User talk:Shadowhawk27

Hi, welcome to Mass Effect Wiki! Thanks for your edit to the Mass Effect 2 page.

Be sure to check out our Style Guide and Community Guidelines to help you get started, and please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! -- SpartHawg948 (Talk) 00:18, January 16, 2010

User's Comments
Please don't modify user's other comments. They are the property of that user and why did you even modify it in the first place. Please note that this is a bannable offence. Lancer1289 21:26, May 24, 2010 (UTC)

What are you talking about? Who's user's comments do you claim that i changed? O_o Shadowhawk27 20:57, May 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * Take a look at the history of the Talk:Overlord page, however this link: http://masseffect.wikia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Overlord&diff=next&oldid=115478 will show that in addition to you changing your comment, you also changed Paz444's. I fixed it, and considering there was another indident later on the page, I think tthat it was just the wiki acting weirdly. However take a look. Lancer1289 21:00, May 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * I c, well the only thing i changed was SpartHawg948's comments on Zaeed Messani not being a squad member from before on my talk page. And in the future i would really like it if you don't accuse me of things i didn't do, cause when you assume, you make a fool out of yourself and me. I'm not the kind of person that would break this sites rules. Shadowhawk27 21:10, May 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * My appolgies for the comment, I wasn't having a good day, and I didn't know about the glitch until it arose later in the day. Lancer1289 21:15, May 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * The feeling is mutual, I know what's it like to have a bad day. :( I've been banned from different sites before but i respect Mass Effect too much, hell i'm a big fan of both games including Dragon Age . :) Shadowhawk27 21:19, May 25, 2010 (UTC)

Purported VA list
Please refrain from posting any info from the VA list you brought up elsewhere that is not independently verifiable through at least one legitimate source. By that I mean, a post by a BioWare developer, an article in a legit magazine, the in-game credits, etc. Personal sites of VAs will be acceptable, however, IMDB will not. That list was posted by some random user (near as I can tell) who does not work for BioWare in any capacity, and as such, is not a valid source. SpartHawg948 23:57, June 17, 2010 (UTC)

Ok ok, i was just trying to help :( Shadowhawk27 00:01, June 18, 2010 (UTC)
 * And I appreciate that, we just need to make sure that any information added comes from a valid source. And postings by individuals on blogs or forums do not constitute valid sources, unless of course the individual posting is a developer. SpartHawg948 00:02, June 18, 2010 (UTC)
 * Any help is appriciated but I'll say what I just posted on my talk page. If you were to create a video with the credits, updated to this point with Overlord, put it to say YouTube, then pull the info off that, I think we can all live if it is done that way. A forum post isn't enough, but the author does say that the credits update with DLC, so if you use the credits to post the info, then say so in your edit summary. Again I think a video would be the best way to go here. Lancer1289 00:04, June 18, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well i am doing the best i can to get some of the others that voices other charictors in the Mass Effect saga beside the ones we DO know off hand. Shadowhawk27 00:07, June 18, 2010 (UTC)

Policy Forum
I don't know whether or not you have noticed but there is currently a proposal to establish a new forum where policy for the ME Wiki can be debated and voted on. The forum would allow anyone to bring to a policy question to the attention of the community and we could use some input. Take a look at the proposal on the Forum:Policy Forum page. Thanks in advance. Lancer1289 07:15, July 12, 2010 (UTC)

So there's no Liara DLC as well as that new Heavy Pistol possibly called the M-5 seen in Kasumi's wallpaper on the official Mass Effect website. Then how come the heavy pistols page still has that? Shadowhawk27 12:26, July 12, 2010 (UTC)


 * Because no one remembered that it was there. Thank you for the reminder, it's gone now. Bastian964 17:28, July 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * As to the DLC, maybe, maybe not, who knows. Personally another pistol would be a good idea. Personally I think that Liara DLC is going to be a stand alone expansion pack, rather than a pure DLC item. However it still will be avalaible over DLC. So again who knows, but I really want that pistol. Lancer1289 20:44, July 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * Same here, cause i want my squad to be fully armed to the teeth with these high-tech guns. I'll see if i can get Chris Priestly to look into that pistol on the wallpaper. Shadowhawk27 20:47, July 12, 2010 (UTC)

Wiki Tables
You're welcome. Wiki tables can be a bit confusing at first. They have a pretty nice explanation of how they work on wikipedia though. Check it out at Help:Tables. Have a good one! -- Dammej ( talk ) 00:48, August 4, 2010 (UTC)

Krogan eyes
Unlike other krogan, Wrex has red eyes, huh? Hmmm... so does that mean that the Krogan Battlemaster (enemy) is wearing contacts or something? And Urdnot Wreav? Many krogan in the games have red eyes. Wrex is hardly unique in that department. SpartHawg948 02:46, August 10, 2010 (UTC)

Forgive me i've been playing this game like a drug addict, i failed to notice that most of the krogan in the game have red eyes :( Shadowhawk27 02:49, August 10, 2010 (UTC)
 * No worries. Just check into this stuff a bit before adding it as fact. SpartHawg948 02:51, August 10, 2010 (UTC)
 * What about Wrex's scars? Do any of the other krogan have those in the game? Shadowhawk27 02:53, August 10, 2010 (UTC)
 * In game? No, no other krogan has scars like Wrex's that I know of. However, the krogan bounty hunter Skarr did. And while having a unique eye color (i.e. blue) is trivia, scarring is by its very nature unique from one individual to another, and as such, wouldn't really be trivia material. SpartHawg948 02:55, August 10, 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah crap.... Shadowhawk27 02:58, August 10, 2010 (UTC)

LotSB
We have nowhere to add the info yet. We do not have the mission titles or the names of locations. We don't know if the previewer made mistakes or missed something. There's just too little info, and second-hand previews aren't always 100% reliable. Be patient. In less than two days, we'll have the DLC ourselves and can sort everything out into the necessary articles. We have no reason to rush and jump at every snippet that the internet coughs up. -- Commdor (Talk) 00:33, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * Indeed, and another problem I had with that it was copied almost word for word from that article, and while you had a link at the bottom it wasn't sourced correctly. We don't need to post every little thing that crops up, espeically when it winds up being just a copy paste. Just be patient, we are less than 36 hours away. Lancer1289 00:42, September 6, 2010 (UTC)

Just to point out...
You recently "requested (although demanded seems like a more accurate description), that instead of deleting unsourced information that you added to an article, another user "help me try and track down the right claim", as opposed to removing the inaccurate information (or, as you put it, he was "playing the edit war with me"). Please note a couple of things. 1) This was not an edit war. If, however, it had been, I can say with 100% certainty that the admins would have ruled in the other users favor. 2) Other users are under no obligation whatsoever to help you track down claims instead of simply deleting incorrect information. If information added to an article is unsourced, or even worse, has a source that does not support the claims the edit makes, any user is well within their rights to remove it, and is under no obligation to assist the person who added it in "tracking down the right claim". Please do not give other users grief for behaving like good, conscientious, and responsible editors. SpartHawg948 18:41, September 24, 2010 (UTC)

Well Please do not give me grief too, i'm doing my best to get as much info on these claims and i really don't deserve grievances (Seriously i really don't and i know you don't too) as well as insults to go along with it cause it really grinds my gears....Shadowhawk27 20:29, September 24, 2010 (UTC)


 * I am not trying to give you grief, I am simply asking that you not give other users a hard time when they have done nothing wrong. JakePT was well within his rights to simply remove your edits both times. He does not need to be harassed about it or asked to stop. Leaving a message telling another user "Well instead playing the edit war with me, help me try and track down the right claim cause i refuse to wait 2 years for ME3 to come out." is completely uncalled for and inappropriate. At no point was I giving you grief, I was merely carrying out the duties of an admin, nor did I ever insult you. Please don't try to make this into something it is not. Merely take the advice and follow it. SpartHawg948 20:33, September 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * i understand that part was uncalled for and i'm sorry for that but JakePT almost violated the Language sections of the Community Guidelines which i would never do. Shadowhawk27 20:42, September 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * And he was called on that by two admins. That has no bearing whatsoever on your comments and actions before he made that comment. None. As such, there is no reason to bring it up in this conversation, as this is about the post you made that caused the entire thing, including JakePT's comment. SpartHawg948 20:44, September 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok, :( I'll never get to be Administrator for this site *Cries* I can't live the buttoned down life like some random user with false claims. I want it all: the terrifying lows, the dizzying highs, the creamy middles! Sure, I might offend a few of the blue-noses with my cocky stride and musky odor - oh, I'll never be one of the Administrators who cluck their tongues, stroke their beards, and be one of the top dogs for this site. :( And not to mention im always to blame, this is why i have no friends... Shadowhawk27 21:03, September 24, 2010 (UTC)

Got nothing more to say SpartHawg948? I guess im just a nobody to you... *sad expression*Shadowhawk27 21:27, September 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nothing to say to what? I didn't see anything in the above comment that appeared addressed to me, or that needed a response. As such, I can see no earthly reason why I would have something to say. SpartHawg948 22:14, September 24, 2010 (UTC)

Well it just proves that my earlier comment ment nothing to you :( Shadowhawk27 22:35, September 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * No. It proves that I didn't see anything addressed to me in the last comment, and that I therefor didn't respond to it. Again, please don't try to make this into something it isn't. This is not a 'me vs you' thing, and I can't for the life of me see why you are (apparently) trying to turn it into one. SpartHawg948 22:38, September 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh sure you gave Jaketp, lancer and whoever else the Administrator role. Me? I just another random user who will never join the ranks and soon to be band from this site one day. Life sure treats me as a joke, a very cruel one to be exact :( Shadowhawk27 22:42, September 24, 2010 (UTC)

Get your facts straight. JakePT is not an admin. Never has been. Lancer is, but you also seem to have no idea how this happens. When a user has amassed a sizable number of constructive edits (we're talking thousands, not hundreds), has demonstrated a considerable level of maturity and ability to follow the rules, and has shown a consistent pattern of only adding good, properly sourced, material to articles, the admins will start talking about making that user an admin. Even then, before it happens, all the admins must agree that the person in question is ready to be an admin. Again, it's not a 'me vs you' thing. Stop trying to make it into one. SpartHawg948 22:46, September 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * like i said, I just another random user who will never join the ranks and soon to be band from this site one day. Life sure treats me as a joke, a very cruel one to be exact :( And fyi: Im not doing 'me vs you' thing. im just pointing out the known facts. Shadowhawk27 22:52, September 24, 2010 (UTC)

No, you aren't. You're making things up (like when you claim that JakePT is an admin), and you are wallowing in self-pity. "Oh, woe is me. Life treats me so bad. It's so cruel." Then, when I don't respond to a comment that has nothing to do with me, you get all huffy like it's some huge insult! I can tell you this... if you seriously want to be an admin, you're pretty much sinking any chance you have of that ever happening. You. Your own actions here are what is hurting these chances. Admins don't wallow in self-pity when they are asked to do something as simple as following the rules. Sorry if that sounds overly harsh, but that's the long and short of it, and I don't believe in sugar-coating. SpartHawg948 22:59, September 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * My mistake on jaketp, but what I still say is true that i will never be like you :( I follow the rules alright but it's never enough to anyone which is why i will never join the ranks which i really want. that's all for now Shadowhawk27 23:05, September 24, 2010 (UTC)

But that's the thing: If you had followed the rules, this conversation wouldn't have even happened. You added improperly sourced speculation. The source was not legit, and even if it had been, it did not say what you claimed it said. When it was removed by JakePT (a legitimate edit), you readded it, again with improper sourcing. When JakePT again removed it, you went onto his user page and gave him grief about removing it. This is not the behavior of someone who just follows the rules. This is a trend, too, this use of invalid sources to justify adding speculation into articles. Trust me, people who always follow the rules never hear from me unless it's for something positive. I don't leave messages like this without a good reason. SpartHawg948 23:13, September 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * Im not going to argue over that one, i'll admit that it was my bad and i have flaws on my end but nobody is perfect. But it's never enough to anyone (including you spart) which is why i will never join the ranks. Shadowhawk27 23:17, September 24, 2010 (UTC)

Again with the 'me vs you'! And don't try to deny it. If it wasn't a 'me vs you' thing, you wouldn't keep saying that no matter what you do, it's never good enough, specifically mentioning that supposedly it isn't good enough to me in particular. Constantly saying that you try hard and all that but that it's me keeping you down or something is trying to make this into a 'me vs you' issue. SpartHawg948 23:21, September 24, 2010 (UTC)

What more proof do you want? Shadowhawk27 23:27, September 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * Soryr to just jump in here, but somehting liek that needs an article that has the exact quote, and is from a legit soucrce. All three of the sources you used weren't legit. Find something that has that from a legit source and it can be added. Lancer1289 23:33, September 24, 2010 (UTC)

Well, Shadowhawk27, as for what more proof I want: ANY PROOF would be nice. Anything at all. Any real, solid evidence, other than your saying it's 'me vs you'. Because it isn't. You are not getting special treatment. If, for example, the roles were reversed, I'd be dealing with JakePT in the exact same way I'm dealing with you right now. So please, let's see the proof that it's me vs you, and that I am giving you any sort of special attention, or treating you unfairly. Any proof would be great. SpartHawg948 23:36, September 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * The only proof i have is me being a random nobody who wants to be like you but will never happen cause I'm too immature, has to amassed a sizable number of constructive edits, has demonstrated a considerable level of maturity and ability to follow the rules, and has shown a consistent pattern of only adding good, properly sourced, material to articles and so forth. Shadowhawk27 23:44, September 24, 2010 (UTC)

That's not proof. That's you repeating back to me the items I described to you as some of the qualifications to even be considered for promotion to admin. Well, it's that with one major exception. You changed it to state that you were immature. I never said any such thing. SpartHawg948 23:46, September 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * No you didn't but me fighting with Jaketp proved that i was... Shadowhawk27 23:48, September 24, 2010 (UTC)

If you say so... I never said (or thought) any such thing, but if you think that this is the case, well, that's on you. SpartHawg948 23:51, September 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yep guilty as charged... i think it's best that i'll just stay quiet since both parties are tired of this petty squabble. Shadowhawk27 23:54, September 24, 2010 (UTC)

Two things...
Two things, and I really shouldn't have to be pointing these out, as they are no-brainers, and I even went into great detail about one of them in a recent conversation that you yourself participated in. 1) When adding information into an article that had to be obtained from an outside source (such as the fact that Steve Blum voices the Shadow Broker), you must include the source in the article. Not just on the talk page. In the actual article. Especially when the link you do provide in the article (the link to Steve Blum's IMDB page) doesn't back up the info you added. 2) It's The Shadow Broker. Not Shadow Broker. I'm referring to the edit you made to the Grunt page. Steve Blum does not voice Grunt, Wilson, and Shadow Broker. He voices Grunt, Wilson, and the Shadow Broker. Shadow Broker isn't a name. It's a title. SpartHawg948 04:14, October 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * If lance said, it's good, it's good, let it go spart...Shadowhawk27 12:36, October 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * Um no Spart shouldn't let it go because that slipped my mind, and you should have put that into the article like it is now. We need it to be a verifiable source, and since IMDb isn't a one stop shop for this, any additional references need to be put into the article. Also I figured I should say this that Spart is a Bureaucrat, which means he is the highest ranking admin on the site. So don't tell him to let it go, and it should have been like that. I didn't do it because that slipped my mind or I would have done it. Lancer1289 12:47, October 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, you guys could have fixed this instead of giving me this grief, Whenever i post something with the right back up claim, it's grief here and grief there. You guys don't like me ever since i joined this site... Shadowhawk27 13:13, October 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * It was fixed, however if it had been more active in that conversation like you had been, then I would have added it into the article like it is now. It slipped my mind because I wasn't really active and since you seem to want to find the voice actors for everyone, then when you do pull from an outside source, you do need to list it, no matter what it is. Whether it be for trivia, a design bug, or a voice actor. If you can't tell from the game, then a source is needed. Like how we did with the recent information from Ms. Norman about Shepard's birthday.
 * While I can't speak for Spart, and I'm sure he'll comment later, but I do like you, it's just you keep making mistakes, which everyone does, frequently when it comes to sourcing like the conversation above this one. I don't need to mention specifics, but you have done quite a few things against guidelines and a few more that have been inappropriate. We all appreciate your edits, as we do with each and every constructive edit, no matter whom it is from, but at the same time you do need to follow the guidelines like everyone else here. If this came across as grief, then it wasn't intended that way, it was me just trying to point out that I do like you, but you do need to follow the guidelines like everyone else. No one is an exception to the rules, as from that above conversation JakePT was called on his inappropriate actions and violations of the Guidelines. Lancer1289 13:32, October 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks lance, i guess... Shadowhawk27 13:51, October 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * You want to know the easiest way to not get grief from me? Do things right the first time. I can't complain if there's nothing to complain about, can I? Well, I could, but if I did, then people would see me griping and complaining for no reason, and that wouldn't end well. Additionally, if you don't want grief, maybe you can try not giving it to others. You know, practice what you preach? For instance, when I point out mistakes that need to be avoided in the future, don't respond with "If lance said, it's good, it's good, let it go spart..." (implying that your mistakes weren't really mistakes and that I was targeting you unfairly - clearly not the case), "Well, you guys could have fixed this instead of giving me this grief," (implying that it is my responsibility to just sit here and fix the mistakes of others all day long instead of being proactive about it by informing people of mistakes and asking that they not make them again - this one is just plain disrespectful in that regard, implying I'm basically a janitor here to clean up the mistakes of others), "Whenever i post something with the right back up claim, it's grief here and grief there" (implying, again, that there was nothing wrong with your edits and that I was targeting you unfairly - again, not the case), and "You guys don't like me ever since i joined this site" (implying that the only reason I left the messages is because I supposedly don't like you - this is a perfect example of attempting to turn this into a "me vs you" thing, which it isn't). So yeah... I don't like getting grief either, and while my message, while admittedly worded maybe a little sternly out of exasperation, as I couldn't believe this was the exact same thing as had happened on the Tela Vasir page, and that it was happening again, was not me "giving you grief". It was me trying to do my job. And I'd appreciate you A) Not giving me grief for doing my job, and B) Not telling me how to do said job. Thanks, SpartHawg948 17:13, October 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * the Tela Vasir page was done by that user Tia Hardesty who got the wrong info from ms taylor. She could have asked a dev to confirm it insead of asking the actress. At least the idenity of the shadow Broker's VA is finally revealed now i can go on with my life. If Tia Hardesty still wants to go after the VA for Vasir, by all means let her, but tell her to get a dev to back up her claim and not *assume* that this is what the actor did. “When you assume, you make an ass out of you and me.” Shadowhawk27 17:24, October 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * Not what I was talking about. Not at all. And I made this clear both here and on the Shadow Broker page. What I was talking about was the fact that both times, info that relied on an external source for confirmation was placed into the article without the source. I could care less if the info later turns out to be mistaken. It's the sourcing that matters. SpartHawg948 17:26, October 21, 2010 (UTC)

Just to point out...again
About that conversation on Tela's Voice Actor, Tia Hardesty posted what she thought was legit information and it was added with the approval of both admins. At the time it was deemed legit enough to post, and it was. When it was discovered that it wasn't legit because of misinterpretation, or whatever it was, it was removed. So it was good information, but because of that misinterpretation, it was not. Because of this, there was absolutely no reason to post what you did on her talk page, as both Spart and myself thought it was legit information. It was completely inappropriate given the circumstances of the information being misinterpreted on both ends. It was fine, and then she herself found the information wasn’t legit so it was removed. So again absolutely no reason to do what you did. Lancer1289 21:03, October 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * Just wanted to give her the heads up so she doesn't repeat the same mistake in the future, no harm intended. Shadowhawk27 21:07, October 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * However she brought was deemed legit information at the time, then she herself found that it wasn't ok, and then told us about it. We've gotten information from other sources before, and considering that was her Facebook page, if the information was not contracted by Ms. Taylor herself, then it would have been legit information. Sourcing requires a legit source, and considering how Facebook works, and we have no reason to assume otherwise, it would have been a legit source, as both Spart and myself said it was. Lancer1289 21:11, October 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well Lance, im going with the devs of the game itself who are the real deal, cause actors like Ms. taylor are not too trust worthy since they said that they can't remember the charictors they play. Shadowhawk27 21:15, October 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * And it was misinterpreted, for whatever reason. If it hadn't been corrected by Ms. Taylor herself, as you also seemed quite content with Facebook as a source I might add, then it would have been legit. Going to the devs is fine, but there is no reason to leave that on Tia Hardesty's talk page, as everyone involved thought it was legit information, including Spart and myself. Then Ms. Hardesty brought the information forward that Ms. Taylor had corrected herself, again for whatever reason, and then the information was removed. Considering that Voice Actors can do many roles in many games, it isn't that surprising that they can't remember them all. Again you seemed just fine with Facebook as a source, and it would have been if Ms. Taylor hadn't corrected herself. Lancer1289 21:22, October 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * Um yeah... I just don't want anyone to post false info on something they think they know off without the right claim. And that also applies to me too Shadowhawk27 21:29, October 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * Leaving messages like that on user talk pages is really something that should be left to the administrators of this site. In leaving this message, you (intentionally or not, it really makes no difference) misrepresented site policies in a way that could serve to discourage further legitimate edits from that user. I must once again repeat, there was nothing wrong with the source Tia Hardesty used. The problem was that it wasn't placed into the article. The fact that the information later turned out to be false is completely beside the point. Please in the future leave things like this to the admins. If a message had been necessary or warranted, one of us would have left Tia Hardesty a message. The fact that we didn't should tell you something in and of itself. SpartHawg948 21:48, October 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * Alright, But still in the end we became fools for believing that claim and don't deny it spart cause you were apart of it Shadowhawk27 21:55, October 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * And that just made absolutely no sense. We weren't fools for believing anything. The source and information looked legit, and again if it hadn't been for the correction by Ms. Taylor, it would have stayed legit. There was no reason to call us fools for believing that claim, when it both looked legit and was from a verifaible source. The information was changed after the fact, and as with information sometimes, frequently would be more appropiate actually, it changes so we have to change with it. Information goes out of date, disproven by more recent information, or any number of things can change, and as such we have to adapt to that. So again we weren't fools, we put in what we thought was legit information and then it was updated to be incorrect. No one is a fool, it's just the information that was updated, and we adapted. There was no reason for that last comment. Lancer1289 22:05, October 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * If Ms. Taylor hadn't corrected herself, i wouldn't be talking. Besides don't believe everything you see until it's been proven by a true source. Shadowhawk27 22:16, October 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * And what better source than the person in question? I ask you that. You are now arguing semantics because the information changed. She remembered inaccurately or misinterpreted something and she corrected herself. The source was legit and you arguing over semantics because the information changed isn't helping. And what true source do you think we should have used? Because again Spart and myself said it was enough for a source. So it was a true source, and it didn't become one when Ms. Taylor corrected herself on the matter. You are now arguing semantics, a very shaky arguing platform. The information changed, and as such we need to change with it. You yourself have used and believed even more questionable sources and misinterpreted information before. This on the other hand was direct from the source and as such we took it as fact, until Ms. Taylor corrected. To state that differently, we had a true source then it was corrected, as it happens frequently when it comes to information. There is again no reason for the previous comment as it was good information until it was corrected, which again happens frequently with information. You are arguing semantics, and to quote Grand Moff Tarkin, "This bickering is pointless". Lancer1289 22:38, October 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * You're right lance, it is pointless, tell spart that im done with this nonsense and i'll just go on with my life. Shadowhawk27 22:44, October 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * Right... in the end we all became fools because we all believed it, and I can't deny it. Wait... how is that, exactly? I seem to remember someone expressing doubt with the validity of the claim (though not the source) and cautioning other users (one in particular) to not go leaping at the opportunity to ask this source for all kinds of other info. Oh, right. That was me. And the one who was fooled, and wanted to ask Courtney Taylor to provide other names, was you. I don't want to restart this, but I was away for the last several comments. I just want to reiterate a request I made to you some time ago, Shadowhawk. Please stop assuming that you know how or what I think, or trying to interpret my comments to mean something other than what they are. It's been demonstrated numerous times that your ability to accurately gauge my thoughts is nonexistent, so you end up assuming. And wasn't it you who said earlier what happens when you assume? SpartHawg948 01:00, October 22, 2010 (UTC)

Kenson
Please note that while I may have missed it in the chaos this morning, Kenson does not have access to Heavy Pistols. This was an initial mistake on my part when I set up the page, however Kenson does only have access to the M-4 Shuriken, a Submachine Gun, and no other weapon. Lancer1289 18:17, April 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah i too noticed about her using sub-machine guns only. I also checked the gibbed save editor for mass effect 2 and it says that her weapon loadout is Heavy pistols and Sub-machine guns. Shadowhawk27 00:21, April 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, Gibbed Save Editor = hacking and because she can only use SMGs in the game, it is irrelevant and not noteworthy. She only uses SMGs and saying she can use anything else without hacking the game is irrelevant as it can't be accessed. Lancer1289 00:31, April 4, 2011 (UTC)