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.

Citadel Assassins
I'm on a ME playthrough right now, in order to add infoboxes and grab a few achievements, and I made a point this time of talking to Barla Von and then going directly to Chora's Den. Guess who I ran into. If you've consistently not encountered them after speaking to Von, I'm not sure how I'm doing this. Arbiter099 18:31, May 7, 2011 (UTC)
 * I just did the same thing earlier today, went and talked to Barla, then went to Chora's den and nothing. Lancer1289 20:18, May 7, 2011 (UTC)
 * It might have something to do with recruiting Wrex first. I remember my first ever playthrough, I talked to Barla Von, but then talked to Harkin and recruited Garrus before recruiting Wrex. I did run into the Assassins. Tali&#39;s no.1 fan 20:25, May 7, 2011 (UTC)

write
thany how about you write it becuses it seem no one wants me to write anything at all bicuses of my work !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

i don't quite inderstand what you are saying
 * See your talk page and respond there, per the message at the top of my talk page. Lancer1289 22:19, May 7, 2011 (UTC)

do it
than how about you write it and get all the credit while i get thron in a garbge truck for life

goodbye!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

--Deadmansspace147 22:26, May 7, 2011 (UTC) P.S. Go to thes sites there vary good : [] = american mcgee alice wikia

[] = american mcgee alice wikia
 * See your talk page as much as I hate doing this. Lancer1289 22:43, May 7, 2011 (UTC)

tell me what to write
if you are still consrnern about this howe about you give me more ideas about what to write, because every time i write something it allows get deleted.
 * If you would post your information/stories in the appropriate venues, i.e. blogs posts, forums, your user page, then it wouldn't get deleted. As for ideas, this is your project, so it's your thing and I have other things I need to worry about. Lancer1289 01:57, May 8, 2011 (UTC)

who made you kung
do you realy think that you can tell what t put on there web page or whatever you call, maby i show telll every one not to trust you at all.
 * And maybe you should read the Community Guidelines which state and I quote "any video uploaded to the site will be deleted". It's right there in the Guidelines. Just look for yourself. Lancer1289 01:32, May 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * Addendum: Also I guess a simple request of responding on your talk page is apparently not possible, which is what I ask at the top of my talk page and on yours as well. I stated that I don't like cross page conversations and for people who which to discuss something I left on their talk page to discuss it there and not here. Lancer1289 01:34, May 9, 2011 (UTC)


 * (Edit Conflict) Lancer is enforcing the site policies as an admin. Other wikis may allow videos to be uploaded, but not this wiki. If I or another admin aside from Lancer had been available at the time when you uploaded your videos, we would have deleted them too. -- Commdor (Talk) 01:39, May 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * Precisely. Considering it is right there in the Guidelines, I really don't see what is so hard to understand. Lancer1289 01:43, May 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, and I note that nobody has answered your question yet. The answer is: I DID. I made Lancer an admin (not a "kung" though). If you'd like to discuss this decision with me, do so on my talk page. Thanks, SpartHawg948 05:33, May 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * Well technically Spart is the King (as Bureaucrat), and Lancer's the Regent (as he edits quite a bit more than Spart on a daily basis). Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem 12:30, May 9, 2011 (UTC)

Krogan Regeneration/immunity
For infobox purposes, is krogan regeneration before they die considered an ability? I've always thought of it as immunity. Or is it both that they regen their health and then activate immunity? Clearing this up would help me a lot. Arbiter099 17:41, May 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * I would probably have to say that is an ability and should be noted. Immunity is something separate and while both activate at the same time, I don't recall Immunity reviving someone when used by anyone else. Even krogan. Lancer1289 18:11, May 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * This was my suspicion, most krogan will activate both, but Fist's bouncer just regenerated without Immunity and it put the question in my brain. Thanks. Arbiter099 18:14, May 9, 2011 (UTC)

New background
Lancer, have you heard anything else about getting the new wiki background set up? Just wondering. -- Commdor (Talk) 01:10, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * I did say if I heard something, then I would post it, however I may contact JoePlay again later about it. Lancer1289 01:17, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * Maybe there's a problem with the coding's compatibility with the wiki program. It possibly loads correctly, but something in the Wiki's code may prevent the new background from being updated. Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem 02:52, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * Like I said, I'll contact JoePlay about it. Let's not specuate what could or couldn't be the problem here as I don't need that conversation on my talk page. Lancer1289 02:55, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * Have you tried inputting the actual code to add the background to the wiki in the actual MediaWiki CSS page? From my experience, it's a lot more effective than using the Theme Designer if that's what you - or whoever tried to apply the background - used. Samsoniussig.png  (Talk)   (Requests)  03:24, May 10, 2011 (UTC)

sorry
this cerburas news is just for you and a few others i got mas at :

== King Tutankhamun exhibit to visit Serrice == Wednesday, May 11th, 2011 After a long negotiation process with the Confederacy of North Africa, the Galactic history museum of Serrice will be exhibiting the best example of the ancient Egyptian civilization of Earth. The exhibit will run for two (Earth Standard) months and will include the bust of Nefertiti, a replica of the burial chamber, and the burial mask of King Tut himself. Belana Torei, head of the museum, had this to say: “We are very honored to finally be allowed to showcase this wonderful example of human history in our home.” The opening ceremony will be attended by many VIPs including Matriarch Denlaya and CNA President Atef Sedki. This will be the first time the exhibit has ever left it’s home planet.
 * And I have to ask why is this here? I really don't need this on my talk page as I can go to the site myself and read it myself. I really don't need this on my talk page. Lancer1289 22:00, May 11, 2011 (UTC)

hard work
i worked so hared on finding thos videos and you delted them, this is what people do to me thay make funn of my work and destroy it just like you just did.
 * I am not making fun of your work, I'm enforcing site policy, which you continually ignore, despite I don't know how many messages. We don't allow non-canon information in articles, we don't permit videos, and we don't permit any depictions of Shepard, except in specific, and listed, circumstances. I would seriously suggest that you read the Mass Effect Wiki:Manual of Style and the Mass Effect Wiki:Community Guidelines as there are several things in there that you have continually ignored and been reminded about several times. If you keep violating site policy like you do, then it will lead to further action. Lancer1289 22:19, May 11, 2011 (UTC)

??????????????????
what do you mean by The Real Lancer?
 * Seriously? I left an answer and why can't you keep a conversation on one page. See User talk:Commdor for my answer as it hasn't changed and I couldn't have been more explicit. Lancer1289 20:35, May 12, 2011 (UTC)

answers
1. i am only trying to help this site

2 is it okay to uplod videos to my peronal page?
 * See your talk page as I will not have a cross page conversation. Lancer1289 20:29, May 13, 2011 (UTC)

so i can only upload videos to my user page but not on the artical  all of you have writen, i that it
 * Again see your talk page as the answer is there as this is incorrect. Lancer1289 20:33, May 13, 2011 (UTC)
 * Aiya! This is getting crazy here! I'll spell it out briefly, try to help. NO you cannot upload videos for use anywhere. Not in articles, and not on your user page. You can, however, embed videos on your user page. This way, you still get the videos, but they aren't uploaded. It's a win-win. SpartHawg948 20:37, May 13, 2011 (UTC)

Undoing edit
I'm not sure why you undid my edit? I was just killing the redirecting links. I know it wasn't the most necessary of edits, but was there another reason? I'm really new to this wiki though... I want to edit but I don't know where to start. does the wiki have a todo list? Or is there any coding work that I could do (navboxes, infoboxes etc-my expertise)?--Technobliterator 22:31, May 13, 2011 (UTC)
 * It is because you did add unnecessary aliases to the article, which are unnecessary. Everything you modified already goes to the correct articles, and we don't need aliases that do the exact same thing, just with more code. It is just unnecessary. There are cases where it is, but in those kind of links, it just isn't. If you do look around, we don't have those types of links, and if we do, when they are discovered, they are quickly removed. Mass Effect Fields accomplishes the exact same thing as mass effect fields, and just unnecessary. If we don't need unnecessary code in an article, then we don't do it. The MediaWiki code is smart enough to recognize the first as accomplishing the second and making adjustments for capitalization. So instead of ignoring that, we just use it to accomplish the same thing with less code.
 * As to a to do list, there really isn't one as really the only thing we need to keep on top of is new Mass Effect 3 information. The only real to do list is the Clean up category.
 * As to coding, there also really isn't anything that isn't already done. There really much I can offer on that point apart from look around, see if anything is missing, or if anything doesn’t conform to the MoS, and fix it. I really can't pull anything else off the top of my head. If you have any more questions, then please ask. Lancer1289 22:41, May 13, 2011 (UTC)
 * I am aware of what you described, I have worked on multiple wikis before, it's just that mass effect fields will link the reader to a redirect. It's just my perfectionism really. I don't think redirect "Mass effect field" to "Mass Effect Field" is necessary, not currently. If I searched "mass effect field" in the search engine, it'd take me straight to Mass Effect Field, if it weren't for that redirect. You could perhaps test this out to confirm it? As deleting redirects is a tedious edit, you could probably get a bot to do that (I have one, or you could ask for wikia staff).
 * I'll check out the articles requiring cleanup, but one thing I've noticed with coding; correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't see navboxes or infoboxes on the wiki. An example is my own work here- my work on another wiki (I created the infoboxes and filled them in, as well as created the navbox). If you're interested, I could help out with adding that to the wiki, and each of the wiki's pages? As well as the edit with form thing? Besdes this, I'm impressed; the wikis I am admin at and edit at nearly always have stubs and missing information.--Technobliterator 22:56, May 13, 2011 (UTC)
 * We do utilize navboxes and infoboxes. We do keep our infoboxes brief (see Saren Arterius for an example) - this is by design. As for navboxes, we have many. See Mass Effect for the series navbox, Garrus Vakarian for some of the character ones, M-490 Blackstorm for weapons and downloadable content navboxes, etc. As for the ones you linked, honestly, I found it a bit disorienting. It was (in my opinion, I'm sure you feel differently) a garish eyesore that caused quite a case of information overload. I mean, the entire intro to the article is wedged into a tiny little space between two infoboxes at the top. There's barely room for more than two or three words per line. SpartHawg948 23:07, May 13, 2011 (UTC)
 * Indeed we do have infoboxes and navboxes and a few examples of the navs have been pointed out. But we also utilize infoboxes on weapon pages, see the Blackstorm page above, enemy pages (Blue Suns Trooper), armor pages (N7 Armor), and you could argue armor and weapon page from ME (Hahne-Kedar). We do have them, but we tend to keep them in the background.
 * As to your work, I'm also trying not to offend, but that just isn't feasible or IMO practical. There is just way to much information squashed when it can be fleshed out in more eye appealing ways, which is what we do currently. That info box is nice, but that wouldn't work for something here or for that matter something that I would want to see here. It crowds the information and distracts from the article's content.
 * As to the links, again it really just isn't necessary when it already does the work for us. We have redirects for multiple reasons, and as stated every one that you modified on that page is not something we have a redirect for, or at least I don't think so, but rather one that the MediaWiki software does for us. We generally don't delete redirects unless they really don't serve a purpose and frankly those are ones that are somewhat used often, that is if they are actual redirects and not ones that the MediaWiki software does for us. And now I quote a phrase that has worked well here, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". Lancer1289 00:00, May 14, 2011 (UTC)
 * Good call. I forgot about those infoboxes. Funny story though... it appears that one of our favorite detractors is keeping tabs on our dear wiki. Soon after this exchange began, Technobliterator (love the user name, btw) received a message informing him that this wiki is the wrong one because "the admins there are unreasonable, self-sentric, self-righteous hypocrites" and because we are apparently more fond of our policies than we are of Mass Effect itself, which is odd. I mean, if we cared about policies, wouldn't we start our own wiki where we could hand out admin positions to our friends like candy and handwrite the policies, rather than working our way up through the ranks to the top positions, and using democratic processes to determine policy? Anywho, this does seem to indicate a new low. First, they refuse to speak to us despite numerous attempts at outreach, to the point that I've agreed to host all discussions here on my talk page, and one of our Senior Editors has even gone there to try and talk. They do this because they claim we are unwilling to talk to them. Now they actively resort to poaching. Poor guys... Anywho, I hope Technobliterator stays with us, as he seems genuinely interested in improving the wiki, but I won't stoop to Zulu's level. People can make their own decisions. There's no need to go snooping around looking for people to poach, or warring for editors on their talk pages. SpartHawg948 00:09, May 14, 2011 (UTC)
 * Wow I really don't know what to say about that. I'm am still willing, and always have been to work out this issue and I did ask if there are any more questions, which I'd be happy to answer. I'd also be happy to take suggestions about things and hopefully explain what we do here and why we do it that way. That is why I'm here.
 * As to the message, that is indeed a new low, and if that is where he's going, then all that wiki will be is just a bunch of messages and no real work will get done unless we do it here first, and then they just copy it. If they have to resort to poaching, then that just shows how desperate he is to keep his wiki open and people adding content. Lancer1289 00:16, May 14, 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh don't you worry about him, I've dealt with many people who are exactly the same on my own wiki; just kids who shouldn't even be editing 'oh wow you deleted my page i dont care if we already have one i will smash your wiki!!!!'. Yeah I see what you mean squashing two infoboxes right next to each other, that isn't something that normally happens. As for keeping them brief, that's why my designs are collapsible navboxes and infoboxes. Sorry but I didn't notice these infoboxes or navboxes, as there are so few. Perhaps I can create a couple more? Also here would possibly be a better example of my work- this one. There's actually a lot of complex work (especially on taxonomy, and 'edit with form'). But yeah I'd really like to help you guys out. BTW I know my name is Technobliterator... but I'm female ;) My brother was the original creator of the account. As for the links I edited? They all did have redirects, otherwise I wouldn't have edited. Yeah I see what you mean in that it was pointless, but I'm a bit of a perfectionist.--Technobliterator 09:01, May 14, 2011 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. You're correct though that we have relatively few infoboxes and whatnot, and most of the ones we do have are brief (although I do think the infoboxes for enemies, such as the Blue Suns Centurion, are pretty sweet-looking). As for more infoboxes, did you have anything in particular you were thinking of creating some for? I'm not saying yes or no, just that (and perhaps this is just a lack of imagination on my part) I can't really see anything that needs it at present. If there is something you think would work though, I'm all ears. If you have some specific ideas, or if you get some 'prototypes' ready or whatever, I'd also recommend starting a new thread on the Projects Forum. SpartHawg948 09:18, May 14, 2011 (UTC)
 * Indeed if there is something that appears to be misssing, then just whip something up and the community will give input on it. That's generally how things work with the project forum. If something can be improved, then I'm all all ears as well. Lancer1289 17:23, May 14, 2011 (UTC)

Rogue AI
Where in the game does additional dialog unlock if you complete this side quest? I've only been able to find one mention which I was able to get without doing the sidequest, which is why I removed it. It would've been a lot more helpful if you were more specific instead of just saying that "dialog happens".--24.255.171.169 20:15, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
 * There is additional dialogue during the initial boarding of the Normandy and during later conversations with Miranda. This information has been confirmed multiple times by different people and is why the information is valid, correct, and stays in the article. Lancer1289 20:17, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, just to be sure, I played up to EDI's first appearance without importing a save, and like I thought, Miranda still mentions Hannibal if you order EDI shut down.

I wasn't sure, so I posted a topic on the talk page of SFT, asking for confirmation. Several months pass by and I check it again, and no one answered. So, as far as I've been able to find out, the information is incorrect and I remove it. To be polite, I post an edit summary, and it's my hope that if I am incorrect, the person who puts it back in will at least offer an additional explanation. That didn't happen. So I ask you where the information is, and instead of giving me a source, because it's sure as hell not on the talk page of either Save File Transer or on the Rogue AI talk page, you pretty much just tell me to shut up believe anything you tell me. Is this how you treat everyone who wants to edit the wiki?--24.255.171.169 21:02, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
 * ^Pretty much. SlayerEGO1342 21:10, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) Seriously is the language and false accusations necessary? I never told you to shut up so don't put words in my mouth as that is just flat out rude.
 * Just because something is posted on a talk page doesn't always mean it will get a response. Sometimes topics are ignored because the facts are present, or they are simply overlooked. Posting something on a talk page and not getting a response is not justification for removing information, not in the slightest. Since you are arguing for the removal of information, it is on you to provide the validation for its removal. There is additional dialogue apart from that one instance and again it is on you to provide the validation and justification for removal.
 * And no this isn't how we treat everyone, but I reply in a calm manner to a comment, then you in this case, proceed to put false accusations in my mouth, along with breaking our langauge policy, that isn't exactly the mature and proper way to go about it, is it? If you wish to continue this conversation, then please do so in a mature manner as I've been nothing but polite to you, and I expect the same in return.
 * And SlayerEGO, I again find it odd, and very suspicious, that you show up at this very instance and you also need to get your facts straight, because they aren't. Lancer1289 21:15, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
 * You find it suspicious that I chose to come home at 2 in the afternoon and go on the internet? SlayerEGO1342 21:26, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
 * No I find it suspicious that you just showed up at this very moment to make a comment that only served to inflame a situation and that can be proven as false. Lancer1289 21:36, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
 * That isn't suspicious. I agree with the wikia contributor. For someone who incessantly undoes edits for lacking "base", it's very hypocritical of you to not provide evidence for your actions. Why not just give the editor the information he's asking for instead of hiding behind "site policy" (or whatever justification you're about to give me)? SlayerEGO1342 21:39, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
 * You commented on this thread minutes after the unregistered user, and both of you clearly don't like Lancer. I'm not saying you're directly linked with the unregistered user or that I'm of the same mind as Lancer in this case, but I can see Lancer's reasoning. Alternating between an account and an IP is a fairly common tactic to try and discredit other users. -- Commdor (Talk) 21:44, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
 * Couldn't he just see that my IP address isn't the same? SlayerEGO1342 21:45, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) Except that is the point. Site policy says that someone wishing a change to the article, whether it be to add information, or remove it, must provide evidence to support their claims or nothing is done, i.e. the status quo is kept. It isn't hypocritical, it is perfectly in site with site policy and I can site numerous examples of this. The evidence in this case must come from him, as the only thing I can provide is non specific evidence as I don't currently have an import without playing that assignment. I do have however, had a number of conversations with people on this issue and they have stated that there is some dialogue that is different if a save either isn't imported, or this assignment isn't completed.
 * And if this is going in the direction that it is continuing to go in, then this debate will end up going nowhere. And it also serves to distract from the point of the conversation.
 * And No I don't have the ability to see your IP address. Lancer1289 21:48, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
 * I actually just re-read the beginning of this thread, and I can honestly say I have no idea why the OP made his second comment. Seems to me like your first response was the information he was asking for. Huh. SlayerEGO1342 21:51, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
 * (Edit conflict) @SlayerEGO - Nope. That's the CheckUser right, which admins don't have. The circumstances under which CheckUser can be requested are also restricted. -- Commdor (Talk) 21:56, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
 * (Edit conflict) Interesting, I never really looked at that. Sometimes a second set of eyes does help. Anyway I think he was also looking for evidence in the form of a video or something, but I also seem to recall something else. Somewhat different dialogue with EDI during one of the conversations in the cockpit, and after the Collector Ambush. Those I'm a bit more sketchy about, but I do know that one of the dialogue options after the Collector Ambush is different. Slight difference, but enough. Lancer1289 21:58, May 16, 2011 (UTC)

Vandal
This guy just broke the Language policy --Legionwrex 22:50, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah I got it. Lancer1289 23:22, May 17, 2011 (UTC)

User colours
I noticed you were trying out user specific colours and it didn't work. It is because wikia did not insert a "title" subtag in the HTML. All you need to do is to adjust the CSS a little. Instead of using a[title="User:SpartHawg948"]', try a[href="/wiki/User:SpartHawg948"]. See the difference? — Teugene (Talk) 03:26, May 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually what I was trying to do was make it appear on a different page. The results of Forum:User Colors on Recent Changes is already working and has been for a few days now. Lancer1289 03:30, May 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * It has eh? Because I don't see any thing changed from here. :/ — Teugene (Talk) 03:36, May 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * Well I haven't had any complains and it seems to be working for everyone else so I'm not sure what your situation is regarding it. Lancer1289 03:40, May 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * You're referring to the user colours on the Recent Pages or the Forums? It's not showing any thing different for Chrome and Firefox. By using the browser source debugging, I see no visible CSS user colour implementation in either pages. — Teugene (Talk) 03:48, May 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * I just went on Chrome and Firefox and I saw that everything is the exact same as if I'm on IE. I see the color differences so I'm thinking this problem is isolated to you. I'm not saying I don't believe you, but at the same time I was logged out and I still saw it. Lancer1289 03:55, May 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * I can also see the colors on Firefox. -- Commdor (Talk) 03:56, May 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * That's really odd. You see, I checked with all the browsers I have installed (Chrome, FF, IE, Opera), logged in or otherwise, and I also checked from my mobile. I see no specific colour changes anywhere. — Teugene (Talk) 04:22, May 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * Then it has to be something that is wrong with your computer or something. On a hunch I tried copy pasting your CSS code into mine, and I have to say I'm not liking that, and I still saw the colors. Lancer1289 04:29, May 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I have to get back home and have a look again. I don't recall seeing anything last night and it can't be a coincidence if it's not visible on more than 2 devices. — Teugene (Talk) 05:21, May 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * I can't say I would classify that as a coincidence, but you have to admit, it is odd. Lancer1289 05:24, May 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * Just to let you know, I tested the same as above at home and... nada. There's nothing different. — Teugene (Talk) 17:40, May 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * Then I have no explanation except that it is something that you are going. Lancer1289 17:44, May 18, 2011 (UTC)

212.219.207.42
This IP seems to be on a recent spate of vandalism. (Sorry, I don't speak Teddie dance. User:THOMASNATOR)) 09:55, May 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok I'm not sure what that second part was supposed to say, but it was dealt with by another admin. Lancer1289 16:49, May 18, 2011 (UTC)

Blogs
It's strange, but whenever I click on a blog, it always appears out of date. Comments are missing, and even the "Recent Changes" box will show old changes that have long fallen off the list. I'll see that someone has added a comment to the blog, but when I click on it, the page appears old. Any reason for this? I use Chrome, by the way. Tanooki1432 00:28, May 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not entirely sure but is this every time or only recently because every blog I've clicked on recently has been up do date? Lancer1289 00:36, May 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * I think it might be something with Chrome... I've tested it on another browser and it worked just fine. Tanooki1432 00:37, May 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * Perhaps, I'm on IE almost all the time and only seems to glitch like that when everyone else is having a problem. Personally if Chrome was better I'd use it, but currently there are some things IE does that Chrome doesn't yet. Lancer1289 00:43, May 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * No, I've had this problem before as well, and I use Firefox. Hasn't happened in a while though. Nobody knows why this happens? Arbington 00:52, May 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nobody seems to have that answer. Cache updating seems to be the common explanation however. Lancer1289 01:23, May 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * Want to hear something funny? I've only been having this problem since the New Look was implemented. Wasn't that just Wikia's greatest move ever? Heh. Arbington 03:11, May 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm sure we all have our complains about it, and mine are quite numerous. They should have gone about that the correct way, i.e. listening to people, and oh I don't know, actually doing something about it. They are still getting complains about the fixed width. But that is an interesting notion...hmm questions. Lancer1289 03:17, May 24, 2011 (UTC)

Spoiler confusion
Hi Lancer, you undid one of my edits about Chief Weyrloc Guld for spoilers (Revision as of 07:27, May 24, 2011). I rewrote the third paragraph of that article and moved it above the spoiler tag, thinking it would be ok. What is it about that paragraph that makes it a spoiler? I'm a little confused there. --CasualGamer 09:08, May 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * First the edit removed some information that was relevant. There was also information in there that is only learned over the course of the game, so it is spoiler information. In addition, there was a restatement of the exact same information in there. Lancer1289 14:43, May 24, 2011 (UTC)

Greetings
Dear Sir or Madam, Your kind greetings are well received and reciprocated. Would I be correct to suppose that you are the site's resident paladin and champion? That is to say, the greater part of the recent edits were made by you, and your name appears on a great many talk pages. Regards, I,   E   • Wouldst thou speak? 00:47, May 29, 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually the greeting is just an automaited message system keyed to the last admin/b'crat/staff member who edited. As to the site's paladin/champion, I can't say I've been called that, but I'm one of the admins here. Lancer1289
 * Dear Sir or Madam,
 * I suspected as much. It seemed rather odd to be thanked for a contribution to a talk page, but I know of no such system on Wikipedia (we have a welcoming committee), so I thought it best to thank you.
 * Regards,
 * I,   E   • Wouldst thou speak? 00:55, May 29, 2011 (UTC)
 * It does it for anything actually. Uploading a picture, main article edit, talk page edit, etc. And you don't have to the "Dear Sir or Madam" every new message, we aren't nearly that formal here. Lancer1289 00:57, May 29, 2011 (UTC)
 * My dear Sir or Madam,
 * The greeting that precedes the body of my correspondence, while felicitous, also makes it much easier for me to discern where the messages to and fro end and begin. I find it can be mildly irritating to construe the origin of large bodies of indistinguishable text.
 * Regards,
 * I,   E   • Wouldst thou speak? 01:06, May 29, 2011 (UTC)
 * Whatever. Lancer1289 01:09, May 29, 2011 (UTC)
 * Sir,
 * Well, I'm sorry I have so evidently wasted your time. Forgive my intrusion; it was kindly meant.
 * Regards,
 * I,   E   • Wouldst thou speak? 01:14, May 29, 2011 (UTC)
 * You haven't wasted my time and I do know the intent. I just tried to communityate that we aren't that formal here, but if that is something that you do, then that's fine, but I'm just saying you will find a lot of talk pages where people don't do that and where you will get large bodies of text. Nothing more. Lancer1289 01:16, May 29, 2011 (UTC)
 * Sir,
 * Je vois.
 * Regards,
 * I,   E   • Wouldst thou speak? 01:25, May 29, 2011 (UTC)

Edit warring on Commander Shepard
Lancer, you are now engaging in an edit war. Even admins must abide by the rules of this wiki and community. As yourself have said, if you disagree with an edit, take it to the talk page. Training and proficiency are different things, as documented on several pages of this wiki. It's obvious that someone else felt the need for documentation, and while I agree that their terminology wasn't quite right, it is correct to differentiate between the two levels of weapon skills in relation to the class abilities. In short, if you have a problem with the edit, take it to the talk page. --Snicker 23:14, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
 * Can you please cite examples of the "several pages of this wiki"? I'll happily try and sort this mess out, but I need to know what precedent you're citing, not just that unnamed "several pages" back this up. SpartHawg948 23:19, May 31, 2011 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) No actually it is not an edit war yet, and the fault would be on you as you are changing the page, not me. You have again brought this on yourself. If you have a problem with an undo, then it is not my responsibility to take it to the talk page, rather it is you since you are advocating the change. And since you would have gone three times with another undo, the fault would be on you, not me. So I will state it again just for clarity, if you have a problem with an undo, then it is up to you to take it to the talk page, not me. If you had one another undo, then you, not me, would have been edit warring. So please do get your facts straight on this issue.
 * As to the issue, in that context they mean the exact same thing. If you look at any other page, i.e. Soldier, Engineer, Adept, Infiltrator, and Vanguard, training and proficiency are interchanged, only on the Sentinel page is different for whatever reason. Hence why the page is worded the way it is. The page is currently worded accurately and there is no need to change it. Lancer1289 23:22, May 31, 2011 (UTC)

You're right, Lancer, I didn't want to invoke the "three strikes" rule, which is why I stopped, but to answer SpartHawg, if you'll look, every class except Sentinel uses the phrase "specialist training" relating to the weapons that they may train in. The game manual has similar terminology, using the phrase "can train with" on the weapons page, in regards to what classes can train in what weapons. Only the Sentinel wiki page here on the Mass Effect wiki uses the term "proficient" to indicate that they get any bonuses to pistol at all. As near as I can tell, the word does not appear anywhere in the game, nor the game manual (nor even anywhere else in the wiki), but it is a good word to indicate that the Sentinel is not completely impotent with the pistol (they do get some bonuses, after all - just no advanced training). I saw the word on the Sentinel page and thought it described the circumstances far better than some long drawn out explanation of how they don't get training, but get some minor bonuses.

Perhaps it would be better to go back to the original edit by the anonymous user, which states that they don't get any training at all, since that would be accurate per the game manual and the game itself?

Lancer, I know you're an admin here, and I see all the good work you do, but once in a while, you might want to stop editing every single other user's edit and just consider for a moment if the person was editing in good faith. Just because you don't agree with something does not make it wrong. I assume that code of conduct does also apply to admins, otherwise, we can just stop this discussion, and I'll be happy to leave. If it does, however, I would recommend using the talk page more often and fewer snarky comments. More flies with honey than vinegar, and all that.

I appreciate the quality of this wiki, and want to see it continue to get better, but I don't want to continue getting into flamewars with you. --Snicker 00:29, June 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * First note that I do consider every edit, I don't just undo randomly or because I don't like it. We do have sort of rule that if something says the same thing, then by definition it is unnecessary rewording, and in that context, in the terminology it is used, then it is saying the same thing. Going back to the original edit files in the face of canon information. Using that edit, it states that Sentinels don't receive training in anything, and can't use any weapon effectively. Which, as we all know, is completely false. The current wording is fine and there is no need to change it.
 * And yes the rules apply to use as well, but again, I do consider every edit, and I don't just undo because I like to. At the same time, and for the third time I'm stating it on this page, and in this very thread for that matter, if someone has a problem with an undo, it is their job to take it to the talk page, not the person who makes the undo. That is how things work here, not restoring the edit, and then taking it to the talk page. If there is a problem with the undo, then it is the job of the person who has a problem with the undo to take it to the talk page, not the person who makes the undo. It is also not proper to undo the undo and then ask for discussion because that it not how things work here. I'm more than willing to talk things out, but when the rules aren't followed, then I can't really discuss anything can I? Lancer1289 01:00, June 1, 2011 (UTC)

Just my two cents here, and sticking strictly to the issue of the wording: Consistency is obviously a good thing, and I'm all for it whenever possible. It's possible here. The issue then becomes a matter of training vs proficiency, and here it seems that proficiency (and proficient) is the superior choice. Using the term training implies that it is possible to train into something you don't already have training in. And this is misleading. Garrus can't, for example, train into using heavy weapons, nor can a soldier train into using SMGs. As such, I do think that Snicker's edit was justified. As such, I intend to put on my B-Crat hat and get that change taken care of. If there is still disagreement as to this decision, any and all who disagree can bring it back up for discussion on the relevant talk page, and we'll get it squared away there. SpartHawg948 04:02, June 1, 2011 (UTC)

What did I do?
I don't remember putting anything offensive down on that page. I was on that page I'll admit but the most offensive word that I can think of that I said was "crap" and that's basically the only word I said that could be even remotely offensive. And I didn't even say crap in an offensive way, so please tell me why I should look at the language policy.
 * I'm also somewhat confused. I can't find anything violating site policy in RiftJargon's last comment. In fact, I find it uproariously entertaining. Crap, as far as I know, has not been deemed unacceptable. Even per the G-Rating from the MPAA that we tend to use as a bench-mark, crap is perfectly fine. SpartHawg948 20:37, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * Whatever then, just forget it. Although there are about 20 different ways that could have been phrased. Lancer1289 20:40, June 2, 2011 (UTC)

Vanguard guide edits
Hello. I did some edits to the Vanguard guide from IP 91.123.31.24 (didn't bother logging in at the time) and noticed your later revisions. Point about preserving the content taken; however, there's still a lot of useless info which I'm going to clean up. Just so you know. It horrified me when I read this guide before doing a Vanguard playthrough, and now I've got a perspective to improve the article. I hope we won't engage in a conflict over this. Mitranim 18:09, June 5, 2011 (UTC)
 * Just to note, there is a wall of text to follow.
 * Yeah, the problem is on each section I left edit summaries as to what I did. The SMG section was fine as is, there was no need to spread out a decent paragraph into three, extremely small ones. You literally cut swaths of valuable and relevant information from the Heavy Pistols section that amounted to a good paragraph. Barrier, some things good others bad, no real complains there. And finally the Warp Ammo section went from being neutral, to extremely biased. Remember that not everyone plays like you do and while "recommended" is a good term, "highly recommended" is exceptionally biased. The guides are to be written from a neutral perspective where relevant information about using the power, and relevant strategies are to be presented, from multiple different viewpoints. Rewriting/deleting swaths of information because you didn't find it relevant isn't really a good idea as while something presented may not have worked for you, it may work for someone else.
 * The biggest problems were the Warp Ammo and Heavy Pistols sections, and I'll discuss the former first. You completely removed the statement about evolving Jack's Warp Ammo to max, and I honestly can't see why that was removed. That could be extremely relevant to someone who wants the power, but doesn't want to have it as a bonus power. I also don't see why the sentence starting with "On the other hand" was removed either. There was a lot of information that was good, but at the same time, valuable and good alternatives were completely removed from the section. Again the purpose of the guides is to present all the powers, some good bonus ones, and from a somewhat neutral perspective. Obviously we can't be entirely neutral, but it is nice to try. Also the words "highly recommended" were also something that really added a lot of bias to the power, especially when a viable and good alternate strategy for getting it was completely removed.
 * As to the Heavy Pistol Section, again you just completely removed swaths of information, and honestly from the other edits, it looks like you removed information that you didn't find valuable. Again not a good idea. An entire section about armor damage was removed and I’m still trying to figure out why you did that. Without the Kasumi DLC pack, you don't get the Locust, so the information is still relevant as neither the Tempest or the Shuriken do any damage against armor . Again the majority of the information that you deleted seemed to be things that either you didn't like, or that didn't work for you. Again, that is just what it appears to be. What may not have worked for you, could work for someone else, or there is relevant information there.
 * I will again say that these guides have to as neutral as possible and present a lot of information. What may not work for you or what may not be relevant to you, may work or be relevant to someone else. Information there doesn't get added piecemeal, and you are free to add additional information, but again deleting huge swaths of information, you removed over 9,000 bytes from the article actually, isn't really good thing especially when you try to rewrite based solely on your experiences. We don't support guides like "Vanguard Guide by (insert name here)", and if you feel that you have to create one, then you are free to do so in the Forums or in a blog post, but rewriting the guide to reflect just one person's experience just doesn't work very well as information that others could find relevant, or strategies that work for them could just be outright deleted because either you didn't try them, you didn't like them, they didn't work for you, or any number of reasons. Again we can't be perfectly neutral, but we do have to present the most neutral perspective as possible and include all information and strategies that could work. Something you did words for you, great add it, but don't delete information that is there based solely on the fact that you didn't find it relevant or (insert reason here).
 * You stated above that there is a lot of useless info, and while I may just reiterate what was in my last paragraph, I feel that I have to. The information may be useless/irrelevant/whatever to you, but to someone else who comes here, they may find it relevant/useful/whatever. Again these guides have to present a neutral perspective describing how best to use the power/talent/weapon system/weapon, not based solely on one person's experience. If you have something that worked for you, then add it, but again, just because something didn't work for you, or you find information to be "useless", doesn't mean that someone else won't find it useful. Again, based on what you did, it seems that you "rewrote" it to reflect only your experiences, or what you found useful, and anything that you didn't, you removed. Information is usually put into those guides when it has been useful and we have to try and reflect all of that, why do you think the Charge section of that article is so long? Information is there because someone found it relevant and added it, and just because it didn't work for you, or you find the information "useless", I actually can't find one useless fact in that guide, doesn't mean it should be deleted. They are general guides, if you want to write a guide based on your experiences with the class, then I have given you the proper locations to do that. And just to say this, if it is created in the mainspace, then it will be deleted instantly as mainspace misuse per that clause in the Community Guidelines.
 * I know that was a wall of text to read, and was probably one of my longest response ever, but if you have any questions, just ask and I'll try to answer them as best I can. And hopefully not with a wall of text. Lancer1289 20:25, June 5, 2011 (UTC)

New User
Hi Lancer, just wanted to say hi and thank you for the great work on this page. I've been providing minor help anonymously for a couple of years now around Wikia (Fallout:3, NV; ME1,2), but just got this account today. I wanted to apologize for deleting a portion of the Arrival (assignment) page. Thanks for the quick un-ban (if that was you, or Wikia if that was them)! I was confused about the two sections "Sneaking In" and "Guns Blazing" and thought they were repetitive, much of the two sections were copy/pasted verbatim. I have since edited the page with a short primer that Sneaking In and Guns Blazing represents branching paths the player may take instead of a linear plot/guide like the rest of the page. Thanks for understanding!

Also, I wrote one of the first Insanity Vanguard guides a while back when the game first came out. http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/944907-mass-effect-2/53386345, you are free to use it as you see fit if it helps the wiki.

Best, --ADWCTA 00:30, June 7, 2011 (UTC)
 * I haven't lifted that ban, I don't intend to, and I'm considering banning you right now for a similar time period. You removed mass content from the article, and I didn't see a justification behind it. For now I will not ban you but what happened was completely unacceptable and I would advise you to not do it again.
 * Also the edit has been removed, and frankly I would have removed it myself as it was completely unnecessary. Of course both sections are similar, because they cover the same thing with, in all honesty, a few small differences. Lancer1289 02:00, June 7, 2011 (UTC)

New Picture
oh im sorry,I didn't notice but anyways... i don't know if this been discuss about but I think we should update the main character (squad members ME 123 )and Shepard because they look like the present version(like garuss face).Alterman09 23:27 June ,6 2011
 * (edit conflict) Seriously is it that hard to leave a new message? The above conversation has absolutely nothing to do with this conversation and I ask people the top of my talk page to leave a new message if it is a new conversation, has nothing to do with another conversation, and not to edit the whole page. I really am puzzled why this keeps happening. This just makes it so much easier to not only respond to conversations in a timely manner, but to archive them.
 * As to the point itself, I'm not sure what you are asking. If you are talking about the images at the top of the various character pages in the templates, then that is an outright no. If you are talking about other images, we are trying to update as fast as new data comes out. Changing the images at the top qualify as spoilers and because of that, they cannot be changed. New images are to be in the appropriate sections. Lancer1289 03:31, June 7, 2011 (UTC)

Language
Yep, just got caught in the momment. Lately I've been able to refrain myself though.--BriNg iN DeR FLAmeS?! 21:07, June 7, 2011 (UTC)
 * That is still no excuse though. Just keep it on the DL. Lancer1289 21:09, June 7, 2011 (UTC)

Wasn't making an excuse.--BriNg iN DeR FLAmeS?! 21:31, June 7, 2011 (UTC)