prove. It didn't. There was literally nothing in the source you provided stating that Urban dictionary was ruled inadmissible because it was a system based on popularity. Generally, when citing an example to back a claim, it helps if the example backs up the claim. As for made-up words, you're free to use them as you will. All I ask is that you not go around breaking site language policy (or any site policies) anymore, as you did with your first post to Lancer today. Avoid conduct like that, and we'll be A-OK. SpartHawg948 03:40, January 26, 2011 (UTC)


 * Also just pointing out that if you were doing something wrong at say your job, wouldn't your boss keep pointing it out as part of his job? Just saying... Lancer1289 17:22, January 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yup. And if you keep showing up to work with no pants, or keep cussing at and arguing with customers, coworkers, and managers, you tend to get fired. SpartHawg948 17:34, January 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * Dude, although I disagree with some things that Lancer1289 debates with me, you went WAY over the line. I understand you being angry about the "derp" thing; I have friends who say it just for jokes and fun. But, there's no excuse for intentionally insulting people and THERE WAS CERTAINLY A BETTER WAY YOU COULD HAVE TALKED TO LANCER1289 ABOUT IT. If the first thing that comes out of you mouth causes the administrator to say you're on "thin ice" only after being banned for ONE DAY, there should be a warning in your head saying, "Epic fail; I am royally screwed unless I rethink my strategy, apologize, and try to think of a BETTER way to say why I'm angry." You should be thanking this people for taking unbelievable amounts of time to make this incredible database for one of the most epic games of all time, not saying something like "Hahahaha", "Foolishness", and hateful things until you're blue in the face. Thank you, and try next time to say what you're feeling in a better way... To Lancer1289 and SpartHawg948, Thank you so much for you and other user's time with this awesome site and for answering all of our concerns and questions; You guys make all of this possible for gamers so they don't have to buy strategy guides and magazines to find out about Mass Effect. Keep on shooting the bad guys and showing the facts! MrAwesomeMatty 07:17, February 9, 2011 (UTC)

Permission Granted
You, Lancer1289, have my permission to move the AudioBox template onto my userspace. --Swooshy 21:55, January 27, 2011 (UTC)

Starships
In the starship section you claim that, my picture isn't a turian fighter. It is, you really get too hung up on speculation, not liking specualtion in and of itself isn't bad, but you take it to a level that is unnecessary. If my fighter isn't a turian fighter then the picture of the Alliance figher should also be removed. How do I know that is an Alliance fighter? I would like a detailed description of where and when it appeared, as well as proof that it is Alliance, nothing short of a figher pilot announcing to the Mass Effect community that he is a fighter pilot, and that he is getting in an Alliance fighter (which by the way is only employed by the Alliance). To which the Mass Effect Universe as a whole will return and respond "Yes, he is correct he is a pilot for the Alliance and that is an Alliance fighter." Only if I see that will my skeptism be quenched. But since for what ever reason you have decided that is an Alliance fighter, and we know that only the turians were battling the Alliance at Shanxi and I saw a fighter shooting at an Alliance fighter, then the other fighter must be turian. It isn't some pirate, it isn't an incident of friendly fire. It is a turian fighter, because exists as a concept drawing for one, just as the Alliance figher is a concept drawing, and it is actually being employed as a fighter in a source that is considered canon in the ME Universe. That is how I know it is a turian fighter. Which is the same way we all know that it is an Alliance fighter. True, not all concept drawings are fleshed out and made into something, but these ones were. As far as the picture goes, again, it is the only one I have available, there probably are some better ones, but I make due with what I have (in the turian page they have a concept drawing of a turian that is unarmored, I think it should be removed cause I've never seen a naked turian in game) and that picture is what I have. The wiki is suppose to be a comprehensive compilation of everything ME related. I have more examples of fighters, I think they should be archived with the rest of the fighters. I also agree on that with other styles of ships. We don't need every ship, character, object, or doodad ever put up on the site. But having only 1 example of a class of ship is underwhelming. The cruiser has 2 examples, one Alliance and 1 turian. Because those are the 2 that we see at the battle of the citadel. This is a sci-fi wiki, so we should have all the things that make sci-fi fun, the races, the tech, and the starships up where we can view and see as much as we can. We only have 1 asari ship, and that is the Destiny Ascension, when we get more asari ships I hope someone puts them up. Turianfiend 20:46, January 31, 2011 (UTC)Turianfiend
 * Now I know beyond a doubt that simple instructions are impossible to follow
 * So the fact that your image overloaded the section means nothing? Or that it is extremely low quality? Or that is an extremely granny image? Or that every other picture on that page, which is written from an in-universe perspective, is from the games, and not from concept art? Not every picture gets a place in articles for various reasons. We do know those are Alliance Fighter, and used in the game. Your image is not in the game, it is only concept art, and we don't have much concept art on the wiki. Your image also is never seen in the game, and the fighter image is and in Evolution. Also it is visibly different from the turian fighters that are present in Evolution.
 * You are making this a much bigger issue than it has to be. I would suggest taking a moment to calm down before things get out of hand. Lancer1289 21:03, January 31, 2011 (UTC)

3D images often have that capacity, to look different if presented at a different view point. And I am calm, this is a public forum, not your forum. Everything I post is legitimate, have you heard of Vandalism it is posted on Guidelines? I post something and come back after 10 minutes and everything I have done is remove, and not just me, every post that I have witnessed. My addition was valid, was it perfect ... by no means. Like I said, I'm just trying to add to the experience that is ME wiki. And no a picture or 2 here and there doesn't overload anything. Was my picture too big ... I didn't think so, but it doesn't mean it wasn't, so as an alternative you can always resize it. Do I expect everything I do to remain posted. Heavens no. But everything I do, isn't good enough for you.
 * No this is not my forum and frankly I'm getting tired of hearing that. I'm an admin here, which means I am to uphold standards and make the wiki better. However, if an edit is done counter to that, then I do have to revert it. Which so far the vast majority have been. In addition, you did dodge the questions about it overloading the section and the one about the image being granny and low quality. Images like that have been added, removed, and in some cases deleted. If you had looked at the article after you added the picture, it was not only way to large, but it also broke up the formatting of the article.
 * As to the vandalism question. You have been here for all of a few hours, I've been here for over a year, and have seen every instance of what is described as vandalism, many, many times over. Lancer1289 21:34, January 31, 2011 (UTC)

Hades Nexus systems unlocked with only Project Firewalker
Hi Lancer, I was a bit unsure why my edit of the Hades Nexus page (Mass Effect 2 version) was considered unnecessary "since it didn't appear on other pages". Are you saying that if a system has no assignments/missions involved with it, then it's always automatically unlocked? (hence, not worth mentioning explicitly on the article) Rtl42 00:08, February 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * No, acutally Pamyat is locked, like Sheol, if you don't have the star chart from Baria Frontiers. In situations where multiple systems could be unlocked by DLC, or other triggers, it doens't list every system that can be unlocked by having this DLC pack. Since the Sheol system has an assignment, the note is saying that only two systems, the gateway and assignment system are unlocked, while you need the map to access the other two. Hades appears to be unique in this situation, however, it is usually handled by the Prereq tag in every cluster/system/planet article. Lancer1289 00:22, February 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * While I think I understand the convention about what to write/what not to, I just wanted to point out that Pamyat is not locked like Sheol. (I haven't even gained access to Illium and I can go to Pamyat.) I know it's not a big deal, so I'm not trying to make this into anything, but imho, as long as we are going to explicitly write out which systems are unlocked by what, it seems reasonable to me to write it accurately. Rtl42 06:22, February 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * Really? Because Pamyat is locked for me and I did do a lot of research on it before I added the note. Right now I am thinking about just changing the note, but I will need some time for more research. Lancer1289 13:48, February 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I see. Unfortunately, I don't have any recording equipment to show some real proof (I'm not sure if screenshots would cut it), but I'd be glad to help if you need to ask me anything about my game "state" (what missions I've done, what DLC I have, etc.). Rtl42 16:14, February 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * The thing is that some systems have a habit of unlocking at odd times and some systems unlock with different circumstances/triggers. Every time I have done Volcano Station, without buying the star chart, I only see two systems on the map for Hades Nexus, the gateway and Prothean Site system. Pamyat is never shown without the star map. I also saw this on several YouTube vidoes while doing the research, leading to the current note. However, the prereq tags on the planets and system page for Pamyat all say that you do need the star map. Like I said, I'll do some more research and that will take time. Lancer1289 17:09, February 1, 2011 (UTC)

Request re: wikia.css and common.js
Hello Lancer,

How go your preparations for the snowpocalypse? I'm hearing forecasts for 18 inches of snow in Chicago... sounds like a fun time!

I'm writing to request an amendment to MediaWiki:Wikia.css and MediaWiki:Common.js.

Because of the upgraded MediaWiki software, the kludge needed to work around issues with embedding audio in articles is no longer needed. Specifically:

/* Hack to make the button not an obnoxious green on IE */ div.codexaudio button { filter: none !important; }

/* Hack to make the "Native browser support" appear (Chrome, FF) */ div.codexaudio video, div.codexaudio audio { height:38px !important; }

can be removed from MediaWiki:Wikia.css, and

/* We have an old version of the oggHandler extension, which has the native ogg players for firefox and chrome (among others) dead-last in priority. This piece of code promotes it   to the head of the pack, working around an issue with Quicktime causing freezes on Firefox as reported by SpartHawg948 (later reproduced by Dammej). Big thanks to Pcj from the community wiki for the suggestion and code. */ $(function { if (typeof wgOggPlayer === 'undefined') { return false; } if (wgOggPlayer === null ) { return false; }

wgOggPlayer.players=['videoElement', 'cortado', 'quicktime-mozilla', 'quicktime-activex', 'vlc-mozilla', 'vlc-activex', 'totem', 'kmplayer', 'kaffeine', 'mplayerplug-in', 'oggPlugin']; });

can be removed from MediaWiki:Common.js.

Whenever you find yourself with some free time, do you think you can make these changes? Thanks in advance! -- Dammej ( talk ) 03:13, February 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry was driving back home in a mini-blizzard, which will only get worse tomorrow after a small window of calm weather. Anyway I would just like to clarify that the strings of code you are giving me are to be removed, not added or replaced correct? I just don't want to break the wiki here. Lancer1289 03:44, February 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yup, they can be removed. The upgraded software has made them obsolete. -- Dammej ( talk ) 03:51, February 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * OK then two removals coming up. Right after I get my popcorn out of the microwave. Lancer1289 03:52, February 1, 2011 (UTC)

Done, and as to my preparations for the upcoming blizzard, you are working off old information my friend. The predictions are now up to 20+ inches for my area. The college sent around emails today to say they may be closed on Wednesday, considering it's a commuter college, and my only class on Wednesday his optional. My teacher said come if you can, and if you can't, here's the work for Friday along with the quiz. I do have a snow blower, and a shovel for the upcoming days. And it is already snowing, up to 4 inches tonight. Driving wasn't bad, but I'm sure it will be bad when I have to come home tomorrow, if class isn't canceled. I'm predicting I'll be home on Wednesday one way or the other, considering I live 30 minutes, on a good day, away from school. Lancer1289 04:00, February 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * That's a doozy. I'll be working from home tomorrow afternoon and Wednesday for sure. Good luck with the storm! -- Dammej ( talk ) 04:11, February 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, good luck as well. Lancer1289 04:14, February 1, 2011 (UTC)

Alternate appearence dlc
Why do you keep deleting what I'm posting as it is relevant and not listed yet? Tivis014 04:47, February 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * See your talk page. Lancer1289 04:50, February 1, 2011 (UTC)

DLC Price Formatting
I changed the price formatting in the DLC page because it was confusing. I originally saw the point/dollar amounts as for the same piece, as 80 points = $1 USD. After being shown by another member that wasn't the cause, and that the two were different as the USD amount reflected the Playstation Network and not the actual price of the points, I edited the field to be easier to understand for people. I didn't believe this required discussion due to the information being the same, just cleaner. WNxSajuukCor 20:51, February 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * No it did require discussion since it is beyond a doubt a very major change to the page. It changes how information is presented and that always requires discussion. What Commdor did is what I would have done because Kasumi, Overlord, and LotSB are included on the disk for the PS3, they are not downloaded and therefore not available over PlayStation Network. I also frankly would say no to an overhaul like that because some people may not know the markings for MS points, or for PlayStation Network, or frankly what the PC meant. "Where do you buy these PC points I need for this content?" is what I was asking myself. I’m guessing that some people may not make the connection between PC and BioWare points from the BioWare social site. The way it is now may be messier, but it is also much more to the point and presents the information better than symbols that everyone may not understand. When it comes to pricing, it is best to present it in the simplest way possible, e.g. with words over symbols to eliminate confusion. Even if we wanted to eliminate confusion, we still have USD next to say "$1.99". Lancer1289 21:01, February 1, 2011 (UTC)

Opinion
Hey there, boss-man. Quick favor to ask you... In case you hadn't noticed it, there's renewed discussion on an old topic on the quarian talk page (Talk:Quarian), and an outside opinion (specifically yours) has been requested. Basically, I'm still asserting that the garb quarian females wear (enviro-suits and the cloth pieces they wear over them and all that) do bear some physical and cultural similarities to burqas. The other user disputes this claim. Originally, he'd wanted to have the other three admins review the matter and opine, with a majority decision determining whether the trivia item stays or goes, but since, as you know, Tullis and DRY haven't been active in quite some time, that isn't really an option. However, your opinion on the matter would still be greatly appreciated. So whenever you get a chance, if you could pop on over, take a look at the discussion, and let us know what you think, it would be much appreciated. Thanks! SpartHawg948 20:27, February 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * Sure I'll check it out and get back. I just got in from Snowmageddon acutal reporters were using that term. I just spent three hours shoveling/snowblowing not only my own driveway and sidewalk, but then the neighborhood comes out in force, and suddenly everyone within reasonable distance has driveways and sidewalks done. I'll need some time to catch up, but it looks like I didn't miss much. Rest asured I'll get around to it and give my opinion. I just have one more message to drop. Lancer1289 20:51, February 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * Roger that. I'll probably see it later then. Duty calls, so I'll be doing the worky-work thing here starting in a little bit. At least now I'll have something to look forward to when I get home! :) SpartHawg948 20:54, February 2, 2011 (UTC)

AudioBox Template
I've finished the AudioBox Template and yay/nay voting is open. I'd like your input, please. --Swooshy 23:05, February 2, 2011 (UTC)

Vandalism on Forum:Index
It seems to me that Forum:Index is being vandalized pretty frequently. Since the page isn't meant to be edited much anyway, would semi-protecting it be out of the question? -- Commdor (Talk) 01:05, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * Frankly it has been vandalized a lot, especially frequently. We protect articles very little, and given that it is a page that is only supposed to be edited very infrequently, I don't see why Spart would object to it being protected. I will leave him a message and see what he says. Lancer1289 01:09, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, just the usual "free speech is good, protection is bad, don't reward the bad behavior of vandals with blatant admission of frustration and defeat" libertarian goodness I usually have to say on the subject. SpartHawg948 02:01, February 4, 2011 (UTC)

MoS and other edits
Recently, when informing an editor of policy, you wrote:

"So when was this change to the Manual of Style agreed upon because I can't seem to remember this discussion anywhere? The MoS is generally only edited by Admins, or with the permission of an Admin. If you have a problem with something bring it up on the talk page, but editing articles that are for wiki policy, no matter the circumstances, require discussion, not arbitrary change."

Emphasis mine. I take issue with this. Intended or not, this comes dangerously close to saying that only admins should edit the MoS, which is of course not the case. If it were, the page would be protected.

I believe it is inappropriate to assert or imply that admin permission is needed to change the MoS. Admins are not special when it comes to producing content on a wiki. They exist to help the community. Period. The MoS is not something that should be developed solely by the admins with input from the community. It should be developed by the community as a whole, since it is the community that is agreeing to abide by the policies set forth in that document. For the purposes of developing that document, an admin is just an ordinary user with the same voice as any other. Their status as an admin carries no weight. Their reputation as a respected editor might, but their status as an admin should be of no consequence.

I'm not saying the change made by the user should be in the MoS, or even that the user's behavior in repeatedly changing the MoS despite clear opposition should be condoned or nurtured. I just think that you need to choose your words more carefully when describing why it is that the MoS changes are being reverted.

Instead, I would have told the user that their changes are not in line with what the community has previously come to a consensus on, and that their change should be brought up for discussion in the talk page so that the idea can be fleshed out more and receive input from more users; Adminship notwithstanding.

I hope I'm not way off base in telling you this. I have the utmost respect for a user that works endlessly to ensure that the wiki is in top shape (I wish I could afford the same amount of time). I just don't want anyone to get a mistaken impression that an admin exists as the gatekeeper of the wiki, through whom edits must be blessed.

Thanks for reading. -- Dammej ( talk ) 05:04, February 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * That is how the system has generally worked in the past. Generally, any time an edit has been done to the MoS in the past, it has been either by an admin, or by someone with an admin's permission. I said generally for a very good reason in that it does in no way imply that admins are the only ones that edit it, but the majority of the time admins are the ones editing it. Anyone is of course free to edit it, like most pages, hopefully with discussion first if it something major, whether it be to clarify something, as you did on one occasion with no permission I might add, or adding something that was agreed upon, adjusting something for (insert reason here), or even just to fix a small error in there with spelling or grammar. The MoS however, like the Community Guidelines, are official site policy and generally are only edited by admins when something comes up, or a change is agreed upon. Again though, it is free for anyone to edit, which has happened also in the past, but examining the history of the MoS, the majority of edits, 49 of the 76 edits, if I counted correctly, to the MoS were by admins, Tullis, DRY, Spart, and myself, with 8 of my edits being before I was an admin. IIRC, one of those edits was done without permission of any admin, or at the very least part of it to clarify something, which is again what you also did on one occasion.
 * Admins are here to help the community and respect it's wishes. Admins are of course moderators, not gods or rulers or kings/queens, but they are there to guide, help, and officiate when necessary. This is also why admins have only one vote when it does come to voting, but at the same time they can break a tie if necessary. Admins are also bound to follow the same documents, the MoS, CG, and anything else, just like everyone else has to. Which is why you don't see Spart or myself breaking them and advising others to not break them, and warning them if they do. An admin is not a gatekeeper, nor a senior editor, or anyone else for that matter, however that has come up in the past when edits by the same person constantly get reverted for any number of reasons. Any edit in line with the MoS and accepted guidelines is of course welcome, but admins, or anyone else for that matter, do have enforce the MoS and advise people who do go against it. Admins do serve the community, but at the same time, when applicable, have to step in to resolve arguments and maybe advise of site policy. Lancer1289 05:37, February 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm aware that you spoke correctly (in general, edits to the MoS are only done by admins). I merely wanted to point out that an outside user, unaware of any history about a user or their past actions, could interpret that phrase (the one I highlighted earlier) as them having broken some unwritten rule that admins should be the only ones editing the MoS. I wasn't accusing you of actually implying that edits should only be made by admins, merely pointing out that your statement could be interpreted that way. If your goal is to nurture and educated rather than imply admin authority (which, given your heartfelt sentiment above, would indeed seem to be the case), then I merely encourage you to be sensitive to those issues. Nothing more, nothing less. -- Dammej ( talk ) 05:55, February 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * I guess that comes from someone else's view of the word "generally". I see generally as "this is how something usually works", but that does again no way imply that admins are the only ones who can edit it as there are always exceptions to the general routine. Some are welcomed, while others are discouraged. I can see now how that might be interpreted as "only this group can edit this article", and I'll try to word things a little more carefully in the future. Lancer1289 06:03, February 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. That's all I can ask. :) It might net be a really big deal, but my sleep-deprived brain somehow threw up red flags upon reading that. At the very least, one can read the paragraph that you wrote earlier to see that the doom-saying interpretation of that sentence is in error. -- Dammej ( talk ) 06:33, February 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * Well we all get a little sleep deprived once and a while, but at the same time, I'd rather have someone see something they think is in error and say something about it, than say nothing at all. Even if they are tired beyond belief because you may catch something that someone else missed. Lancer1289 06:36, February 6, 2011 (UTC)

The addition to the SR-2 page was correct
Miranda's quarters are in the same physical location as the SR-1's commander's quarters.

Some professional jealousy or something? Why would you remove factual information on a page?

137.242.1.63 07:41, February 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * It was probably more an issue of relevance. Sure, the info was factual. But was it relevant? To anything? What did that bit of information add to the article, other than taking up space? There are many pieces of factual information that are not really relevant to just about anything. That is more than likely the reason the info was removed, not petty jealousy, as you surmise. SpartHawg948 07:44, February 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * Indeed relevance was the main issue why I removed it. I didn't remove it out of jealousy or anything else, just relevance. As Spart noted, there are plenty of other pieces of factual information that are left out because they aren't relevant. Lancer1289 07:47, February 6, 2011 (UTC)

So, I expect you will go back and remove every single piece of information in the SR-2s write-up that correlates to the SR-1.

No relevance, right?

137.242.1.63 07:51, February 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * No because every other mention of the original Normandy are relevant and should be in the article. If I counted correctly there are only 10 references to the original Normandy and all references are noted and contain relevant information. There is no need to remove relevant information from an article, especially on the points they are making. Your addition was unnecessary and irrelevant, every other point that I could see was relevant to the article. I can't justify a rewrite or removing relevant information. Lancer1289 07:57, February 6, 2011 (UTC)

"Your addition was unnecessary and irrelevant,"

Of course... because YOU say so. And they wonder why I almost never become involved with wiki projects... unbelievable fucking hubris and egomania...

What a sad little monkey you and your kind are.137.242.1.63 08:01, February 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * Wow, there is no need for petty insults, jabs, or language like that. I stated quite clearly why your edit was undone, and stated that every other reference in the article deserves a place. There was no need for that comment or that language. This isn't about ego or anything else but relevance. Your edit wasn’t relevant, yet every other reference is. Lancer1289 08:04, February 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * (edit conflictx2) If there are similarly irrelevant bits about the SR-1, please feel free to point them out. If it's something that is relevant, such as comparing or contrasting things between the SR-1 and SR2 (the CIC being bigger, for example), I think the case could be made for relevance. Simply stating that the XO's office on the SR2 is in the same location as the CO's quarters on the SR-1 really has no relevance to the SR2 article. It'd be like pointing out that the galley, where Gardner hangs out, is in the same location as Alenko's little nook on the SR-1. SpartHawg948 08:05, February 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * In an aside, way to take the high road. "I don't like what these people are saying, so instead of talking about it like an adult, I'm going to first throw a hissy fit, and then insult other users." What a class act. SpartHawg948 08:05, February 6, 2011 (UTC)

Morality in mission/assignment pages
You've told me before that it was decided that morality points would be left out of the mission/assignment pages and kept to the guides respective to their game. But, after looking through the manual of style, FAQs, and policy votes, I can't find where this policy you spoke of is. Would you point me to it?
 * We spoke of it earlier this week on the Talk:Noveria: Geth Interest page. The policy itself was decided by the admins back in October to leave current points in walkthoughs but not to add any more. Lancer1289 19:00, February 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Will this be put into writing in the manual of style? What channels would I use to see a different policy enacted? Byrnt 19:10, February 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * Well there are a number of things that are followed that aren't in the MoS, and right now it is more of an unspoken rule. If you do want change, then the best place would be the Policy forum. Which I should just say that was only put up less than a year ago. Lancer1289 19:13, February 6, 2011 (UTC)

BioWare Giveaway
Hi, I posted a message about the Wikia BioWare Giveaway on the main page of the wiki - hope you don't mind. If you do, you're free to change it. Ausir(talk) 23:24, February 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't see a problem with it and currently have no plans to remove it. I do however have an email to send but that's about it. It is nice to say informed about things like this so thanks. Lancer1289 23:35, February 9, 2011 (UTC)

Why?
Why are you undoing all my edits almost as soon as I do them?
 * If you would check my edit summaries, the reasons are there. The first edit was irrelevant and unnecessary as we have seen model of the Citadel made out of LEGOs and it isn't mentioned. Also the image was way too big. I have also seen models of the Normandy made out of various items and they aren't mentioned. Your second edit was incorrect as it says "Hard Look" not "Hard Lock". Basically if you have a question about why an edit was undone, check the edit summary first, then if you still have questions, then ask the user. Edit summaries are the best way to answer questions as the vast majority of people leave them. Lancer1289 18:21, February 10, 2011 (UTC)

undo my edit
Was there anything you found wrong with it, or any particular reason you didn't think it belonged?
 * And what edit would that be? The comment above is unsigned and left by a user who has never edited here before. So please clarify who you are and what edit you are talking about. Also, check my edit summary as I'm certain I left a reason. Lancer1289 18:39, February 10, 2011 (UTC)

Alternate Appearance Pack Version Info
Hey Lancer1289,

I made an edit to the Alternate Appearance Pack page with some information about the new release of version 1.1. I saw that you removed it twice, even when I thought I had edited it properly with a reference to my source.

First, I suppose I'm having difficulty figuring out how to properly cite my sources. The first and most obvious source is that the file ME2_AltAppearance1.exe was removed from BioWare's servers and ME2_AltAppearance1-1.exe replaced it. The full URL to the file is: http://static.cdn.ea.com/bioware/u/f/eagames/bioware/masseffect2/ME2_DLC/ME2_AltAppearance1-1.exe How should I properly format that as a source?

Secondly, I discovered that the difference in version 1.0 and 1.1 of the file is that several language translations were missing from the original file. I discovered this information by running a search on Google. It was explained at the site http://warezl4nd.info/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=15381, which I am afraid is a warez site, and I don't know if it can be considered as a trustworthy and safe source to list.

Finally, you stated that this information is irrelevant. I respectfully disagree. I am a collector of DLC for many games, I always would like to be informed when an update is available, especially when it is not posted on the official BioWare Social site. I think it would be a good idea to include this information on the page for the Alternate Appearance Pack.

Just let me know what you think, and how I can reformat my original post to adhere to the standards of this Wiki.

Thanks, --Koomazaz 00:43, February 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * First, all it does it update the language packs and where it can be included. That alone isn't worth mentioning because new languages are added all the time for DLC packs. Second no new content is added, no new outfits, no new missions, nothing. If something new was added then it would be worth mentioning, however since no new content is added, and because there was no official announcement, which tells me that BioWare just updated the pack with things that were missing in the original release, probably due to an oversight or something. An update on a pack or the game usually isn't worth mentioning, especially for something very small and inconsequential.
 * And neither thing you provided is considered a valid source. The first doesn't even link to anything, just an .exe file nothing else. The second isn't a trusted source because it is a forum. Lancer1289 00:56, February 11, 2011 (UTC)

you undid mt edit to me2 page
this edit was made based on the post on the me2 forums by chris priestly check out this link please and please redo my edit                 http://social.bioware.com/forum/Mass-Effect/Mass-Effect-2-Playstation-3-Technical-Support/Mass-Effect-2-PS3-patch-notes-freezing-and-saved-game-issue-work-around-5845607-1.html
 * I will not redo it becuase of two things. First is your edit summary: "added why save bug for ps3 occurs", and your wording: "this happens because of an issue with loading multiple missions in one sitting which causes the bug." No where in Chris Priestly's comment that is caused by loading multiple missions in one setting. The second reason is that is just pure speculation and as such has been removed and will not be readded. Lancer1289 20:57, February 13, 2011 (UTC)

ME2 Assassin edit removal.
Can you please explain to me why you deleted my ME2 edit for the Assassin page, just 5 minutes ago? I don't like it when someone undoes my edit with no explanation, especially right after I finish posting it. If you have a good reason, I won't argue or try to re-edit the page, but please tell me there was some reason for it. Thanks. InfiniteAmo 01:30, February 14, 2011 (UTC)
 * See your talk page and Talk:Assassin for more information as I will not repeat myself. Also there was no need for that petty jab. This also could have been avoided if you had read my edit summary to begin with. Lancer1289 01:32, February 14, 2011 (UTC)

I've already done so, so no hard feelings? Also, it seems crazy how often you've instantly you've re-edited something right after me, like just now, on the Loyalty page. I have to say though, the current page is much more comprehensive than it was 10 minutes ago. d(-_-)b InfiniteAmo 02:05, February 14, 2011 (UTC)
 * No I can't see a reason to have hard feelings. I just informed you of policy and the editing is just becuase as an admin, I follow the Recent Changes and Wiki Activity functions. These display changes as they occur and help keep the wiki up to standards. Lancer1289 02:08, February 14, 2011 (UTC)

My apologies
Sorry about the mistake on the M-300 page and presumptions. Being a bit of a military buff and FPS fan, I thought of it being a possible link. My apologies --Razgriez 19:29, February 14, 2011 (UTC)
 * No reason to apologize. The reason for the removal of the landmine information was actually two fold. On the one hand, it was a stretch, and the second was it was inconsistent with how the other, non-DLC, shotguns are named: M-23 Katana, M-27 Scimitar, and M-300 Claymore. We have reports that the M-22 Eviscerator is named after a sword, but so far no conclusive evidence has been presented on that point. Even Google can't find much apart from our M-22 page. As for the other two things, it just seemed unnecessary and irrelevant with what the thing actually does. Lancer1289 19:37, February 14, 2011 (UTC)
 * That you are correct on, I completely forgot about the fact that many of the weapons feature a unique linked weapon name of each type. Assault Rifles are given names related to Revenge (Avenger, Vindicator, and by a stretch, the Revenant, in the way that Shepperd is in some ways, back from the dead to get revenge on the Collectors) Shotguns after types of swords, and Sniper Rifles, at least 2 are named after animals (Viper, Mantis). I imagine the the reason for the Eviscerator, is much like many of the other DLC "Small arms", in that they do not tie into the previously mentioned themes, and more as a way to give a "Powerful" style name to the weapon, if at the very least, as a way to market them in DLC as being worth the money to buy from XBL Market or PSN store.--Razgriez 20:00, February 14, 2011 (UTC)
 * An interesting theory. Lancer1289
 * So after I got home from work tonight, I went about and did a bit of research, on the web, and at home by paging through some various military/war related books, fiction, non-fiction, historical, fantasy, myths. I did manage to find one example of the name of a sword type called an "Eviscerator". The description is that Eviscerators are "grotesquely large two-handed chainswords". The source? Codex: Witchhunters from the 3rd edition of Games-Workshop's Warhammer 40,000 table top war game. Aside from the descriptions and image of the severe wounds caused by either the Shotgun or sword, I believe there is no actual true link between the two, aside from coincidence of having the same name.--Razgriez 07:06, February 15, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah that just seems to be a coincidence than anything. Warhammer is fictional and we can't find anything on it unlike the other three. Lancer1289 13:37, February 15, 2011 (UTC)

Shiala's Vandal
So, I happen to be following Shiala, and I think it quite humorous that someone is going through all the trouble to get around bans just to screw with you. I would propose a semi-protect, but I saw Spart's comment above about doing the same for Forum:Index, and I wholly agree with him. Besides, this would just force him to move to another article.Nonetheless, the fact remains: something must be done. The question is, what? --- 03:55, February 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * There is nothing that can be done except more bans when he comes up. He has brought this on himself for repeated vandalism, sock puppetry, insulting other users, using inappropriate language, and probably a few other things. Frankly I'm not that bothered by it, amused would be a good descriptor. To be honest, I think I'm well within my rights to ban him permanently, but I think that is being too hasty. Protection can only go so far and unless we are willing to protect every page, then it is out of the question, and you've already seen Spart's opinion on that.
 * I honestly do kind of find it sad that he has to resort to such immaturity and he thinks he's bothering me or being amusing. I'm am continually amazed at how people can react to situations and how people seem to have to inflate their own egos some way. A bit harsh yes, but then so is the truth usually. I still don't know why some people act the way they do over something so small and inconsequential. I think you saw the "deal" he proposed, and frankly that had me rolling my eyes. He vandalizes, breaks rules, insults me, uses inappropriate language, and he wants me to let him off with a slap on the wrist. We have a standard two-week ban for anyone who vandalizes, and that would have been it if he had stopped there. Sadly however, he then decided to up the ante with more violations, leading to the year blocks. He could have stopped at any time, yet he chose to continue. When you break the rules, there are always consequences for your actions, and it is up to you to live with them. Accepting responsibility for ones actions is very mature. On the other hand, breaking more rules shows a clear lack of maturity and, IMO, inability to accept the consequences for your actions. I know we’d all like to get off with just a slap on the wrist, having found myself on the receiving end more than a few times, as I’m sure the same is for anyone else, but you have to learn to accept responsibility. It’s all part of growing up. Lancer1289 04:08, February 18, 2011 (UTC)

Locust
Sorry to bother you lancer but I did not know what exactly to do so I wanted to asked first. It has to deal with the Locust on the Playstation 3 version. I do not know if it has been discussed, which it probably has, or if it was a glitch that they have patched. The Locust on the PS3 version has i believe 140 total rounds in it. I do not know what you want to do with this info but i just wanted to point it out. thanks --Nat Wetli 10:44, February 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * This is the first I've heard of it and the first it's ever come up. That being said, I can't take one person's word on it but a more appropriate place to discuss this would be the Talk:M-12 Locust page, and not my talk page. Considering I don't have the PS3 version, I can't do anything with the information. Lancer1289 14:50, February 18, 2011 (UTC)

Delete proposal request
This seems like nothing more than an attempt at trolling and is nothing more than a waste of space. Can we get rid of it? Tanooki1432 19:36, February 19, 2011 (UTC)
 * Well I don't know about if it should be. Frankly it has been my experience that things are left in the forums. I would suggest asking Spart for his opinion on this as to be honest, I'm unsure what to do however I think I know what his response will be. Lancer1289 19:42, February 19, 2011 (UTC)

Continuing from the talk on the "shepards old dog tags" deletion.
I wouldn't worry about me posting he or she into any pages on this wiki. I only post on the dragon age wiki (mostly because those articles need work, plus the articles that are rune here seem to be in extremely good condition. Though if I needed to post in an article then I can guarantee that I would make every effort to distinguish between a male and female Shepard. Balitant 01:43, February 20, 2011 (UTC)

Continuing from the talk on the "shepards old dog tags" deletion.
I wouldn't worry about me posting he or she into any pages on this wiki. I only post on the dragon age wiki (mostly because those articles need work), plus the articles that are rune here seem to be in extremely good condition. Though if I needed to post in an article then I can guarantee that I would make every effort to distinguish between a male and female Shepard. Balitant 01:44, February 20, 2011 (UTC)
 * However, you must realize that many people don't know that rule and do it anyway. It was merely a precautionary measure nothing more or less to prevent problems that have come up in the past. Lancer1289 02:41, February 20, 2011 (UTC)

DLC Leak
Lancer, check this out:

http://www.joystiq.com/2011/02/21/mass-effect-2-arrival-dlc-detailed-by-latest-patch/

Also this:

http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/103/index/6128586/2#6128856

-- Fiery Phoenix 18:57, February 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * And what do you want me to do with this? I already saw both blogs on the subject. Lancer1289 19:02, February 21, 2011 (UTC)

Duh, I wasn't aware you'd seen the blogs! I do have to say, this sounds totally awesome! The whole Ultimate Sacrifice thing has me VERY intrigued. Fiery Phoenix 19:04, February 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * And if I hadn't I would have looked. Just because I haven't commented on something doens't mean I haven't seen it. I frequently don't comment on blogs because some topics are interesting but I don't see anything I need to comment on. If this comes across as a little annoyed, well it's only 13:00 and I've already had a long day. Lancer1289 19:14, February 21, 2011 (UTC)

Nah, it's alright. Just wanted to chill you up with the news a little. I'm pretty exhausted myself. Fiery Phoenix 19:17, February 21, 2011 (UTC)

Just wondering?
I am just curious to know if you know the slogan for the wikia's. It's "The wikia that anyone can edit" not the "wikia that anyone can edit and you suddenly delete". Because I am getting really annoyed of all my edits getting undone for no real reason. Example: the Firestorm edit I made, you said that it wasn't trivia, but trivia is defined as "matters or things that are very unimportant, inconsequential, or nonessential" so the statement I made about the mercenary having the Firestorm on his back without Zaeed's dlc. installed, fits perfectly into this catagory. Also you say that other enemies have the Firestorm, but I haven't seen any without the pack installed. Another example is when I edited the asari page and you said my statement was 'subjective', but I have to ask, how is that subjective when the Collector General page states that he looks like Pilot off the Farscape series? Answer me that please. ValerianCousland
 * Yes I know the slogan, however I ask you a question in return. If an edit goes against the site's established policies, then should we allow it to stay or should it be removed? If you respond, then please answer that.
 * Second the asari trivia was removed by someone besides me first, yet I don't see you dropping a statement to him asking the same question. The wording of the trivia is subjective because there are an extremely limited number of things connecting them. Frankly not close enough to stand on its own.
 * As to the flamethrowers, it is incorrect because there are other enemies that have them. One very clear example is the Blood Pack Pyro, which is encountered during Dossier: Archangel, Dossier: The Professor, Jack: Subject Zero, and Mordin: Old Blood. So I ask you also to say is that trivia when there are enemies that have a flamethrower without the pack and on missions that can be played without the DLC pack?
 * As to the Collector General, if you have a problem with it, then take it up on the Talk:Collector General page. Frankly I can see the comparisons, but again if you have a problem, then take it up on the talk page which is the most appropriate thing to do in this case.
 * I again ask you to answer the two questions I have asked above if you respond as thinks like this have a habit of going unresponded. Lancer1289 22:03, February 21, 2011 (UTC)

It intimidates people not to write, you delete things almost as soon as the people write them up. If people have a problem with the statement, don't you think they'd ask you to delete it rather than yo just do it. It's not as if I wrote a whole load of garbage not related to anything at all. As for the flamethrower, after YOU deleted my edit I wasn't going to write it for the other edits because you'd just delete it, so I wasn't going to waste my time. But your statement that it wasn't trivia is wrong, so if you want to delete something give a valid reason rather than make some crap excuse. Please. And as for the Collecter General, it solidifies my point that you can't defend yourself, but rather "direct" me to another page. 109.79.97.132 14:11, February 22, 2011 (UTC)
 * And you are exactly? You have never edited here before but I'll take it for granted that you are ValerianCousland. As to the comment, thanks for avoiding the questions which I asked you to answer and you failed to answer either. I explained why the flamethrower edit wasn't trivia, and yet you proceed to break the language policy to call my "excuse", which is perfectly legitimate given the backup which invalidates it, what you did. So thanks for ignoring my excuse. As to the General, it doesn't do anything. I said clearly if you have a problem with it, then take it up on the talk page, which is the way we do things here. I was telling you the appropriate and correct way to go about something, and you choose to ignore it. So it doesn't solidify anything since I said I can see comparisons, yet you choose to ignore the proper way to go about something the correct way. Lancer1289 14:25, February 22, 2011 (UTC)

WHY?
You dont have to be a try-hard... for re-editing every article I edit. Geth are an Humanoid-race of Networked AI's... Why do you keep editting this stuff back?
 * There is no need for petty jabs like that. The reason is that the geth are not a humanoid race, only the mobile platforms are humanoid. Geth are programs, a.k.a. software in computer systems. When they are not in those mobile platforms, they are in massive databanks. Remember what Legion says on its loyalty mission, only a small amount of mobile platforms are kept active at any time, and more are manufactured as necessary. The geth are programs, not humanoid. Lancer1289 00:23, February 22, 2011 (UTC)

Speculation
Congratulations, you have just deleted my addition to the wiki page "Sovereign". You've reasoned that it was a "Speculation". I just can't stop thinking how funny you are because the long existing line following my addition was "This is possibly a reference to a well-known Biblical event..." which was untouched by you. Moreover I rephrased the info I've added again to meet your taste. Sincerely.

Okay, you have deleted it again. Instead of "funny" now an other word pops into my mind.
 * The first undo alone was mislabeled as speculation when it should have been "That is a huge stretch". What else connects the first edit to Sovereign? Nothing except size and that isn't even close enough for trivia. The second edit was still a stretch. How do you know that other longer vessels don't exist or that maybe other Reapers are bigger? You don't and you can't know. You are trying to connect two things based on just size alone, and that isn't even close enough for trivia by a long shot. To connect two things based on a name, you need a lot of supporting evidence to justify it. Size and name alone, coincidence, and not enough for trivia. Lancer1289 20:34, February 22, 2011 (UTC)

It's just double standard in the wiki.
 * And what would be a double standard exactly? Both undoes had support and were legitimate, while both of your edits had little in the way of evidence or support. Nowhere near to the level of support needed for trivia. Lancer1289 21:02, February 22, 2011 (UTC)

yeah
I know I'm new to the site and stuff but I would just like to know why you removed my edit, thanks. Also I'd like to thank you for all the work you and other editors do to make this site great. Epzo 20:42, February 23, 2011 (UTC)
 * And which edit are you talking about exactly? Lancer1289 21:16, February 23, 2011 (UTC)
 * I think he means the one you undid shortly before he left the message. There should only be one such edit. :P
 * Seriously though, the edit was undone because the information was already present on the page. At least, that's the reason provided in the edit summary. SpartHawg948 21:17, February 23, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah the information was already present in the General Tactics section. Lancer1289 21:24, February 23, 2011 (UTC)

I would have to disagree with that, and if your talking about the "rapid-fire weapons" line then its not what I was talking about. Plus the information I added was class-specific, unless there is another class that has Adrenaline Rush. Also the trivia about the Mattock was relevant, more so than a medieval digging tool/improvised weapon trivia. Epzo 21:33, February 23, 2011 (UTC)
 * Except it is redundant because it basically repeats information that is already present in the same bullet, and above. It doesn't tailor it for the soldier, but merely repeats information that is already present. Redundant and unnecessary as we don't need to repeat information. As to the Mattock article, the information is subjective considering the wording "in reality it fills the true battle-rifle roll being a mid-ranged weapon". That is an opinion not a fact. The information about the pickaxe is relevant because it mentions a possible name connection. And there are very few things named Mattock. Lancer1289 22:04, February 23, 2011 (UTC)
 * What that using Adrenaline Rush to run around someone isn't redundant? It doesn't mention once from what I can tell that the damage bonus gained from Adrenaline Rush plus a weapon is effective or whatever, which is what your saying is already there. But if you still won't budge, what if I added that the Mattock is very good for this role? And sorry if that wasn't clear about the battle-rifle thing because that wasn't an opinion its a fact, a Battle-Rifle is a mid-ranged weapon that is usually semi-auto (original M-14 was select-fire and FN FAL was also) and because of the round used (standard rifle round), which is more powerful and accurate at longer ranges than an assault rifle and my examples were real life examples of weapons I have handled and fired. I didn't just make that up too, I want to be a military historian and one aspect is weapons which I tend to read about and study... a lot. So the Mattock qualifies as a Battle-Rifle by definition. Epzo 22:26, February 23, 2011 (UTC)
 * It qualifies by a selective definition. Battle rifles can also be burst fire, example from ME is the M-15 Vindicator. Some can also be classified as DMRs as well given their range and accuracy. Also you do note the full cartridge, but at the same time we don't know if the Mattock has a more powerful "round" or if it is larger than the Avenger's. The Mattock could also fall into the classification of a DMR as it also somewhat fits based on the description and the way it is used. More people have compared it to a DMR than a Battle Rifle,, and while that is mute, it does say that it has DMR characteristics. I will admit though it compared it to the one from Reach. It is still your interpretation of a definition which can be interpreted differently, which is also known as an opinion. The argument could go on all day but we'd still arrive at the same thing, it is still an opinion. And yes I do know what I'm talking about.
 * As to the Shadow Broker thing, I really don't know. I would have to see it first because weapons tend to get a bit out of hand. Lancer1289 22:55, February 23, 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok, I get were your coming from now. Yeah, a DMR would also be a good way to describe it. I didn't say you didn't know what you were talking about I just wanted you to know I wasn't just making up stuff and that I had some knowledge. hmm. sorry I brought this up on your talk page. As for the Shadow Broker thing, I noticed it said something about using the Geth Plasma Shotgun with Adreniline Rush to run around the Shadow Broker and fire a charged shot. Also like I said before I'm new, like today new, but I have been using this site for a while and when ME3 comes out or a new DLC I hope I could add some useful information. Once again thanks for listening. p.s. how do you look at edit summary? Epzo 23:13, February 23, 2011 (UTC)
 * By using the history function. At the top of a page there is a line saying "Edited ____ ago by ____" with the ___ being filled by time interval and person respectively. Hover, don't click, over the user name or any part of that, and a drop down box will appear. At the bottom is "View full history", click on that, and you will see edit summaries. You can also use the Recent Changes feature to see them as well. Lancer1289 23:23, February 23, 2011 (UTC)

Armor
Lancer,
 * I noticed that while DLC armor has there own articles, the individual pieces such as the Death Mask, or Stabilization Gauntlets don't. It could be useful if someone was wondering if the N7 helmet is good for a specific class. Just thought I'd run the idea by you. Epzo 00:59, February 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah we have already explored this topic over multiple talk pages and it was dismissed each time. We do have an article for the armor pieces: Armor Customization, and guides for the various classes: Ex Adept Guide (Mass Effect 2). However armor pieces are greatly affected by personal bias, playstyle, aesthetics, and class being played. Armor is very biased and having an article for each armor piece was ruled out a while ago, and putting information in the guides was again dismissed. The information is again affected by many different factors and people find which piece of armor works best for them. Some just don't even change armor at all over the course of the game. Lancer1289 01:09, February 24, 2011 (UTC)

Dragon Age II?
Are you planning on buying Dragon Age II when it's released? There's something riding on your answer... -- Commdor (Talk) 20:54, February 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * I've had it on preorder since November at GameStop and plan to pick it up on release day. So what exactly is riding on my answer? Lancer1289 20:57, February 25, 2011 (UTC)


 * Same here, pre-ordered in November when I heard about the Signature Edition, can't wait. Anyway, through a series of fortunate circumstances, I've obtained an extra code for the bonus item Ser Isaac's Armor. Want it? -- Commdor (Talk) 21:01, February 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * That's it. Commdor's banned for holding out on the big boss! :P
 * Seriously though, release-day pickup is for suckers! It's all about the Amazon.com release day delivery! :D SpartHawg948 21:02, February 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) Nice grab sure I'll take the code if you are willing. Send it to me via email. Just click here and fill it out and I should get it soon enough. Thanks Commdor. So how did you acquire an extra code exactly? Lancer1289 21:06, February 25, 2011 (UTC)


 * Cool, Spart's getting it too. But I only have one code... Fight to the death! I probably should have started some contest blog to give everyone a chance. Oh well. I mainly wanted to offload the code before it expires or I forget about it, but it had to go to people I trust. I thought of Lancer first, so he gets it. If Lancer wasn't getting DAII, I would have gone to you next, Spart. Anywho, it just so happens that my brother got Dead Space 2 for 360. He isn't into RPGs, so he gave me his code for Ser Isaac's Armor. Then, my mom (being an avid horror game fan) got Dead Space 2 for PC, and I got her code as well. This whole promotion worked out great for me, I got two bonus item codes for a game I want without spending a dime. -- Commdor (Talk) 21:17, February 25, 2011 (UTC)

I've emailed the code, Lancer. -- Commdor (Talk) 21:24, February 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * Code recieved but I seem to have problems redeeming it. Do you have to enter it from the DAII menu through the demo or can you enter it directly from Xbox Live? Lancer1289 21:32, February 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * You redeem the code here (the BioWare Social site). Make sure you're logged in. -- Commdor (Talk) 21:38, February 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, and done. Code is redeemed. Thanks again Commdor. Lancer1289 21:40, February 25, 2011 (UTC)

No fair! Lancer had an unfair advantage! He didn't have to work! There I am, out risking my life and whatnot, and this is the thanks I get! Boo! Now I have to go out and buy a copy of a game I'm only marginally interested in. And all because no one was thinking of poor little old me, the person who pretty much kept the site going for most of its existence. There's really no justice, is there? :( SpartHawg948 08:15, February 26, 2011 (UTC)
 * LOL @ Spart! XD


 * I've had my copy pre-ordered since November as well. Game is looking real fine. -- Fiery Phoenix 18:19, February 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * Indeed. Mighty fine. And the demo is awesome. Though I must note two things: Flemeth looks mighty hot, especially compared to her appearance in DA:O, and additionally, my roommate took one look at the demo and stated (quite accurately) "That is a bloody game!" And indeed it is. :D SpartHawg948 19:18, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

Check this out
Hey Lancer,

While you're at it, I'd like your opinion on this; specifically, the newly added LOTSB section at the bottom the page. -- Fiery Phoenix 18:08, February 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll take a look now that I have a chance to breath. However in the future if you are leaving a new message, please just click the "New message" button at the top and not edit a section or the whole page like I ask at the top. Thank you. It makes it easier to find what message you left or what you edited. Lancer1289 18:39, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

Actually, that was a different comment. See the Dragon Age 2 section above. :) -- Fiery Phoenix 18:45, February 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * I was referring to your first edit, not the second. Lancer1289 18:50, February 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * So you ask me to look it over, and then you edit conflict me. :( That isn't very nice. Lancer1289 19:14, February 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, sorry about that. Totally didn't know. -- Fiery Phoenix 19:27, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

Regarding Geth Hopper
Apologies. Edit conflicts. What do you mean by 'template needs more work'? Phylarion 21:30, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * We need to figure out how to incorperate it as what was going on was not how it works on other articles. To work it out, I reference Talk:Geth Hopper. Lancer1289 21:33, February 28, 2011 (UTC)

Stats in general
When we describe enemy health and shields, what difficulty level do we describe them to? Some enemies out there seem too weak. Tali&#39;s no.1 fan 21:41, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * It does flex a little based on level and on difficulty. Frankly we'll just have to go with it as I have seen a few different indicators. Lancer1289 21:47, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * Why not just list the difficulty outright, when putting it in? "Oh this difficulty they have this much health". As an example.NickTyrong 03:37, March 1, 2011 (UTC)

Reading it now.
I'm reading it now. The passage says "and thereby magnify". Is it changed in different versions? Because I'm on the 360 version of Mass 2. And is saying "The text is an exactly copy reguardless of the audio)" automatic? Because it's in secondary. There is no audio.

Again, is it just changed in different versions? By the way, this is in regards to the change to the codex for Javellin.NickTyrong 03:25, March 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * Apparently you are correct. The Javelin entry was one of a number of Codex entries that are different from ME to ME2 and when I pointed it to Spart, he and I went through and transcribed those entries that were different. Spart is the one who actually transcribed the entry for ME2 so I'm assuming that he made a small error, or the Codex updated as he doesn't make errors like that very often. I assumed it was correct, given that I had also checked it and it said the same thing, IIRC that is. Anyway I have already switched it back to the correct version.
 * As to the audio statement, it is for differences between the audio version and the text version. We have also discovered several small differences between the audio version of a primary entry, and the text version, the Thanix Cannon being the biggest example. When it comes to that, the text version is copied directly no matter what the audio says. I thought the entry was further up in the Codex. I really need to get back on my Codex project when I have the time. Lancer1289 03:42, March 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. And yeah, I'm sure there might be more small oversights like that. Always is.NickTyrong 04:05, March 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * Indeed. Lancer1289 04:10, March 1, 2011 (UTC)

Missing Title #2
Im having trouble adding this armor to my male character. I want the medium hazard armor level x. But I can only get the armor shown bellow in red as 'Crisis Armor'. Im probably being really stupid and messing up the codes, but when I try and add Hazard Armor is doesn't look like the picture bellow...

--Tea Break 09:20, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * So is it so hard to leave me a new message like I ask at the top of my page? Editing the whole page makes it harder for me to see what is new and what is old.
 * As to the question itself, since I don't mod my games I'm not the best person to ask. I would recommend the Talk:PC Cheats or Talk:PC Tweaks page where you would probably get a better answer. Also can you please remove the image as I don't like images on my talk page. Lancer1289 14:18, March 3, 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I clicked the 'leave message' button... Im new to this site. --Tea Break 14:24, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * Well then I guess it's wikia again. I'm sure you can understand that it is frustrating when people don't hit the new message button and I have to hunt through to see where a new message is, and what it is exactly. I have had it happen where I've had new messages in the middle, at the beginning, and the end of my talk page. It just makes it harder to find where the new message is that is all. Lancer1289 14:30, March 3, 2011 (UTC)

Heads up
Just a quick heads up... after giving it some thought, I'd decided to go back onto a few talk pages and restore some deleted commentary that was removed by a user who is no longer with us. One of the talk pages I was going to be working on was the Timeline talk page, which you just recently archived. So I'll probably be tinkering around with the archived content of the Talk:Timeline page in a bit. Just figured I'd let you know, what with the 'no editing archives' thing and all - I'd planned the edits before the archiving took place, you just happened to beat me to it by a few hours. SpartHawg948 22:25, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * Would this Throwback by any chance and I'm assuming your getting the content from the history? Anyway last time I checked, you as a b'crat, outranked me anyway and I believe your edit summary "And as for the archive, I'm a B-crat! I'll do what I want!" pretty much cleared it up. As this would fall under "maintenance and housekeeping", and you outranking me, I really can't see a problem with it as that is your decision, and I wasn’t really that privy to a lot of those discussions. As to the archiving, I just happened to be looking around and saw that one, so apologies for making it a little more difficult. The main reason the archive tag is there is to discourage old arguments from restarting on a page that is for reference purposes only. I think you know where I'm going with that. Lancer1289 22:56, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * It is Throwback. And, upon further examination, at least part of it was deleted in violation of site policy a ways back anyways, so it should have been restored then, though I didn't do it. And yes, I am a B-Crat, and I DO WHAT I WANT!!! :P SpartHawg948 22:59, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * Since he was removing his comments I'm a bit confused after looking at what you readded. I do know that he did remove other comments, and with his attitude, is what finally got him permabanned but it looked like you just readded his comments. So perhaps you could enlighten me as to which policy that was, or am I misunderstanding something? Lancer1289 23:05, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * One of the comments he removed on the Timeline talk page was a comment left by an unregistered user. It was more than likely him, just not signed in, but it was still a violation of policy. SpartHawg948 23:26, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah well thank you for enlightening me. Lancer1289 23:28, March 3, 2011 (UTC)

Edit reverts
Regarding your recent edit on the morality page, i am using the Steam version of Mass Effect, whereas i noticed, during the Qui'in glitch that my paragon never actually touched 25, it was always 24, except for one time when it reached 48. Regenade popped up by 25 each time, except for two times when it reached 30 and 50. The game version is 1.02.

-Icekhaos (Unregistered), editor of Morality/Mira pages.
 * Well I did check the Morality Guide and it did in fact say 24 Paragon so I have fixed that. However, I have never encountered a situation where the meters went up 48, 30, or 50 in one go. The 48 and 50 can be explained away as you did the glitch too fast and it just carried over, as that has happened to me several times. I have never encountered the thirty however, and that would need confirmation before it goes in. The talk page for the Morality Guide, Talk:Morality Guide would be the best place for it. Lancer1289 18:54, March 4, 2011 (UTC)

As for the Mira edit, i was trying to point out the possibility of stacking up the bricks in the middle, that the core would still reboot.
 * Except that isn't the point of the thing and I've never seen it happen. Either way it is irrelevant.

Lancer1289 01:24, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Regarding the X57 edit, the footsteps are closest to red point 7, figured i would add them there.
 * Except it isn't a marked location on the map, and I believe there are other things that aren't marked. Just because it is near something, doesn’t mean that it has a place in the article. Either way it is something that belongs in the walkthrough. Lancer1289 18:12, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Missing Title #3
GameStop has apparently revealed that Mass Effect 3 will be released on Xbox 360, PS3, and PC on November 8, 2011.

i found this days ago and someone at gamestop in my home town told me this as well, here is my source: http://gamerant.com/mass-effect-3-release-date-dyce-57442/
 * Yeah many problems with that. First not a reliable source. Second old news. Third the person at GameStop is not reliable as their own website says December 31, along with Amazon. Bottom line is there is no reliable source for the release date yet, and the site that your provided is less than trustworthy.
 * And is it really that hard to leave a new message instead of editing the whole page or section that has nothing to do with what someone wants to talk about? Lancer1289 03:44, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Missing Title #4
Regarding that edit on the assassin page, I swear I had just talked to Barla Von and then fought the assassins on my playthrough minutes ago. I remember this particularly because of the annoying amount of health I found them having on insanity. I won't change the article again, but I know I talked to the volus, fought the assassins, then got Harkin's commentary on femshep. As a rule, I've always talked to von first, immediately after talking to the council, and always encountered the assassins. Not sure how you don't. Anyway, this is making a mountain out of a small bit for an encounter with two throwaway characters, don't want to trouble you over this.
 * However every time I have talked to him, then avoided Wrex and Garrus, I have never gotten the assassins. Only when I avoid going to Von do I get them, every other way results in them not being there. And seriously is it that hard to leave a new message, like I ask at the top of the page, rather than edit the whole page or edit a section that has nothing to do with what you want to discuss? Lancer1289 05:51, March 7, 2011 (UTC)

I did hit the button, just forgot a title. sorry for the inconvenience. also forgot to sign, sorry bout that too. Anyway, not sure how I'm fighting them then, I go talk to von because I don't want to go back up to the presidium and there they are outside the den, every time. Arbiter099 13:31, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
 * Well that may explain a few things about new messages. Anyway ME does have a few bugs and things like that have been reported, but not to such a degree... Lancer1289 15:03, March 7, 2011 (UTC)

Besieged Base edit
I think that saying "Shepard will say that they are just doing their job" sounds awkward and informal; the use of "they" as a singular neuter pronoun is not really correct in formal (i.e. written) usage. "Shepard will say that he or she is just doing his or her job" would be correct, but at least as awkward as the first. "Shepard will say that he or she is "just doing my job"" is the best compromise, in my opinion. --Lucius Voltaic 03:57, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * The problem with that is that we will go to any lengths to avoid "he or she" as that is even more awkward and breaks the flow of a sentence more than any form of they. You will be very hard pressed to find "he or she" or some variant of that on this wiki as most are either gone or reworded. Your compromise is even more awkward sounding and choppy than the current version. Right now I am going with the current version unless one can be proposed without the "he or she" as that is just awkward. Lancer1289 04:03, March 8, 2011 (UTC)

Trivia on "Borr"
I object to the undoing of my edit as "unnecessary rewording". As it stands now, the sentence means that the Norse mythology named a god so as to fit in with the naming pattern of the system. That's obviously not what it meant. Besides, my way flows better. Is there some rule that prior wording is automatically preferred? --Lucius Voltaic 01:01, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * Really? Because that is not what I'm getting at all. What I'm getting out of the sentence now is that in keeping with the naming conventions of the Asgard System, in Norse Mythology, the planet is named for Borr, the father god. I'm not sure how you are getting that people about 1000 years ago named a god to fit the naming conventions of a fictional planet in a fictional system. Your rewording was choppy, "is in keeping" is extremely choppy and breaks the flow of the sentence much more than it does now. I still don't know how you are getting what you are as that is very puzzling.
 * And no, prior wording is not in any stretch of the word automatically preferred, however if a new edit says the same thing using different wording that breaks the flow of a sentence or is choppy, then it is preferred because it flows better. Lancer1289 01:12, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * The sentence, pared down to its grammatical essentials, says: "In keeping with the naming theme, Borr was the father of Odin." The word "Borr" in this case must refer to the god, as the planet is obviously not Odin's father; so the planet Borr is not even mentioned in the sentence. If we want the sentence to refer to the planet, it has to say something along the lines of "In keeping with the naming theme, Borr was named after the father of Odin." My edit was an attempt to incorporate both that and the qualifiers such as "in Norse mythology". --Lucius Voltaic 01:41, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * Still can't see it and I still can't see what you are getting at. If you want to reword it where isn't choppy, then fine, but I don't have a problem with it right now. Lancer1289 01:58, March 9, 2011 (UTC)

Fan art
Lancer 1289, I have a question. You delted one day ago my review about Blasto. I wrote something about a fan project by Machinima on this Issue. My question is if posting Fan art is always forbidden. The trailer i named in my part of the review was in my eyes very objectiv on the quotations made by Bioware. It was a good Easter Egg in the game. So must be a review so objective to hid every else media on this topic?
 * OK here's a question, or two. Was that "trailer" made by BioWare? Was the "tralier" authorized by BioWare? I can answer both questions, NO it wasn't. Fan art has no place in the main articles here as it isn't authorized, nor is it canon. That "trailer" wasn't part of the game, or the ME universe, and since it isn't canon, then it has no place here. So yes we do not allow fan art anywhere in the mainspace of the wiki. You are free to post that in a blog post or in the Forums, but not in the articles. It doesn't matter how "objectiv [sic]" the review is, as that is subjective information, because the "trailer" isn't official, it doesn't have a place here. Just because you think something is objective, that is your opinion, which also doesn't have a place in articles. Someone else may disagree about whether it is objective or that it was a good Easter Egg. The bottom line is, that if it isn't canon, authorized by BioWare, i.e. official concept art or official art, isn't in the games or books, then it doesn't have a place in the mainspace of the wiki.
 * Also what exactly was your last sentence trying to say as the wording is very confusing? Lancer1289 14:45, March 9, 2011 (UTC)

The last sentence was about the trailer. Like you have noticed i had put the URL of the trailer in the Review of Blasto. The trailer was not from Bioware and Bioware didn`t comment on the video, but in the trailer itself they show only a hanar and Eclipse mercenarys with the grafic engine of the game and they transfer the audio data about the movie(Easter Egg) from the game into their trailer. I won`t put anything else again in a review or guide on this wiki, but to mention it for all the Mass Effect Fans who look up this Wiki should be also legal by the Guidelines.

Sry when i made you same problems but first i`m new on this Wiki, second Englisch isn`t my mother tongue (my bad grammar^^) and at least this was my opinion on that. PS: Thx for feedback.
 * The problem is that it isn't official ME material and as such qualifies as fan art and isn't allowed under the guidelines. If we allow one instance of fan made material in the mainspace, then where does it stop? Usually it doesn’t. Both SpartHawg948, the resident bureaucrat, and myself agree no fan made material for numerous reasons. That is the kind of thing that belongs in the forums or in a blog. Not in the mainspace. Lancer1289 17:15, March 9, 2011 (UTC)

Missing paragon points with Liara after Lair of the Shadow Broker.
Anonymus on (PC): Sorry for my error with the random console result in the Shadow Broker Base.

Maybe I fail again, but after I saved in the Shadow Broker Base (after completing the mission) I checked my P/R-points with Gibbed-Editor and had 1880/426. I than talked with Liara (she was my romance in ME1; imported this character; Jack my current romance) and she went with me on the Normany 2. We had some talk in Shepard's cabin, I was friendly all the time, in the end talking about having family, growing old, having blue childs. We came close, but no (visible) sex. After she left, I saved again and rechecked this savegame, having now 1888/426 P/R. This means, that I got +8 Paragon points. Only wanted to inform you with this message, before I mess up again ;)

Greetings.
 * I do have to ask why this is on my talk page? Because the most appropiate, logical, and best place would be the Talk:Morality Guide (Mass Effect 2) page. I do not modify my games using third party mods so I have no idea what is going on with save editors. If you wish to confirm something, then again the page I linked would be the best place because there isn't anything I can do with this information as my ME2 PC games got whipped out a few months ago when my hard drive crashed. And even if they hadn't, I wouldn't use the save editor to begin with as I know there are plenty of others who do and check this sort of thing. So again, if you want confirmtion or anything else with this, then the page I linked would be the best place. Lancer1289 20:21, March 9, 2011 (UTC)

Missing Title #5
TThe purpose of my Eletania edit was to add a link to information on the condition, as the term may seem confusing to non-English people.
 * That's it I give up. I have now beyond any reasonable doubt determined that it is impossible to leave me a new message and that the page will be edited anyway despite what I ask.
 * As to what I stated, it was for a second opinion on the matter. Lancer1289 22:14, March 9, 2011 (UTC)

User: 92.43.64.72
He undid your revision to Commander Shepard where you removed the irrelevant and useless Pedobear references that have nothing to do with him. I've reverted back to your version, but he may need an eye kept on him.
 * Thanks for bringing this to my attentnion, however the user has been banned in accordance with current site policy about vandalism. Thanks again for being on the lookout. Lancer1289 14:18, March 10, 2011 (UTC)

What is Trivia?
As a new user, I don't see very good guidelines about what should be considered trivia and what should be considered content, even after reading the FAQ. The example I am using is Sha'ira's information. The dialog between the two crew members on the Normandy is listed as an indication of Sha'ira's place in the ME2 universe. The Galactic News Network tidbit that is audible in several locations on Omega is not. (It is listed in the Wiki's list of GNN broadcasts.) At first blush, they seem about equivalent. Both provide information, both are heard when walking around the world, seemingly at random, and both are incidental to the plot.

I am not disputing the inclusion and I won't go back and edit it. The FAQ for Trivia is a bit tautological, though; it states, in essence, that trivia should be trivial, but not too much so. If we don't have a good definition for trivia, it becomes non-trivial. Your conversations with me have implied that this distinction is obvious but, as far as I can discern from the original guidelines, it is not.

It might be worthwhile to put in something in the FAQ that says that LoTSB dossier information, ads, news broadcasts, etc. are all inappropriate for inclusion in general discussions and that they should be confined to their own pages. Ingehira 08:32, March 12, 2011 (UTC)
 * Except that isn't listed in the FAQ, nor should it be. That is just a very general overview and shouldn't get into specifics. The document you should be looking at is the Mass Effect Wiki:Manual of Style, which goes into a lot more detail about these things. As to your last point, I really don't think that has to be stated because it doesn't happen very often and isn't usually pushed. Lancer1289 18:52, March 12, 2011 (UTC)

I think ideally trivia should meet at least two basic conditions before it is credible: That it is relevant to the source material in some way (paying homage included), and it isn't an obscure statement, or rather should I say arcane (known only to select individuals). If trivia is on the name of an individual or place, a third condtion needs to be met: giving an explanation for why the two are related, sourced info is optional but recommended for controversial points. I guess that pretty much covers the basics. H-Man Havoc 01:15, March 13, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah the problem with that definition is that more than a few things on this site wouldn't be rendered trivia by that more restrictive standard, and some that would get in based on that less restrictive standard. You really have a double-edged blade there. Trivia is more or less hit or miss with each item being graded as it comes up.
 * An individual or place needs a lot more than just demonstrating they are related. One could use that argument to justify Omega looking like High Charity, yet in reality they are more different than alike. To justify that kind of trivia, we actually had to put it in the MoS. Granted that is not a one size fits all solution, but you need more than just one item to back up a claim like that. To make a connection based on a name or visual description, you need a lot more than just one item to back it up, multiple are needed.
 * When it comes to relevance, that is a completely separate matter and yours is not a "one size fits all" solution, and to be honest there isn't one. There are some trivia items that aren't even relevant to the articles yet they are there. I can't come up with any off hand right now, but relevance needs to be evaluated based on what the trivia item contains and what it is about, which are two separate things. Relevance also needs to be done from a neutral standpoint and generally is.
 * Obscure statements are also something that needs to be evaluated on a case by case basis. Sure is something is obscure, then there is already much stacked against it, but at the same time, it could be relevant. I have seen trivia items come out of the strangest places and yet they still remain because they are not only good, but could inform others to a link to something obscure. This standard also applies to arcane statements as well. Just because you haven't heard of something, doesn't mean that it isn't relevant.
 * Sources: Always a good idea, and especially on controversial topics, but usually that is hashed out on the talk page with the source itself being added or not, depending on the situation. However sources aren't always required for trivia items. It is usually required for out of universe connections if anything.
 * The bottom line is that there really is no "one size fits all" solution, and again your definition does present a double edged blade when it comes to standards. There are some more restrictive terms, and some less restrictive terms which could clash with each other. The real point of the matter is that each item is really a case by case basis with the most general guidelines in the MoS. This is because, from my perspective and based on my editing experience, is because some items could come from the infield, to use baseball terminology, and not be trivia, and something could come out of right-centerfield and be trivia. Anyone is of course free to change any trivia item on the talk page of an article, and if their piece of trivia was remove, free to argue for its inclusion. But it is again more of a case by case basis based on, but not limited to, what it contains, where it is going, what it is about, what it is connecting to, and can a serious connection be made. Lancer1289 01:50, March 13, 2011 (UTC)

Thane: Sins of the Father edit
Hey man, thanks for cleaning up the category edit I did, however with the 2 bugs I added, I realize they are probably not well-known or frequently encountered, but I've been doing the playthrough on this mission and just had BOTH happen to me within a matter of minutes.

Not for nothing, I'm definitely not trying to steal your thunder or question your knowledge of this game by any means, but I am also an avid fan of the series and am just trying to add as much relevant detail to the wiki as possible for future users.

Thanks for your walk-throughs by the way. From what I've seen so far, it's been pretty clean.
 * The problem is that this is the first I've seen or heard of them, anywhere. I've never seen it on the BioWare Forums, gaming sites, or here, among other places. I have also never encountered them in any of my playthroughs of ME2, and I have at least 20 full playthrougs, I need to double check. However, I would propose something on the Talk:Thane: Sins of the Father page and see if anyone else has encountered them. Lancer1289 07:09, March 13, 2011 (UTC)

Okay, well either way, just because you haven't encountered it doesn't mean it hasn't happened. What's silly to me is that because YOU haven't encountered those issues, YOU deem it necessary to remove them from the page. First of all, please don't misconstrue the intention here. If I wanted to waste my time I would have vandalized the page and left completely irrelevant information for you to spend your valuable time cleaning up, BUT because I, 1. Have no interest in vandalism of this website & 2. Have only the desire to add FACTUAL representations of things that happen during gameplay, I think it's mightily unfair of you to revert my edit just because you haven't "heard of it anywhere".

I have several play-throughs (not 20, like yourself), but one would think that someone like you who is so inclined to maintain the integrity of this information being provided would AT LEAST give it recognition instead of throwing it to the nether-realms of a "talk" page. Seriously man? We're on the same side so please drop the power-trip. The Fallen Nemesis 07:21, March 13, 2011 (UTC)The Fallen Nemesis
 * "Power Trip"? Seriously? I propose an appropriate forum to discuss something, and you just completely blow it off. Like I have stated this is literally the first I've heard or seen these bugs, and considering one does involve an interrupt, that does need to be verified before it goes into the article. If this were a common bug, then it would have been reported elsewhere wouldn't it? Yet I have never seen or heard of this bug. If you want confirmation on them, that someone else has encountered them, the talk page is the most appropriate forum for that, and contrary to your belief, talk pages are not a "nether-realm", they are places where things can get sorted out. To which I propose another question, if you are the only one who has encountered this bug, it may very well be isolated in your console/PC depending on what you play. If no one else has encountered it, then it is relevant? No because it appears to be an isolated incident, which can happen even on consoles. The talk page of an article it the best and most appropriate place to get feedback on something like this.
 * And again there is really no need for petty jabs and saying that I'm on a power trip, which isn't the case. Lancer1289 07:33, March 13, 2011 (UTC)

Please go see the Talk:Thane: Sins of the Father "Bugs" section I set up last night. Someone replied to the bugs I posted, which you deleted. I'm not sure if that means neither are qualified to be bugs yet or not, but considering that it's no longer an isolated incident relegated only to MY console, I would appreciate confirmation from you that these are now validated bugs which I can freely list on the mission page. Please advise. The Fallen Nemesis 23:20, March 13, 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm still not willing to call it a confirmed bug yet. Get one more, then it can go back in. Three confirmed cases is much better than two and threes is how I've seen it work in other places. Lancer1289 00:37, March 14, 2011 (UTC)

Missing Title #6
In the Dossier: The Justicar mission, there is a med-kit just to the right of the door you bypass after you destroy the gunship. That was not listed in the walk-through so I figured I'd let you know so that you can go back and edit it. If you can verify that and are okay with me editing that portion of the walkthrough, please let me know and I will gladly make the change. The Fallen Nemesis 23:05, March 13, 2011 (UTC)
 * First why was this in the topic above? It had nothing to do with what was being discussed and wasn't relevant to that conversation.
 * As to the actual content, you are incorrect as it is listed in the article at the end of the paragraph that talks about dealing with the gunship. Quote: "There is also Medi-gel on the other side of the bridge." I really do not see the need to say the same thing twice. So, considering it is already in the article I don't see the need for an edit. Lancer1289 00:37, March 14, 2011 (UTC)

The Arrival Screenshot
http://masseffect.bioware.com/media/screenshots/ It's sort of official. Also, check the homepage: http://masseffect.com/ Comes out and says that it's the first Arrival screenshot. Tanooki1432 20:12, March 14, 2011 (UTC)
 * So when people add things to articles, why can't they say where they are getting it from and what it is about? I mean is that really so hard to ask? Reguardless, I'll upload a higher quality, and better named PNG image anyway and add that. Lancer1289 20:37, March 14, 2011 (UTC)

Telon
We did discuss this a long time ago. But in the previous conversation we had, SpartHawg948 stated " Firstly, 'punched him out' is pretty horrible grammar. Knocked him out, or simply punched him, would be more acceptable". He said that punched him would be acceptable, so therfore I changed it to that. Also punched him is more accurate than knocked him out because we don't even know if he was knocked out in the first place. We physically saw him get punched but have no confirmation whatsoever that he was ever knocked out.
 * So what is the problem with the current version exactly because this issue was settled a long time ago? Knocked out is the accepted term as it is what actually happens. Telon is unresponsive and is knocked out because he doesn't respond to anything that is going on. IF he were simply punched, as your edit puts it, then he would be reacting to outside stimuli, yet strangely he isn't so therefore he is knocked out. You are not accurately describing what happens and therefore the current version is more accurate. Frankly I do not see why you are pushing an issue that was settled months ago. Lancer1289 01:16, March 18, 2011 (UTC)

Well although we have no real confirmation Telon was knocked out, we can still keep it that way. I guess it does work but I would still like to add the word punch somewhere in that sentence. I hope you can see my point of view and consider it.
 * (edit conflict) Ah, the old "I'll wait a while and then try the edit that got undone again and hope they forgot about it" routine. For the record, I never said that "punched him" would be acceptable for the article. I, in point of fact, stated that it wouldn't be acceptable. "Punched is EXTREMELY vague. You can punch someone with a gun without impairing at all their ability to then shoot you in the face. Or, you can punch them so hard, they get knocked out. Since there is so much wiggle room within the term 'punched', I felt it better to go with the more accurate version. In the quote you provide, I said that "punched him" would be more acceptable than "punched him out". One poor choice of words can be more acceptable than another poor choice of words and still be a poor choice of words not acceptable for an article. SpartHawg948 01:32, March 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) And why would we add punch anywhere in that sentence? Spart already pointed out to you that articles exist "to give a fairly brief summary of the plot, not to describe in detail every single little thing that occurs in each scene." To quote Spart again, "this is not a play-by-play, it's a broad overview". I could keep going but just read over the last response on your own talk page as that is just about everything I was going to say. The current version is fine and doesn't need to be altered. Lancer1289 01:36, March 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * Addendum: And now I see that you misquoted Spart as well and twisted his words. Anyway Spart has basically stated everything he did in the argument about 8 months ago now, so I don't see the need to repeat anything. The article is fine as it is and more accurate at that. Lancer1289 01:39, March 18, 2011 (UTC)

First of all spart I do not "wait a while and then try the edit that got undone again and hope they forgot about it". I decided to edit it again and restart this discusion because by saying somthing along the lines of "Telon got puched and then fell unconscious" is more accurate than saying "Telon got knocked out". Even though it is a play by play it is more accuarate, and I beleive accuracy is VERY important. Don't you think accuaracy is important? --Saltpeter1 01:45, March 18, 2011 (UTC) And I would like to ask you Lancer, how have I twisted Spart's words and misquoted him?
 * So why would we state the exact same thing just using more wording? You have already been told about this multiple times now so I won’t repeat what Spart has stated and that I have quoted on this very page . You proposed something similar and yet Spart still said no, and something tells me his opinion hasn’t changed on the matter. I still say the current version is fine and is accurate within the context of the matter and if you have a problem with something, then you take it up on a talk page, not edit the article to “restart” something. That isn’t how things work here.
 * And yes you did misquote him and twisted his words. You said and I quote that “[Spart] said that punched him would be acceptable, so therfore I changed it to that”, when he never said that. You took his words out of context, and lead to a very false conclusion that he said it was OK when it never was. So yes, you did misquote him and twisted his words to your advantage without providing context and the nature of the comment. That is called misquoting. Lancer1289 02:04, March 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) But that is literally exactly what you did. You tried the edit that got undone again. You didn't "restart this discussion" until after the edit was undone. If restarting the discussion was your goal, you should have actually restarted the discussion, not gone ahead and made the edit. As for how you misquoted me, I made that pretty clear in my last post. You took a statement I made and claimed that I was saying something that supported your position, when in fact I was doing nothing of the sort. By claiming that I meant something that is actually the opposite of what I actually meant, you twisted my words and misquoted me. SpartHawg948 02:06, March 18, 2011 (UTC)

So does any of this answer my question about changing it to "Telon got puched and then fell unconscious"?
 * I believe that was answered by me about eight months ago. The answer still hasn't changed. SpartHawg948 02:18, March 18, 2011 (UTC)

Eight months ago I wanted to change it to punched out not "Telon got puched and then fell unconscious". Punched out and "Telon got puched and then fell unconscious" mean the same thing but "Telon got puched and then fell unconscious" is more grammatically correct. So I don't see why it can't be changed to "Telon got puched and then fell unconscious" because it is more accurate. --Saltpeter1 02:25, March 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * I was actually referring to a few similar and similarly needlessly long alternatives you posed. It really isn't any more accurate, and it is needlessly wordy. As I stated before, we're providing a brief but accurate overview, not a detailed play-by-play (or blow-by-blow, if you prefer). The current version is both concise and accurate. Yours is not. SpartHawg948 02:30, March 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) I leave to take my dog for a walk and look what I miss. Anyway, I'm going to have to agree. There is no need for any modification and something told me that Spart wasn't going to change his mind about this, especially when the current version is accurate as it is. There is such a thing as wordiness, yes that is actually a word, and that is exactly what that is, unnecessary wordiness. Lancer1289 02:39, March 18, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah I guess we can leave it your way. If you do beleive people will prefer less info.
 * However again, there is no need for unnecessary wordiness. The current version is accurate, and there is no need to complicate it with a play-by-play account. Lancer1289 02:41, March 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * Better to have concise and accurate details that tell the reader what happened, instead of needlessly wordy morasses of text that bombard the reader with extraneous details they neither need nor want. More is not always better. Sometimes, as the saying goes, less is more... SpartHawg948 02:44, March 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * Again agreed. No need to add other details when it is uncalled for in an article. Lancer1289 02:52, March 18, 2011 (UTC)

Well as a reader I wan't more details. --Saltpeter1 02:54, March 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * And I understand that. However, it would seem that there are (currently, at any rate), more people who prefer concise and accurate to overly detailed and verbose. Speaking solely for myself, as a reader, I like it factual and to the point. I want to know what happened, but don't need literally every little tiny piece of info, especially not about a video game, where the best (and funnest) way to learn what happened is to go play it for myself. If we list every detail, that takes so much fun out of the game. On the other hand, if we give an accurate account but don't go overboard with the detail, there's still plenty to do and see in-game. SpartHawg948 02:58, March 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) So why would we modify something that is already accurate, for something that says the same thing, just with completely unnecessary wordiness? That doesn’t make much sense grammatically or logically. This argument is in all honesty going nowhere as you have one b'crat, Spart, and one admin, me, telling you that the current version is acceptable and appropriate in the context of that article, which has already been explained to you, multiple times, what the article is to entail. Lancer1289 03:00, March 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * Addendum: I would have to say that short and to the point is also something I like. Long drawn out statements are nice when they are called for, but they aren't in this case. Going along with not needing every piece of info, which I agree with, there is a sense of mystery and drive for the reader to go out and find out what really happened. Or look it up on YouTube at the very least. Lancer1289 03:05, March 18, 2011 (UTC)

What does the word b'crat mean? You used it Lancer but I am unclear as to what it means. And yes I do agree now that because more users prefer short explanations that Telon should stay the same. --Saltpeter1 03:18, March 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * Bureaucrat. It's a user who is one level above administrator. A Bureaucrat has all the powers an admin does, and also has the ability to make someone an admin, strip an admin of their powers, or make someone a Bureaucrat (but not to take away their powers). Currently, I'm the site's sole active Bureaucrat, though we do have one inactive one, whose name escapes me at the moment. SpartHawg948 03:22, March 18, 2011 (UTC)

Garrus Quiting C-Sec
On the normandy after he joins your crew when you go to speak to him he tells you about how he quit C-Sec.
 * So...I've heard that conversation many many times over and yet there is a distant lack of a date mentioned anywhere in that conversation. You were speculating and interpreting, i.e. using your opinions, what Garrus said, which isn't allowed in articles. The current version eliminates speculation and states what we know. I will not get into an argument about this considering what is there reflects what we know, not what is interpreted or guessed at. Lancer1289 21:27, March 19, 2011 (UTC)

Garrus was still in C-Sec before he joined your crew in mass effect 1 and quit in order to join. Garrus tells you that in the conversation. So if he quit between the time he was investigating Saren and the time he joined your crew then he would have quit in 2183. --Saltpeter1 21:38, March 19, 2011 (UTC)
 * So what is this game called Mass Effect 1 that you speak of? Because I'd liek to see another game with Garrus in it. However, you ignore the simple fact that Garrus rejoined C-Sec after the events of Mass Effect so the current version is in line with canon, while yours ignores that fact. Lancer1289 00:11, March 20, 2011 (UTC)

Actually Mass Effect 2 has Garrus in it and he joins your squad as well. And if you get Garrus to be renegade in mass effect 1, he won't rejoin C-Sec and in fact try to be a spectre.
 * Garrus is in Mass Effect 2? Really? Did I miss him because seriosuly that is great news? Again what game is Mass Effect 1? Is there a game that we missed because we'd like to know about it? Still the current version is more accurate than yours because of dialogue that is in Mass Effect that you seem to be missing. Lancer1289 00:25, March 20, 2011 (UTC)

Well I wasn't sure you knew which mass effect I was talking about so I specified mass effect 1. And what dialogue would I be missing because in mass effect 2 Garrus says he tried to be a spectre.
 * (edit conflict and this was easier than editing the whole page as a result) So what is this game called Mass Effect 1 you keep talking about? Did we miss a game or something because if we did I'm sure we'd like to know about it.
 * As to the dialogue from Mass Effect you are missing, the dialogue where he states what he will do in either case. That is clearly something you have overlooked. I will state again that the current version is more accurate than yours and this is beginning to get ridiculous. Lancer1289 00:36, March 20, 2011 (UTC)

This is only getting ridiculous because you are not taking this seriously and making bad jokes. This must mean you don't take your job as admin seriously either. Saltpeter1 00:41, March 20, 2011 (UTC)
 * I take my job seriously and frankly that is just completely unwarranted and unnecessary. And a bit insulting. but what you seem to be failing to realize is that no matter the conversation with Garrus in ME, the current version is more in line with canon than yours. You just can't seem to accept that despite the fact I've stated it I don't know how many times now. I do think that I have played the game enough times to say that with certainty otherwise I wouldn’t be saying it. Lancer1289 00:50, March 20, 2011 (UTC)

I apologize if I have insulted, and I understand that you have played the game many times and your probably right. But I think that if we are discussing this, we should talk seriously and not have unessessary jokes. Saltpeter1 01:03, March 20, 2011 (UTC)
 * I was takings this seriously the entire time but seriously, I'm not allowed to crack a joke every now and then. Lancer1289 01:10, March 20, 2011 (UTC)

Of course you can crack a joke! But it gets repetitive when for 3 posts your saying the same joke. And I took that joke as you implying that i'm stupid. --Saltpeter1 01:15, March 20, 2011 (UTC)
 * Well you did keep referencing a non-existent game. The game is just called Mass Effect not Mass Effect 1. And seriously how can I get the two mixed up to begin with. Lancer1289 01:22, March 20, 2011 (UTC)

I don't know, I just like being specific. And if there's nothing else I guess this conversation is over. Talk to you later --Saltpeter1 01:26, March 20, 2011 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict due to a signature…again) Well then it is over isn't it. Lancer1289 01:33, March 20, 2011 (UTC)

Yep --Saltpeter1 01:36, March 20, 2011 (UTC)

Descriptions are verbatim
Verbatim...from where? Are all planet descriptions intended to be just copied text from the codex? Jkp1187 00:06, March 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * Uh, verbatim from the game perhaps like every other planet description, quote, and email among other thing . If that is what it says in the game, then that is what we say here, with no modifications and no additions. Lancer1289 00:09, March 21, 2011 (UTC)

Mass Effect 2 Guide
Honestly, this little edit war you have going on is a little ridiculous. As I said in my edit, it seems clear that in a walkthrough, the options available should be mentioned. Jkp1187 00:10, March 21, 2011 (UTC)