User talk:Garhdo

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

Please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! -- Tullis (Talk) 17:54, June 29, 2009

Character page suggestion
Just wanted to point out that the suggestion you left on the talk page for Characters would actually be pretty much taking it back to the way it was before the big cleanup and reorg that was done to the page 6 months ago. I commented extensively on it in my reply on Talk:Characters, but the gist of it is, the page is for MAJOR characters, not for plot characters. The vast majority of the names you suggested adding are trivial characters who you speak to once, hardly what I'd call major. And some of them, far from being plot-important, are anything but (IE Jenkins and Nihlus). We're trying to keep the page nice, neat, and not excessively long, as it is not meant to be a complete list. Thanks for the input, but as I stated in my response, I honestly don't see it happening. SpartHawg948 11:33, December 28, 2009 (UTC)

Yep.
Having fun? :)

--The Milkman | I always deliver. 22:05, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

Always feel free to quote anything you want for your new blog. Garhdo (talk) 22:20, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

I'm already up to ten pages.

--The Milkman | I always deliver. 22:22, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

I give up. the man is a complete moron and is grasping at straws in a vacuum.Garhdo (talk) 23:34, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

Notice how every other comment is about rape with this guy....

Yeah, I'll start working on that blog tomorrow maybe. --The Milkman | I always deliver. 23:37, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

I swear this moron is playing a different Mass Effect to the rest of us lol. Can't wait for your blog dude.Garhdo (talk) 23:51, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

It Wasn't You
It was quite literally everything else, and the other user's comment is quite literally what broke the camel's back so to speak.

However, the walkthroughs have always been a part of the site and I don't see that going away. I have gotten several comments, and heard over Xbox live that we are a good place to go for them as other places are not as reliable. Walkthroughs, like the articles for the novels (Mass Effect: Ascension), the games (Mass Effect 2), the comics (Mass Effect: Redemption), the class guides (Vanguard Guide (Mass Effect 3)), the player notes of weapon articles, and most of the multiplayer articles are intentionally written out of universe because they have to be.

A number of other wikis, very large ones, also have the practice of having both in-universe (NPCs, player character, places), and out-of-universe articles. One of the largest I can think off of hand is the Vault, and Nukapedia. They manage to do it quite successfully. I know there are others, but I wanted to give one very big example. Lancer1289 (talk) 03:46, February 6, 2013 (UTC)

That's fair enough, but this issue won't be resolved. I know the other user was being rude about it but the fact is that the comment, while a joke, is unnecessary. If you can find three other examples of such jokes I will happily retract my point but I believe it should be removed. I have asked SpartHawg to intervene simply so that the issue can be resolved.

I understand the walkthroughs should be written in a different style in order to meet their purpose, but that doesn't mean they should resort to jokes - they should still be as concise and informative as the rest of the wiki. Nevertheless an incident like this is causing contention and must be resolved asap.Garhdo (talk) 03:53, February 6, 2013 (UTC)

Image on Talk:Turian
Would you please make the image on the Talk:Turian page smaller? It's currently quite unwieldy. (And since it is your comment, I am not allowed to change it.) Instead of using the whole image URL for images hosted on our wiki, you can use wiki-text like the following, so you can change the size. Trandra (talk) 07:53, February 14, 2013 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't realise the whole image posted as I was just trying to post the URL, same as I did for the turian image. Any way I can do that rather than just changing the size?Garhdo (talk) 08:14, February 14, 2013 (UTC)

It's ok I think I've sorted it.Garhdo (talk) 08:28, February 14, 2013 (UTC)

Inflammatory comments...
Look, I get that it wasn't meant as an insult, but surely you can see how someone who has devoted a great deal of time and effort to this wiki might not appreciate being called "out of touch". Things like that can really tend to throw wrenches into discussions and derail the whole thing. Is there any chance you can avoid further inflammatory statements toward other editors in the future? I mean, a blind man could have seen that the "out of touch" remark was only going to cause drama. Please note, this is a request, nothing more, as your comments were in no way a violation of site policy, they were just (IMO) ill chosen. Thanks, SpartHawg948 (talk) 08:35, February 14, 2013 (UTC)

I understand and respect the contributions Lancer has made in the past, but you must be able to see that recently he is acting in a way where he is against the entire community, including other admins. All of his comments are curt and abrasive, verging on rude. As I said to him if he is having as many personal problems as he says he needs to step back as he is not helping this perceived divide between admins and community which is permeating this site recently. I said what I said as, at present, it is the best description of his behaviour and I believe admin involvement to curb his antagonist attitude is sorely needed. My comment was also meant to highlight to him exactly the way he is being perceived, and perhaps spur him to take some action to improve his attitude. Yes the comment was bound to cause trouble, but it is also the harsh truth. Still, I understand where you are coming from and I will respect your request, as I was perhaps a bit too harsh, but I follow with a request of my own - talk to Lancer. If he is having as many issues as he suggests then he should step away from the wikia until he can be more agreeable, as all he is doing at present is furthering the divide and causing more drama.Garhdo (talk) 08:45, February 14, 2013 (UTC)
 * I will second that. Lancer is constantly curt, hostile, abrasive, and inflexible, not just recently but for quite a while.  Case in point would be this exchange where he snapped at someone for just making a suggestion about a page.  It is harming the community and is a major source of the antipathy that many of the users are feeling towards the Admins in general.    TheUnknown285 (talk) 09:00, February 14, 2013 (UTC)

Garhdo, I've been talking to him. He's stated his desire to step back and take a less active role in discussions, policy, etc, at least for the time being. Which is exactly why comments like the one you made are so frustrating. They draw him back in and only serve to draw out the abrasiveness. It's a "one step forward, two steps back" scenario. And TheUnknown285, perhaps the community isn't blameless here. Just as "many of the users" are feeling "antipathy" toward the admins as a whole because of the actions of one, the actions of a small but vocal minority of editors, who are needlessly antagonizing admins and deliberately insulting them for no other reason than to antagonize certainly isn't helping admin-community relations either. I've taken the insults directed at me in stride, but not everyone else is so inclined. SpartHawg948 (talk) 09:15, February 14, 2013 (UTC)


 * That is no reason to take it out on others by snapping at people for making a suggestion (see the link I provided above) or leaving curt edit summaries like "Fail," or "So not a valid source" or "Not even remotely trivia," especially when there's no apology either. It's bad enough to snap at someone out of misplaced anger, it's something else to not even apologize for doing so.  And again, this has been going on for quite a while, so I'm not sure I even really believe your reasoning to begin with unless there was a conflict I somehow missed in the year-plus that I've been a frequent visitor to this wiki (and the 2.5 years that I've been a member).  TheUnknown285 (talk) 10:02, February 14, 2013 (UTC)
 * Well thanks. Your "I'm not sure I even really believe your reasoning to begin with" is greatly appreciated. As for a conflict, you mean like that time we dealt with a vandal for a month+ who alternated between flooding this wiki with porn while impersonating Lancer and going to other wikis to vandalize them while impersonating Lancer? That was over a year ago. Not sure how over, but over. Ever since that whole episode, in which people ignorant of the facts came to this wiki from other sites for the explicit purpose of bashing Lancer (who was, at the time, also dealing with the vandal impersonating him), Lancer has been a bit jaded. Understandably so, IMO. And for the record, while "fail" does seem uncalled for, "so not a valid source" and "not even remotely trivia" seem like valid edit summaries. (I'd leave the "so" off of the first one, personally.) I mean, they are literally short summations of why the edit was undone. SpartHawg948 (talk) 10:13, February 14, 2013 (UTC)

Oh, and thanks, Gardho. As I said, it was a request. You could have told me to shove off. The fact that you didn't is just plain awesome. SpartHawg948 (talk) 09:15, February 14, 2013 (UTC)
 * Is that last point genuine or sarcasm? Because it sounds like the latter when I am trying to be amicable. I understand the community minority you are talking about aren't helping - I have seen this in action and I know who are causing problems, whether they are right or wrong. The fact is some valid points are being raised by both sides, but attitudes like Lancer's muddy the waters. I'm glad he's stepping back. Its a shame but I do think he needs it. Tell him I wish him well.Garhdo (talk) 09:20, February 14, 2013 (UTC)
 * Which last point? Everything in my message was genuine. The last point (as I see it) was me thanking you. That was 100% genuine. So too was my comment to TheUnknown285. People, for example, creating blogs for the sole purpose of insulting the admins in infantile ways certainly are doing nothing to help. I understand it's a minority, but just as the admins as a whole are being tarred, per TheUnknown285's comment, being continually insulted by members of the community can cause even the most patient admins to become extremely frustrated, resulting in interactions with other members of the community that are, at best, curt, and at worst, rude and abrasive. SpartHawg948 (talk) 09:26, February 14, 2013 (UTC)
 * OK then thank you. I know I haven't taken a huge role on this wiki previously but I would like to help resolve the current issues in any way I can.Garhdo (talk) 09:36, February 14, 2013 (UTC)
 * Which, btw, is greatly appreciated. One of the things I've been complaining about from day one is that the folks opposed to the chat policy changes haven't been putting up viable alternatives other than "do your job better" (which is pretty much literally what some have said). If we're going to get anywhere here, alternatives are needed, as are people willing to actively engage in discussion on the topic. As for not having had a huge role previously, there's nothing wrong with that. A fresh perspective can often be beneficial to discussions like this. SpartHawg948 (talk) 09:51, February 14, 2013 (UTC)

The priiiiize...
Alright, I'll tell you what you get from beating Vega's pull-up record:

A compliment from James.

183 pull-ups and all you get is a lousy compliment. XD LilyheartsLiara (talk) 18:53, March 6, 2013 (UTC)

HAHAHAHA! I am laughing so hard! You built that up so perfectly Lily - Kudos! Garhdo (talk) 00:13, March 7, 2013 (UTC)

Chat Mod
Congratulations! You have been approved for Chat Moderator status. Please familiarize yourself with the Mass Effect Wiki Chat! Live usage rules assembled at Mass Effect Wiki:Chat Policies. As a Chat Moderator, you are expected to enforce these rules while using the Chat! Live feature. If you have any questions about your new responsibilities, please let me or another administrator know. Good luck and good editing. -- Commdor (Talk) 00:35, March 8, 2013 (UTC)


 * Wow, I am honoured! Thank you very much. I hope I live up to the task. Garhdo (talk) 00:44, March 8, 2013 (UTC)


 * Special:RecentChanges -- you'll see your name highlighted in a cobalt blue on this page, marking the edits you've made.
 * Side note, thank you for the congratulations! I thanked you in turn by changing your name to the proper color, LOL. Trandra (talk) 20:16, March 11, 2013 (UTC)


 * Ah I see now. And your welcome. And thank you in return lol. Garhdo (talk) 20:25, March 11, 2013 (UTC)

ME: Citadel content
I would advise you to check this link before you undo the stuff on Garrus: http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Tali%27Zorah_nar_Rayya?diff=392047&oldid=391869.Typhoonstorm95 (talk) 01:57, March 8, 2013 (UTC)

I just left a message on your talk page, but i'll look at that as well. Garhdo (talk) 01:54, March 8, 2013 (UTC)

I asked a question a few nights ago about why I can't meet certain sqaudmates at the citadle for the citadle DLC. I was wondering if you have any new information about my problem. Dalanden20--Victory is reserved for those willing to pay its price 03:44, March 12, 2013 (UTC)


 * I believe someone else mentioned on the blog about having trouble with inviting/meeting Tali. Unfortunately whatever went wrong in your game does not seem to be a common occurrence. I would recommend asking on the Bioware Social Network forums, as they may be able to offer more insight, and if other people are having the same problem then there they already be a help topic about it.
 * Hope this helps. Sorry I don't Have more to offer. Garhdo (talk) 09:26, March 12, 2013 (UTC)

Editing other users' user pages
Please do not edit other users' user pages (except in cases of undoing vandalism). This is against ME Wiki's policies, as outlined in the Community Guidelines here, and is a bannable offense. Your offense occurred on LilyheartsLiara's user page, where you appeared to be under the impression that it was her talk page. Trandra (talk) 20:45, March 12, 2013 (UTC)


 * Yeah I think I must have got confused which page I was on. I only just noticed when you reverted the edit! Won't happen again. Garhdo (talk) 20:50, March 12, 2013 (UTC)

Citadel DLC:
I have looked for some help pver at their help forums and no answer to mine or similar questions posed on the forums as of this post. Dalanden20 --Victory is reserved for those willing to pay its price 21:25, March 12, 2013 (UTC)

Policy Forum
If you want to propose something new, then a new forum is required. If you are drawing up a list, then that does not belong on that page. The only thing that page should list after the closing of the forum is that it failed or passed, and where the new information can be found. Please read the title page for the forum which gives quite a few things on this topic.

And I'm going to say this, the forum is not closed yet. By site policy, there are over seven hours before that occurs. Lancer1289 (talk) 16:49, March 14, 2013 (UTC)

Ok I misread and thought it said AM. And I'm not trying to propose something new, but put in the draft of the new policy. Garhdo (talk) 16:52, March 14, 2013 (UTC)
 * That should have been done long in advance, not after the fact, which is why this proposal needed so much work and is one of the reasons I never supported it, nor will support any change to the policy. And even then, it does not belong on that page. It belongs somewhere else and then moved to appropriate places. Putting it there gives the complete wrong impression about what it is. Lancer1289 (talk) 16:55, March 14, 2013 (UTC)


 * Well where would you suggest I put it? Garhdo (talk) 16:56, March 14, 2013 (UTC)
 * A sandbox page, user talk page, or some other place. Lancer1289 (talk) 16:58, March 14, 2013 (UTC)


 * Ok. It is now here. Garhdo (talk) 16:59, March 14, 2013 (UTC)
 * And the most recent comment on the forum page is exactly why things are done that way. Please advise the user of what happened and that draft is not for voting on. Lancer1289 (talk) 17:08, March 14, 2013 (UTC)

mandatory proposal closure
eh, technically you can't open up another proposal until 7 days after commdor locked your earlier proposal. please see the link at the edit summary (or just the community guidelines under making major changes). this wiki likes doing things slooooowly ya know. also, grats on your next edit. 1000th. T̴̴͕̲̞̳̖̼̱͒͛̎͒ͫ̃ͧeͩ̈̽̈҉͓̝̰̼̦̫̤̀͠m̫̪̪̯̻͎̫̅̇̓̇͌̚p̸̙̝̓̓͌ͨ͆ͣͥ̂̕o͒̽͐̽͏̞̬̻͕͔͕͚̰͍͠͞ṙ̢̞͚͈̹̰ͨ̓ͭ̈́̌ạ̢̧̪̹̺̺̣̹̲͂͆̏ͪͨ͒ͭř̹͈͜͠y̷͍̻̜̹̼̾̽̈́e̵̹̼̟̦͚͐̈́͌͘d͉̲̣̻͉̱͗̅ḭ̷̻̆͋̆̓̔͝t̨͍̦̫̗͂̅̍̋̆ͩ͝ộ̫̟̬̳̝̲̾ͫ̒̿ͮ̑̚rͯ̎ͨͭ̄̿̽͛҉̠̫̱̠̘̘̲́ͅ7̩̻ͤͩͨ͝͡8̜̣̙͇̻ͨ͛͛̆͒̆̽̒͐͜͡ ͥ̍̉̃̇ͥ̓ͨ͏̕҉̥̹͓̗̤̠̖̤ (talk) 17:02, March 17, 2013 (UTC)

No worries. Ive suggested on the Policy page I set up that Cattlesquat should probably actually propose it himself as it is his proposal anyway. And thank you for the congrats, although my profile page says I only have 960-odd, so it may be premature. :S Garhdo (talk) 18:38, March 17, 2013 (UTC)

Editing other users' comments
Please do not edit other users' comments (except in cases of undoing vandalism). This is against ME Wiki's policies, as outlined in the Community Guidelines here, and is a bannable offense. This is your second warning.

If someone needs a comment fixed, let them know on their talk page. DO NOT edit their comment. Trandra (talk) 20:16, March 19, 2013 (UTC)

not sure how its my second warning, and I was trying to tidy the page as the gent had posted ur entire user page on the Talk page, presumably unwittingly. But no worries. Garhdo (talk) 22:36, March 19, 2013 (UTC)


 * 1) It had already been fixed before you edited his comment.
 * 2) Your intent, though well-meaning, doesn't matter. The rule is not to edit other users' comments, so don't do it.
 * 3) This is your second warning about editing other users' stuff. My first warning is still on this page, above.
 * Trandra (talk) 22:55, March 19, 2013 (UTC)


 * It had not been fixed, which was why I made the edit. However I will make sure I am more careful what I edit in future. Garhdo (talk) 23:22, March 19, 2013 (UTC)

Check the page history. This is his edit, right before your edit. This is your edit after his edit.

Anyway, I'm not trying to get on your case here, but I do like being right (to the point where it gets annoying sometimes). :P Trandra (talk) 23:35, March 19, 2013 (UTC)


 * He must have done that just before me, as I definitely remember editing brackets. like i said though its no biggie. Next time I'll suggest how to fix something like that rather than doing it myself. No worries. Garhdo (talk) 00:14, March 20, 2013 (UTC)

Garhdo, I am utterly confused. After I gave you a warning about it not less than 24 hours ago, you've gone and overwritten another user's comments on a Talk page. There is obviously no malicious intent, but you appear to be careless, which can be an insult in itself. Trandra (talk) 09:27, March 20, 2013 (UTC)

Actually that was my own comment. Garhdo (talk) 09:37, March 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually wait somehow I went over Lancer's comment. No idea how. Garhdo (talk) 09:39, March 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * Right I've checked the time indexes for both edits I have overwritten, and they have apparently been made substantially before mine, yet when I am viewing the page, Editing the page, and even looking on the Wiki Activity page neither of the edits I have overwritten has shown up. I'm not sure if there is a problem with how wikia is appearing for me, but Lancer's comment wasn't there, and when I edited the other comment I could still see your user page, apparently an hour after the user made the edit. I am honestly not sure what is going on? It's like I'm seeing an older edit of pages, and so accidentally erasing newer edits when I publish. I think this must have happened on my User:Garhdo/Policy page as well, when Lancer said I deleted his comment. But the newer edits for those pages aren't appearing in my Wiki Activity feed either. I could really do with some advice on this as basically these last two warnings seem to be a result of this problem? Garhdo (talk) 09:44, March 20, 2013 (UTC)

this seems to be a wikia problem, you might be better off contacting wikia support. i won't even pretend to know something about this issue (if i've been experiencing it, i might've had the incentive to do the research myself). i can only recommend a couple of preliminary measures. T̴̴͕̲̞̳̖̼̱͒͛̎͒ͫ̃ͧeͩ̈̽̈҉͓̝̰̼̦̫̤̀͠m̫̪̪̯̻͎̫̅̇̓̇͌̚p̸̙̝̓̓͌ͨ͆ͣͥ̂̕o͒̽͐̽͏̞̬̻͕͔͕͚̰͍͠͞ṙ̢̞͚͈̹̰ͨ̓ͭ̈́̌ạ̢̧̪̹̺̺̣̹̲͂͆̏ͪͨ͒ͭř̹͈͜͠y̷͍̻̜̹̼̾̽̈́e̵̹̼̟̦͚͐̈́͌͘d͉̲̣̻͉̱͗̅ḭ̷̻̆͋̆̓̔͝t̨͍̦̫̗͂̅̍̋̆ͩ͝ộ̫̟̬̳̝̲̾ͫ̒̿ͮ̑̚rͯ̎ͨͭ̄̿̽͛҉̠̫̱̠̘̘̲́ͅ7̩̻ͤͩͨ͝͡8̜̣̙͇̻ͨ͛͛̆͒̆̽̒͐͜͡ ͥ̍̉̃̇ͥ̓ͨ͏̕҉̥̹͓̗̤̠̖̤ (talk) 11:14, March 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) always test in at least 3 other web browsers in at least 2 configurations and a further 2 states: IE, firefox, chrome; logged in and logged out; and cleared history or not.
 * 2) make sure the AJAX refresh is on. it's the auto-refresh box.
 * 3) when in doubt, do not reply immediately. refresh the page. both normal F5 and clear cache refresh (ctrl+F5 in firefox and google). in normal operation, an edit conflict interstitial page pops up if someone posts first before your edit. evidently in your case it does not.
 * 4) lastly, use this in conjunction with wiki activity. Special:RecentChanges. for double and triplechecking measures. also make sure its auto-refresh is on.


 * how do I make sure the auto refresh is on? I didn't even know Wikia had such a feature as I couldnt find it in my preferences. And refreshing within my browser makes no differences, and I am not getting the edit conflicts, presumably because there are hours between the page version I am seeing and the edits having been made. I still get edit conflicts if someone edits as I am, or at least I was. As I said I saw Trandra's User page in that post an hour after it had been fixed, yet I had only just opened the page. This problem only seems to have been happening in the past two or three days, so I'm not sure its my browser, but I have no idea how to fix it. Garhdo (talk) 17:06, March 20, 2013 (UTC)

Auto-refresh is at the top of the Special:RecentChanges and Special:WikiActivity pages right near the header.

Make sure you Ctrl-F5 on pages to force it to clear the cache. And when you're editing a talk page, use the arrow button next to Preview to "Show Changes." That might show you if you're overwriting something.

Go to Community Central and search to see if anyone else has had a similar problem. Trandra (talk) 20:12, March 20, 2013 (UTC)

MoS on Trivia
The MoS section on Trivia can be found here: "Name trivia should be kept to a minimum, and confined to cases where it is either confirmed by a developer, where it conforms to current naming procedures, such as the naming of astronomical bodies after mythological figures, or where a reasonable connection can be made. Coincidental similarities are not trivia." I have to say that your inability to locate this policy is no excuse for the short temper you exhibited in your discussion with Lancer. I ask that you apologize on his talk page for your attitude as soon as possible. -- Commdor (Talk) 00:52, April 1, 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you for providing the link, but I will not apologise as I stand by what I said. Lancer's blunt, abrasive attitude, specifically when he acts like his word is law simply because he says it is and that a discussion is closed because he will no longer comment on it, is of a particular irritation to me. Don't get me wrong I know he has done much for this site in the past but his previous efforts are no excuse for his current behaviour and I will not pander to a petulant child who talks to editors like dirt. Garhdo (talk) 01:44, April 1, 2013 (UTC)
 * also in this case a reasonable connection between the two names can be made. LV-426 is the planet involved in Alien and Aliens, and the movie Aliens has been an admitted source of inspiration on the Bioware team, particularly on mission involving rachni, such as Noveria. Garhdo (talk) 01:56, April 1, 2013 (UTC)


 * Regardless of Lancer's past behavior, in this case you're the one who conducted himself poorly. The policy you disputed did in fact exist, so your outburst insinuating Lancer was making it up was completely unjustified. If you apologize to Lancer then I will consider this matter settled, but if you refuse I may be forced to take punitive action against you (including but not limited to a formal admonishment against user harassment). Any complaints or concerns about an admin's conduct should be taken up with the wiki's bureaucrat, they are not grounds for openly disrespecting or provoking that admin. As for the trivia issue, the reasonable connection argument is harder to apply here given that Mass Effect: Infiltrator's developer is a company called IronMonkey Studios, not BioWare. I'm not saying I disagree with including the trivia, but I wouldn't rely solely on that policy excerpt to get it added to the page. -- Commdor (Talk) 03:26, April 1, 2013 (UTC)


 * I was unaware Infiltrator had a different developer. Very well. However I did not suggest that Lancer was making the policy up because I couldn't find it. I requested that he provide it, as without it the situation appeared as I called itbased on his attitude - namely that he had made up his mind that the trivia item would not be included and therefore it was not up for discussion. I did not insinuate he was making it up as you claimed, and as stated before I stand by my previous assessment of his attitude and will not apologise. Take whatever action you feel is appropriate. And for the record I have previously voiced my concerns about Lancer's attitude to the Site Bureaucrat. I am unsure whether or not action was taken but if anything Lancer seems worse. I am not trying to disrespect or provoke him, but instead call him out of his childish behaviour and boorish attitude. Garhdo (talk) 03:37, April 1, 2013 (UTC)

Concerns
I find your conduct recently to be quite insulting. If you are going to run to Spart with every issue that comes up involving me, then I can and will report you for harassment. You completely imply that I cannot be mature, handle things on my own, and will do whatever I want regardless of site policies. Now if the situation gets out of hand, which it is not yet, then I can see getting a second opinion, but what you keep doing is nothing more or less than insulting because you basically say that I cannot do my job without Spart looking over my shoulder every 10 seconds. I find this attitude completely unprofessional and insulting. Lancer1289 (talk) 17:26, April 2, 2013 (UTC)


 * Actually I believe the current policy recommending is that when there is an edit war situation going to the site Bureaucrat can lead to a ruling one way or the other. Spart overruled you, quite rightly I think, regarding Xeno and the Traynor trivia piece and so getting his ruling on the other two current points of contention is reasonable. Regarding Xeno the dispute also involved two admins, which makes it a job for Spart to rule, hence why I suggested it to Xeno, who is new to this wiki and may be unaware of such a policy. However I should point out that Spart has overruled you a lot recently, especially in arguments where it is you against majority opinion. That precendent alone suggests that you cannot do the job properly, for whatever reason. Phalanx's Pinnacle station reference makes perfect sense, and after Commdor's help above I am rethinking my stance the LV-426 reference, but getting an outside opinion couldn't hurt. My conduct of late is to try and improve this wikia, to help facilitate new edits and to remove all this senseless and petty bickering, a lot of which you seem to be at the centre of. You never make an effort to discuss things with the community. You simply post your own opinion and that is it. Discussion over. My 5-year old child is not even that beligerent. The fact is that for whatever reason the good work that you have done on this wiki is being forgotten by the community because of the boorish antagonist you have become recently. I understand you have real life concerns, as you have made this clear, yet this is not an excuse. If you can no longer act in a reasonable and diplomatic manner within this community than you should no longer be a part of it. I'm sorry to say it but that is my opinion on the matter, yet while I don't expect you to take it onboard I sincerely wish, for the good of yourself and this community, that you would. Garhdo (talk) 17:41, April 2, 2013 (UTC)
 * You would do better with constructive criticism if I wasn't compared to a five year old child. There are plenty of more mature ways that you could have gone about that. I am more than capable of being reasonable and talking things out, but when people follow site policies regarding that. But when one proceeds to insult the person they are trying to help, then the other one does not typically take that advice. Notice that I have not used an excuse recently for anything, apart from my 9 day absence. I cannot however seem to be reasonable when someone continually violates site policy and then proceeds to attack me for voicing my opinions, which you have done. If someone wants to discuss things calmly and in a civilized manner, then I am more than capable of complying and would be happy to, but when someone wants to do something that will end up violating site policy, then that is not acceptable and if they cannot listen to reason, then a hard line must be taken.
 * The current policy is that when an edit is disputed, the one who is adding the information (in this case), or removing information (other cases) is responsible for being mature and opening a line of communication and not make further edits to the article until discussion has taken place. It is not a mature attitude to just do what you want, even if a line is opened, and to continue to make the disputed edit. If an edit is disputed in any way, the article is left as it was until discussion has concluded and restored to the point before the disputed edit was made. Once discussion has concluded, with all site policies and standards considered, then action can be taken. Not before then.
 * And the insinuation that I cannot accept an overrule is completely, despite evidence to the contrary, in conjunction your recent comments on a talk page, is utterly insulting and I cannot and will not forget it anytime soon. Lancer1289 (talk) 18:10, April 2, 2013 (UTC)


 * I would love for you to enlighten me s to exactly which site policies I am believed to have broken. And I know you can accept and overrule, I never said you cannot. My point was that you should not need to be overruled. As the person disputing the edits you have to provide reasons why, especially as you fly in the face of the three person majority that you implemented. And who says the hard line needs to be taken by you? That stance just makes you the bad guy, which I do not think you really want to be. In fact perhaps you should have gone to the other admins for a ruling first, getting their support and relying on them as a team player, instead of taking all the responsibility on yourself. And as for comparing you to a five year old, if you acted with maturity we could indeed have a sensible discussion, which I would welcome. I apologise for coming across offensively, but I actually find it quite saddening that with all the positive contributions you have made over the years you are persistently perceived as the bad guy by the community. I could understand your attitude if you were willing to talk about it. You are after all the most active admin here and as a result you will be the one who comes up against the community, but you make no effort to liaise with it yourself, instead demanding that other editors come to you, reverting edits regularly, and speaking to people in a curt and abrasive manner. Perhaps if you opened the dialogues, spoke to people who show a concern, and generally acted more positively towards this community, than many issues would simply not get anywhere near as out of proportion as they currently are. I am offering you a chance to talk, if you wish, and I sincerely hope you take it. Garhdo (talk) 18:37, April 2, 2013 (UTC)


 * Ok... I'm gonna try and cover everything here in one fell swoop -
 * Lancer - it is not harassment for Gardho to come to me with valid concerns, and all of the issues he's brought to my attention, of late, have been valid.
 * Gardho - you clearly violated site policy by insulting Lancer. Calling someone an "obtuse child" is clearly an insult. I can't speak to anything else, but that in itself is a serious violation. Both Commdor and myself are of the opinion that it is a violation of site insult policy, that it was meant as such, and that something needs to be done about it. Neither of us wants anything like a ban, but something does need to be done. An apology, both here and on the LV426 talk page, is certainly warranted. There is certainly plenty of belligerence here on both sides and it needs to stop. SpartHawg948 (talk) 21:35, April 2, 2013 (UTC)


 * My most recent post above, both apologising for coming across offensively and trying to offer support and a conversational outlet for Lancer as someone concerned for the position he is putting himself in with the community, is my final word on the matter. I will be more mindful of my comments in the future, and I believe I have apologised above. I ask that Lancer can do the same, and also that if he doesn't take me up on my offer of support that he at least takes some of my advice above to heart. Garhdo (talk) 21:46, April 2, 2013 (UTC)
 * So... no apology on the page where you actually called Lancer an "obtuse child"? Because that's the page I'm more concerned about, since it's the page where you actually broke site policy by insulting Lancer, and it's the page where various and sundry people unaware of your recent post above will see an insult directed at another user go without apology or retraction. Again, this was serious enough for Commdor to bring to my attention, which he did after your comment was posted here. So yeah... I'm just throwing that out there... SpartHawg948 (talk) 08:01, April 3, 2013 (UTC)


 * I believe I adequately explained my position. It was not meant as a direct insult but an analysis of the situation, hence why I explained my position rather than being directly insulting. The comment on the page has been modified to remove the obvious point of contention. I have apologised very genuinely here, and it should be noted that there has been no acceptance of said apology, nor indeed any other comment towards myself from Lancer, despite the fact that his opening comment in this thread is overly vitriolic and seems spiteful. Garhdo (talk) 11:46, April 3, 2013 (UTC)

Action Mode.
I'm doing a playthrough in action mode right now. Figured I'd let you know that in the Grissom Academy mission, the students are placed in defensive roles if Jack is missing and Prangley dies. If you want anymore updates (since I'm doing a default story, different than yours) just let me know.--Legionwrex (talk) 16:27, April 4, 2013 (UTC)

Ok that's cool. I was just trying to get all of the Action Mode results listed, and in what context, so if you want you can leave anything different that you find here and I'll update the whole list at some point. I need to do it again at some point to get the variables for Samara and Legion etc. Garhdo (talk) 20:45, April 4, 2013 (UTC)

Tabview for Multiplayer characters
Regarding the idea that you raised on the alternative appearances tabber proposal, it would look something like this. It looks better if you remove "Soldier" from the names, though some users may object quite strongly to doing that... Phalanx (talk|contribs) 11:04, April 17, 2013 (UTC)


 * I think that looks really good, and drastically cuts down on page length. Thanks for doing that. I'll have a look at editing it, with your permission of course (just to get a handle on the formatting there) and propose it as a project. Garhdo (talk) 11:11, April 17, 2013 (UTC)


 * Feel free to mess with it :) Phalanx (talk|contribs) 11:15, April 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * I also did this which has simpler formatting and may be easier to get to grips with. Phalanx (talk|contribs) 12:02, April 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * Nice work Phalanc, I support it. And i support the removal of the reference of the class (such as in the selection screen of the game)--DeldiRe 15:27, April 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks this is how that looks. Phalanx (talk|contribs) 12:29, April 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * Could you do the same for the page squad outfit ? it look nicer than the current proposal and it is the same idea--DeldiRe 15:27, April 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * Like this? Phalanx (talk|contribs) 15:54, April 17, 2013 (UTC)

before everyone jumps the gun i'd like to point out a few things.

there are reasons why tabview isn't widely implemented (yet) on the wiki.
 * 1) notice the [edit this tab] buttons on weapon tabs? we literally MUST have them else we lose the ability to edit subpages short of manually appending a couple of words to URLs. personally i find it too intrusive but a necessary evil.
 * 2) we aren't really in the business of making subpages for really short content. like squad outfits. subpages for really long topics, e.g. multiplayer classes, perhaps, but squad outfits is just stretching it. that's part of the reason why i chose to develop the outfit view in tabber, not in tabview.

phalanxapedian, i gave the proposal a week (PLUS TWO MONTHS counting from the initial talkpage topic) to simmer. butting in now is just rude and you lost your chance to chip in. the squad outfits proposal is already on the table. i would highly recommend you actually research the pros and cons of using tabbing solutions before proceeding any further because just blundering on ahead because "it looks good" can and will cause problems down the road if not thought through. as it is, i'm already seeing some problems in your multiplayer character implementations. fixable, but leaves me seriously doubting its viability and looknfeel. T̴̴͕̲̞̳̖̼̱͒͛̎͒ͫ̃ͧeͩ̈̽̈҉͓̝̰̼̦̫̤̀͠m̫̪̪̯̻͎̫̅̇̓̇͌̚p̸̙̝̓̓͌ͨ͆ͣͥ̂̕o͒̽͐̽͏̞̬̻͕͔͕͚̰͍͠͞ṙ̢̞͚͈̹̰ͨ̓ͭ̈́̌ạ̢̧̪̹̺̺̣̹̲͂͆̏ͪͨ͒ͭř̹͈͜͠y̷͍̻̜̹̼̾̽̈́e̵̹̼̟̦͚͐̈́͌͘d͉̲̣̻͉̱͗̅ḭ̷̻̆͋̆̓̔͝t̨͍̦̫̗͂̅̍̋̆ͩ͝ộ̫̟̬̳̝̲̾ͫ̒̿ͮ̑̚rͯ̎ͨͭ̄̿̽͛҉̠̫̱̠̘̘̲́ͅ7̩̻ͤͩͨ͝͡8̜̣̙͇̻ͨ͛͛̆͒̆̽̒͐͜͡ ͥ̍̉̃̇ͥ̓ͨ͏̕҉̥̹͓̗̤̠̖̤ (talk) 16:44, April 17, 2013 (UTC)


 * I wasn't trying to undermine you and I was simply trying to get a rough idea of how it would look (by request may I add). I'm not currently making any proposals, just experimenting. I do realise the pros and cons of tabber versus tabview, including the lack of the edit tag. Personally I prefer they way that tabview looks, and feel that the problems with can be fairly easily worked around. However, they are apparently working on something new so it may not matter in the long run. Phalanx (talk|contribs) 17:05, April 17, 2013 (UTC)


 * the "workaround" with tabview comes at steep price multiplied by the number of tabs: [edit this tab] + a few things non-devs care or know about. that seriously undermines the sleekness of tabview in my books even though i actually prefer how it looks over tabber as well. i can't support widespread adoption of the project on the wiki as long as its weaknesses aren't ironed out. that, and we need a minimum of content length for its usage to be justified :p T̴̴͕̲̞̳̖̼̱͒͛̎͒ͫ̃ͧeͩ̈̽̈҉͓̝̰̼̦̫̤̀͠m̫̪̪̯̻͎̫̅̇̓̇͌̚p̸̙̝̓̓͌ͨ͆ͣͥ̂̕o͒̽͐̽͏̞̬̻͕͔͕͚̰͍͠͞ṙ̢̞͚͈̹̰ͨ̓ͭ̈́̌ạ̢̧̪̹̺̺̣̹̲͂͆̏ͪͨ͒ͭř̹͈͜͠y̷͍̻̜̹̼̾̽̈́e̵̹̼̟̦͚͐̈́͌͘d͉̲̣̻͉̱͗̅ḭ̷̻̆͋̆̓̔͝t̨͍̦̫̗͂̅̍̋̆ͩ͝ộ̫̟̬̳̝̲̾ͫ̒̿ͮ̑̚rͯ̎ͨͭ̄̿̽͛҉̠̫̱̠̘̘̲́ͅ7̩̻ͤͩͨ͝͡8̜̣̙͇̻ͨ͛͛̆͒̆̽̒͐͜͡ ͥ̍̉̃̇ͥ̓ͨ͏̕҉̥̹͓̗̤̠̖̤ (talk) 17:18, April 17, 2013 (UTC)


 * So long as it's easy for "non-devs" to edit the actual content I don't feel it would cause too much trouble. For example, templates and tables can be extremely hard to modify but so long as it's made easy enough to edit the actually important content then it's not much of a problem. I also don't see the need for a minimum content length, so long as it improves the formatting of the page it's not a problem. As far as I know, it's not like there are penalties to having a larger number of small pages. Phalanx (talk|contribs) 17:27, April 17, 2013 (UTC)


 * and i've pointed out tabview's lack of a natural edit button offsets its superior look advantage. you'd do well to remember that when devs care about an issue it usually translates to things that make the overall end-user experience seamless and with less problems reported (zero optimally, but that never happens).
 * also, too many pages = administrative nightmare. mass effect wiki is one of those wikis i've seen that have a good page count to page content ratio, and it's more or less a good thing. we don't really need to be like wookieepedia on this (unidentified rodian with jacket? uh, wat)


 * PS hai garhdo we were messin up ur talkpage T̴̴͕̲̞̳̖̼̱͒͛̎͒ͫ̃ͧeͩ̈̽̈҉͓̝̰̼̦̫̤̀͠m̫̪̪̯̻͎̫̅̇̓̇͌̚p̸̙̝̓̓͌ͨ͆ͣͥ̂̕o͒̽͐̽͏̞̬̻͕͔͕͚̰͍͠͞ṙ̢̞͚͈̹̰ͨ̓ͭ̈́̌ạ̢̧̪̹̺̺̣̹̲͂͆̏ͪͨ͒ͭř̹͈͜͠y̷͍̻̜̹̼̾̽̈́e̵̹̼̟̦͚͐̈́͌͘d͉̲̣̻͉̱͗̅ḭ̷̻̆͋̆̓̔͝t̨͍̦̫̗͂̅̍̋̆ͩ͝ộ̫̟̬̳̝̲̾ͫ̒̿ͮ̑̚rͯ̎ͨͭ̄̿̽͛҉̠̫̱̠̘̘̲́ͅ7̩̻ͤͩͨ͝͡8̜̣̙͇̻ͨ͛͛̆͒̆̽̒͐͜͡ ͥ̍̉̃̇ͥ̓ͨ͏̕҉̥̹͓̗̤̠̖̤ (talk) 17:46, April 17, 2013 (UTC)

If this tabview system did get implemented I would only suggest it on the MP class pages, purely to make those pages easier to view. I wasn't aware of any problem with the edit tags, which is why this thing would not be put up for voting until it has had a chance to be discussed and I have had a decent chance to get a good feel for editing it. But I think, purely for the length of those 6 pages that either this system should be implemented, OR we split those pages up into subpages, which I am personally loathe to do. Garhdo (talk) 02:45, April 18, 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't think you understand what Tabview does, which is basically to split the content into subpages. It just provides a way to view the sub pages on one page. You could use Tabview with any already existing page on this wiki. Just look at how many subpages Phalanx-a-pedian had to create to make the Soldier sandbox page alone. Trandra (talk) 03:02, April 18, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes but it looks a bit better than the header page and sub-pages that we have for Soundtracks and Characters. It may create the separate pages but it keeps them in one location. I can see issues with it but I still think it would merit further discussion. Garhdo (talk) 04:12, April 18, 2013 (UTC)
 * although waht about Tabber? That creates the tab headings but without making separate pages correct? Like the weapon pages do? Would that not work on the character class pages? Garhdo (talk) 04:19, April 18, 2013 (UTC)

I think that we should bring this debate on a forum page. For a "wikia noob" (I do not know the technical specificty) like me, this new tabs looks really nice and are easy to use even if they create lots of new pages. So it worth a debate to try a safe implementation if we can avoid the cons pointed by TE78 and Trandra. And btw, good work from Phalanx for the experimentation. --DeldiRe 09:46, April 18, 2013 (UTC)

Regarding the number of pages, yes it may make more but this is nothing like the "Unidentified Rodian with jacket" page. The difference here is that that is supposed to be a fully fledged article, the pages to make tabview work are just subpages. They are background pages similar in purpose to those needed to make tables and templates work. That's how they should be viewed, not as full articles in their own right. They are not intended to be individually presented to a reader, merely as a resource for the background page. My main problem with Tabber is that it doesn't normally look very nice. So long as we add in the edit tags and anything else like that then it shouldn't be a problem. I also think that if those things are addressed then it should actually be easier for "wikia noobs" to edit since it makes the editing page shorter and easier to see what you're doing. In addition it should be better for users with poor internet connections since it only loads a tab when it's clicked on. Hopeful they new option that they are working on will address the problems with tabview (however, it may be quite a while before they do finish that). Phalanx (talk|contribs) 11:46, April 18, 2013 (UTC)


 * I'd emphatically oppose it. Too much hassle for too little return. I believe months ago when we split Mass Effect 3 Multiplayer/Character Customization into the current class pages, there was some agreement that further splitting along the lines of individual pages for each character class was overkill. Even with Tabview, that's what this would be. As it is, I see no reason to make more subpages when ME3 DLC is done and there's little prospect of the current pages being significantly expanded beyond their current size. Article growth is thus no longer a concern, and implementing Tabview for the sake of Tabview will not be an improvement over the current layout. We don't need tabs for everything. Furthermore, if Wikia is already working on a new tab-oriented system, it'd be better to wait and see if that pans out rather than rush to invest in an ungainly older system that could be rendered obsolete at any time. -- Commdor (Talk) 14:47, April 18, 2013 (UTC)
 * Fair point. I do think its worth exploring, as those pages are of a decent enough size to use either Tabber or tabview, but if the system is about to change then we should wait and see if the new system is better. Garhdo (talk) 15:59, April 18, 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree, however I'm not sure how long it will be before they have a new option. It could well be a long time. Implementing this is also not too difficult. But anyway, I'm not currently making any formal proposals regarding tabview (though I may possibly at some point), just experimenting with what effect tabview could have. Phalanx (talk|contribs) 21:50, April 18, 2013 (UTC)

Thane's prayer
Hi Gardho, for the Thane's prayer issue, I think that the anon is right. Check that : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itlEvIjEUfs at 2:46. --DeldiRe 12:30, April 26, 2013 (UTC)

Trailer project
Hi Gardho,

As stated on the discussion about video, would you agree to work with me on a project for the trailers related to ME universe ? However, I'd like to finish MEI content before moving to another project (just need to finish missions pages with walkthrought and some pictures).

Several points need to be discussed if we want to propose something.


 * Organization of the infos : I would go for something similar to Soundtracks page with a separation by games (and dlc? or more a chapter for ME3 and a chapter for ME3 DLC or something similar) wit ha picture of the trailer who link to the trailer page.
 * Layout of the trailer page : a template such as we have for the character ? or a table with more infos ?
 * Infos on trailer page that we want put :
 * Link
 * Official description
 * Short description of the content
 * Release date
 * Music
 * Locations depicted
 * Characters depicted
 * Related game
 * Trivia
 * Others ?
 * Simple link or embed ? (upload looks to be a bad idea) : Link should be enough and more in accordance of what wiki does (a good example is the soundtracks pages who gives the title of the soundtracks but not a link to the music itself).

--DeldiRe 09:12, May 2, 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't mind waiting to implement it, as it definitely isn't a priority. I don't think trailers should have their own page in the manner as Soundtracks however, simply that we embed the launch and release trailers on the relevant pages, in a similar manner to other release information being included (such as screenshots and press releases for DLCs). Garhdo (talk) 14:50, May 2, 2013 (UTC)


 * So for the layout, something similar and in between to what we can find for Achievements and Downloadable Content ? --DeldiRe 15:10, May 2, 2013 (UTC)
 * No not even that necessarily. I mean you could do that but all I would do is, for example, embed this trailer |for the Citadel DLC on this page, and so on. Garhdo (talk) 15:16, May 2, 2013 (UTC)
 * I do not really agree because most of the game have several DLC's. However we could add link to the related place of the wiki (trailer page) on each related page such as ME:citadel--DeldiRe 16:05, May 2, 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't think you understand what I mean my friend - rather than having a trailer page, we would just embed the trailers for the releases on the pages for those releases. Its actually a lot easier than what you're suggesting and would only require a policy alteration rather than a massive project. Garhdo (talk) 16:44, May 2, 2013 (UTC)


 * Yeah I see, it could be easier but we will loose lots of informations such as the name of the music, ... (see above) and what do we do with trailer such as the "fight for the loss" series ? And most important, if we do this way we won't have a full list of trailer easy to find. That's why i suggest something similar to DLC page but it could be a good addition to put a link to trailer page (at the right line) on every page related to a specific trailer. --DeldiRe 18:08, May 2, 2013 (UTC)


 * Well most of the music used by the trailers is already mentioned in Trivia, the soundtrack page, or comes from the game itself. The Fight for the Lost trailers, as well as other character trailers from ME2, could be embedded on the charcter pages in the ME2 Dossier sections. And we could implement a video archive, similar to the picture archive, that I have seen on many other wikias to make the video easier to find. Garhdo (talk) 18:20, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

I might be willing to support (or at least not oppose) an effort to embed official trailers in the game and DLC pages, but speaking plainly, I'd be very uncomfortable with anything beyond that and would oppose it in the strongest possible terms. I don't intend any offense, but the very idea of making an entire page devoted to something as esoteric as trailers and placing videos smack dab in the middle of character articles is nothing short of outlandish. I'm not about to let the wiki be diluted by allowing videos to be given such needless emphasis, or have the door thrown wide open for potential copyright disputes. -- Commdor (Talk) 23:52, May 2, 2013 (UTC)