User talk:Commdor

'''Welcome to my talk page. Feel free to leave a message. Please sign all posts with four tildes (~).'''

I reserve the right to alter any comments placed on any of my user pages and blogs in any way that I see fit, or to remove/delete them entirely.

Vandal
http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Contributions/75.65.157.123

Ban him or keep an eye on him… whatever you want, really. Just informing you of this guy.-- 04:40, November 18, 2012 (UTC)

Morning War
I can't remember if Legion says the same thing, but if you take the Geth VI into the Consensus, it says the Quarians have "officially been at war with the Geth for 293 years." The timestamp for the final retreat from Rannoch is 292 years ago, meaning the war lasted a single year. 76.84.23.7 04:30, November 19, 2012 (UTC)


 * After a watching a video of the mission, you are correct that both a start and an end date given, but your numbers are off. The quarians were officially at war with the geth for 291 years, not 293, and the retreat from Rannoch and end of hostilities was 290 years ago, not 292. Anyway, I'll re-add the info to the article. -- Commdor (Talk) 05:07, November 19, 2012 (UTC)

Apologies
Sorry for the no show all weekend, but I had a pretty busy one. My club hosted an all day gaming event on Saturday. We wound up playing Star Wars Battlefront II for 3 hours and Axis and Allies for another 4. In addition, yesterday we went to see Wreck-It Ralph, good movie, and we all went out to dinner.

I also kind of needed a break. Apologies for not warning you in advance but I thought I could keep up on Saturday, but apparently not. Lancer1289 (talk) 18:04, November 19, 2012 (UTC)


 * No big deal, all was quiet around here. If this was the week of Omega's release, though, I might have a very different opinion. -- Commdor (Talk) 18:07, November 19, 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah I think I'm going to have to do what I did with Leviathan. I can't get to it until about 9:00 pm CST. See if you can get ahold of Spart or Teugene and see if they can assist. If not, I will try and download it before I go to school and play through it. If not, then I'll have to try something else. Lancer1289 (talk) 18:14, November 19, 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I was directed to you from the other Wiki users. I'm with FUNimation and was looking to see if we could maybe get some help promoting the upcoming one-night only theatrical showings for Mass Effect: Paragon Lost.

If you could maybe help, please contact me at justin.rojas@funimation.com.

More info on screenings here: http://masseffectparagonlost.com/screenings.php

Best, Justin Rojas Sr. Social Media Manager FUNimation Entertainment

Simple Request
Commdor, would you please check your email at your earliest convenience? I have something I would like your feedback on. Thanks. Lancer1289 (talk) 19:05, November 20, 2012 (UTC)


 * Responded. -- Commdor (Talk) 19:14, November 20, 2012 (UTC)
 * Commdor, did you get my followup email? If so, please provide some feedback. If you think it is good, just say so here. Lancer1289 (talk) 17:15, November 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * Commdor, did you get my reply to your last one? Lancer1289 (talk) 19:35, November 24, 2012 (UTC)

Source for Damage Reduction on Melee Attack
Here, from BioWare forums itself, tested by other players.

It's not that your edit was wrong, it's that you could have put it in a little better. Wholesale deletion is easier for an admin when he or she has more important things to police on the site. Lksdjf (talk) 19:42, November 20, 2012 (UTC)

Well, I understand, no problem. I just wanted to state that I would never put a information without any basis. --Bingbangpoe (talk) 22:39, November 20, 2012 (UTC)

we need your housekeeping powers nao
recent changes page. i won't even bother slapping delete tags on those due to the levels of facepalm and fail. better you admins deal with this swiftly and directly. thanks. T̴̴͕̲̞̳̖̼̱͒͛̎͒ͫ̃ͧeͩ̈̽̈҉͓̝̰̼̦̫̤̀͠m̫̪̪̯̻͎̫̅̇̓̇͌̚p̸̙̝̓̓͌ͨ͆ͣͥ̂̕o͒̽͐̽͏̞̬̻͕͔͕͚̰͍͠͞ṙ̢̞͚͈̹̰ͨ̓ͭ̈́̌ạ̢̧̪̹̺̺̣̹̲͂͆̏ͪͨ͒ͭř̹͈͜͠y̷͍̻̜̹̼̾̽̈́e̵̹̼̟̦͚͐̈́͌͘d͉̲̣̻͉̱͗̅ḭ̷̻̆͋̆̓̔͝t̨͍̦̫̗͂̅̍̋̆ͩ͝ộ̫̟̬̳̝̲̾ͫ̒̿ͮ̑̚rͯ̎ͨͭ̄̿̽͛҉̠̫̱̠̘̘̲́ͅ7̩̻ͤͩͨ͝͡8̜̣̙͇̻ͨ͛͛̆͒̆̽̒͐͜͡ ͥ̍̉̃̇ͥ̓ͨ͏̕҉̥̹͓̗̤̠̖̤ (talk) 16:46, November 23, 2012 (UTC)

Mass Effect 3 Special Edition content
I'm speaking with a YouTube user which has some videos of Mass Effect 3 in the Wii U, and i need a confirmation from him about the content in the game and if he downloaded any DLC in the Special Edition. If i get the confirmation from him, may i add the information in the ME3: Special Edition and Downloadable Content pages?

Thanks for your time(By the way, sorry for my English) -- Intoxicação Alimentar (Talk) 23:00, September 26, 2012 (UTC)


 * Tell me what he has to say first, and then I'll be able to see how it should be added to the wiki. -- Commdor (Talk) 23:07, November 26, 2012 (UTC)


 * I just received a message from him:

"From what I know so far, the game has all DLC released for the game so far except for upcoming releases like the Omega dlc and the alternate appearance dlc packs, which I've heard may be available for download on Wii U later in the future.

And nope, didn't have to buy anything but the game itself."

Here is one of his videos showing some of the weapons. http://youtu.be/5gxPL5FhEHo?t=45s -- Intoxicação Alimentar (Talk) 23:28, September 26, 2012 (UTC)


 * The video does show some of the Firefight and promotional weapons (AT-12 Raider, Reegar Carbine, M-90 Indra, Krysae Sniper Rifle), but I need to see a video showing all of the Firefight weapons and the other weapons you added to the Mass Effect 3 article (Chakram Launcher, M-55 Argus) to be certain that the Firefight Pack is included in ME3: Special Edition. -- Commdor (Talk) 23:42, November 26, 2012 (UTC)


 * Or, at the very least, can your friend confirm that all Firefight Pack weapons and the Raider, Chakram Launcher, and Argus are in the game? -- Commdor (Talk) 23:45, November 26, 2012 (UTC)

Tomorrow
I know what I said earlier, but I've been thinking about it, and unlike Leviathan, I really do not care about spoilers with this one. Leviathan was more like slap in the face, what just happened sort of thing. This one, it is more like who kills who. So I will be on tomorrow as normal. I can add things once I get access to it, hopefully around 1:00 pm CST, maybe sooner, and I stress the maybe, and play through it, I can add content, but until then, I can sick around and monitor other things. At 1.99 GB, or that is what I hear, it will take some time to download.

I also sent you an email and I really could use a response. Thanks. Lancer1289 (talk) 02:42, November 27, 2012 (UTC)


 * I should be back from class and downloading the DLC at 11:00am EST (10am CST, I think). I should be on for most of the day as well, but at some point I'll have to stop so I can finish a project/presentation for Wednesday. It'll be a relief with you keeping a lid on things, Leviathan was hectic (but not as bad as ME3's launch. But Omega is supposed to be 2x Leviathan's size. Hmm...). -- Commdor (Talk) 02:50, November 27, 2012 (UTC)
 * Well I think a large part will be enemy articles and additions to current ones. I will be on by 8:00 am CST when I sit down to class. I'm just worried about some of the things I state in my email. Lancer1289 (talk) 02:52, November 27, 2012 (UTC)


 * Responded to that. Don't be down, we've been doing this "job" (Wikia really should pay us, make this a real job, I think. I spend so much time on here it's scary) through worse. At least we've got Omega to enjoy tomorrow. -- Commdor (Talk) 03:30, November 27, 2012 (UTC)

Well you seem to be on earlier than expected. Anyway I will be on almost nonstop except for about an hour and a half starting at 9:15 am CST, or in about an hour and ten minutes. Also can you check your email? Thanks. Lancer1289 (talk) 14:04, November 27, 2012 (UTC)


 * Will check after class. Have to leave now, will be back by 11am EST. -- Commdor (Talk) 14:08, November 27, 2012 (UTC)
 * Very well then. Enjoy class if you can. I'm in history right now. Lancer1289 (talk) 14:10, November 27, 2012 (UTC)

Page that needs to be deleted
I just wanted to bring this to your attention, in case you or another admin didn't notice.

http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Mass_Effect_Awards

--The Milkman | I always deliver. 22:57, December 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * Taken care of. Lancer1289 (talk) 23:09, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

Thank you.
For helping deal with those vandals. For a second I thought I was all alone.--Legionwrex (talk) 02:08, December 6, 2012 (UTC)


 * Don't mention it, I just happened to be on at the right time. Stay vigilant, usually these mass vandalism attacks last a few days. If an attack happens and I or Lancer can't be reached, be sure to contact the Wikia VSTF. -- Commdor (Talk) 02:12, December 6, 2012 (UTC)
 * I'll be sure to. It appeared to be an organized attack (though the very fact people took time to organize an attack on a video game wiki tells you something).--Legionwrex (talk) 02:17, December 6, 2012 (UTC)

Another Vandal
http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Contributions/75.81.235.143

Go ahead and do something about this person, please. -- 03:58, December 6, 2012 (UTC)

Discussion
Discussion established. How long should I wait before re-submitting the organization of info? SinisterSamurai (talk) 20:32, December 8, 2012 (UTC)


 * Discussions are open for seven days. If, after that time, the community doesn't oppose your changes, then you can re-add them to the page. -- Commdor (Talk) 20:49, December 8, 2012 (UTC)

SP/MP weapons backlink
i corresponded with trandra regarding switching the colons to slashes on sp/mp weapon pages (here) and i was wondering if we need to have a community consensus on that. if not, we needed your powers to expedite things. it's just a minor adjustment that improves navigation by a bunch. T̴̴͕̲̞̳̖̼̱͒͛̎͒ͫ̃ͧeͩ̈̽̈҉͓̝̰̼̦̫̤̀͠m̫̪̪̯̻͎̫̅̇̓̇͌̚p̸̙̝̓̓͌ͨ͆ͣͥ̂̕o͒̽͐̽͏̞̬̻͕͔͕͚̰͍͠͞ṙ̢̞͚͈̹̰ͨ̓ͭ̈́̌ạ̢̧̪̹̺̺̣̹̲͂͆̏ͪͨ͒ͭř̹͈͜͠y̷͍̻̜̹̼̾̽̈́e̵̹̼̟̦͚͐̈́͌͘d͉̲̣̻͉̱͗̅ḭ̷̻̆͋̆̓̔͝t̨͍̦̫̗͂̅̍̋̆ͩ͝ộ̫̟̬̳̝̲̾ͫ̒̿ͮ̑̚rͯ̎ͨͭ̄̿̽͛҉̠̫̱̠̘̘̲́ͅ7̩̻ͤͩͨ͝͡8̜̣̙͇̻ͨ͛͛̆͒̆̽̒͐͜͡ ͥ̍̉̃̇ͥ̓ͨ͏̕҉̥̹͓̗̤̠̖̤ (talk) 02:50, December 10, 2012 (UTC)


 * It sounds like this is to correct a prior oversight, so I don't think a community discussion would be necessary. I don't have time to handle all of the moves and link updating tonight, but I should be able to get it done sometime tomorrow. -- Commdor (Talk) 03:00, December 10, 2012 (UTC)


 * i'm all for lessening the workload but i feel the point is moot since you'll still be sweeping the same pages for deleting redirects/housekeeping/etc if i decide to take action. so should i or you can handle this fine T̴̴͕̲̞̳̖̼̱͒͛̎͒ͫ̃ͧeͩ̈̽̈҉͓̝̰̼̦̫̤̀͠m̫̪̪̯̻͎̫̅̇̓̇͌̚p̸̙̝̓̓͌ͨ͆ͣͥ̂̕o͒̽͐̽͏̞̬̻͕͔͕͚̰͍͠͞ṙ̢̞͚͈̹̰ͨ̓ͭ̈́̌ạ̢̧̪̹̺̺̣̹̲͂͆̏ͪͨ͒ͭř̹͈͜͠y̷͍̻̜̹̼̾̽̈́e̵̹̼̟̦͚͐̈́͌͘d͉̲̣̻͉̱͗̅ḭ̷̻̆͋̆̓̔͝t̨͍̦̫̗͂̅̍̋̆ͩ͝ộ̫̟̬̳̝̲̾ͫ̒̿ͮ̑̚rͯ̎ͨͭ̄̿̽͛҉̠̫̱̠̘̘̲́ͅ7̩̻ͤͩͨ͝͡8̜̣̙͇̻ͨ͛͛̆͒̆̽̒͐͜͡ ͥ̍̉̃̇ͥ̓ͨ͏̕҉̥̹͓̗̤̠̖̤ (talk) 13:48, December 10, 2012 (UTC)


 * I'll be able to carry out the fixes in about three hours, once I finish an exam today. -- Commdor (Talk) 18:57, December 10, 2012 (UTC)

I've finished converting the Pistol, SMG, and Shotgun pages. I'll get to Assault Rifles and Sniper Rifles later tonight. -- Commdor (Talk) 22:43, December 10, 2012 (UTC)


 * verified/fixed the rest of the pages with, every weapon should transition properly now. unless i screwed up on something. T̴̴͕̲̞̳̖̼̱͒͛̎͒ͫ̃ͧeͩ̈̽̈҉͓̝̰̼̦̫̤̀͠m̫̪̪̯̻͎̫̅̇̓̇͌̚p̸̙̝̓̓͌ͨ͆ͣͥ̂̕o͒̽͐̽͏̞̬̻͕͔͕͚̰͍͠͞ṙ̢̞͚͈̹̰ͨ̓ͭ̈́̌ạ̢̧̪̹̺̺̣̹̲͂͆̏ͪͨ͒ͭř̹͈͜͠y̷͍̻̜̹̼̾̽̈́e̵̹̼̟̦͚͐̈́͌͘d͉̲̣̻͉̱͗̅ḭ̷̻̆͋̆̓̔͝t̨͍̦̫̗͂̅̍̋̆ͩ͝ộ̫̟̬̳̝̲̾ͫ̒̿ͮ̑̚rͯ̎ͨͭ̄̿̽͛҉̠̫̱̠̘̘̲́ͅ7̩̻ͤͩͨ͝͡8̜̣̙͇̻ͨ͛͛̆͒̆̽̒͐͜͡ ͥ̍̉̃̇ͥ̓ͨ͏̕҉̥̹͓̗̤̠̖̤ (talk) 02:26, December 11, 2012 (UTC)


 * Looks good, thanks for catching that. A few class-related things have come up, so I've decided to finish the page moves tomorrow. I have nothing on my plate then, so I'm 98% sure it will definitely get done. -- Commdor (Talk) 03:56, December 11, 2012 (UTC)

A Tribute
We all saw Mr. Mittens's post on Gavin's talk page, about him being brain dead and all. So I was kinda hoping we can do a memorial service or something to honor his memory. I don't have many ideas about how exactly we can deliver a fitting tribute, maybe a blog or a forum? We just want to know if such a thing will be approved by the admins.--SolitaryReaper (talk) 15:36, December 11, 2012 (UTC)


 * You and Mr. Mittens can certainly create a blog post honoring him if you want, you don't need an admin's approval for that. -- Commdor (Talk) 19:14, December 11, 2012 (UTC)

a personal request
Do you think you could meet me briefly in the chat room, please? There is something I would like to ask you privately. Thank you for your time. --Ygrain (talk) 20:47, December 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * Just wanted to say "thank you" once more. --Ygrain (talk) 08:07, December 12, 2012 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. -- Commdor (Talk) 16:07, December 12, 2012 (UTC)

Message Wall
Hi, I'm not being rude or anything but why won't you install message wall instead of talk page? -- TomWelling (Talk) 13:47, December 13, 2012 (UTC)


 * For the same reason most other wikis I know of also don't use it I suppose, we don't see any need to switch. -- Commdor (Talk) 20:09, December 13, 2012 (UTC)

Shepard Rank
The Commander Shepard page lists him/her as "N7 Alliance Marine/Spectre" (http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Commander_Shepard). However, Bioware lists him as a military officer with the Systems Alliance Navy (http://masseffect.bioware.com/about/story/ see "Commander Shepard"). The Navy and Marines are two different things. Additionally, "Commander" is a naval rank, not a marine rank. I just wanted to point this out, because I believe that this wiki is too valuable, and too useful, to have misinformation on it.

Thank you. 108.238.167.131 02:10, December 14, 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your concern, but the article in question is correct. First, the Systems Alliance is a fictional organization that utilizes its own, unique ranking system which has no exact real-world equivalent, so comparisons to real-world ranking systems don't apply. Second, even though the source you cite is the official ME3 website, the information there does not supersede information from the games themselves that affirms Commander Shepard is an Alliance Marine. BioWare has previously acknowledged that lore information on their websites can contain discrepancies with what is presented in their games. -- Commdor (Talk) 02:42, December 14, 2012 (UTC)


 * Further, within the Systems Alliance the Marines are considered mealy a branch of the Navy, just like fighter pilots are. They have distinct names for some ranks but these are exactly equivalent to the navy ones and can be used interchangeably. 78.150.29.121 03:25, December 14, 2012 (UTC)

SolitaryReaper's behaviour
While I was using Chat! with a few other users,I wrote one of them about my hobbie-boxing. Then,SolitaryReaper came in,and said I should "leave boxing to the professionals".Furthermore,he later stated that I "could not beat a 10 year old".This could have been taken as a joke by me,however he later admitted of taunting me. The user named " The.Gooey.Prophecy" witnessed the exchange and agreed that SolitaryReaper"s statements were insulting.--I never miss (talk) 16:13, December 15, 2012 (UTC)


 * I made a light statement doubting his proficiency in so and so skills and he overreacted. Bad50cal's complaint is not to be taken seriously.--SolitaryReaper (talk) 16:24, December 15, 2012 (UTC)

The issue has been settled.Please,ignore this topic.--I never miss (talk) 17:37, December 15, 2012 (UTC)

I'm Back
Well I should be back more or less from now on. I hope you didn't share what did happen to me. I'm still in pins and needles, and Narco, which is basically Vicodin, for the pain, but I can come back as usual. I will be on and off more frequently until Tuesday, because of the amount of things that is going on for me that day. Starting on Wednesday, I should be back to normal. I hope. Lancer1289 (talk) 20:04, December 15, 2012 (UTC)

I also thank you again for putting those things on my user page and talk page. Lancer1289 (talk) 20:11, December 15, 2012 (UTC)


 * You're welcome, and yes, I kept your situation private per your request. Good to see you back. -- Commdor (Talk) 23:16, December 15, 2012 (UTC)

Codex/Humanity and the Systems Alliance false information
Hey Commdor, the entry in the timeline are false...the attack on the citadel led by Sovereign not Saren (did you even play the games?) happened in ME1, Collector entry is just too short imo it should also say that Shepard was actually dead not presumed, and the Destruction of the Alpha Relay is canon so it should be in there too, also that Shepard was detained on earth for it should be in it.

Source: Games: ME1-3+DLCs


 * Read the first "Please note" paragraph at the top of Codex. Codex entries are transcribed word-for-word from the games and not altered. -- Commdor (Talk) 21:08, December 17, 2012 (UTC)

Today I Guess
Commdor. Since you do know what happened, I have an appointment tomorrow that I need to go to in the morning. I won't be on until sometime in the afternoon, or perhaps at all since I also have a Club Christmas party tomorrow evening. I'll see if I can get on before I go, but I figured I should leave this. Lancer1289 (talk) 06:59, December 18, 2012 (UTC)

Emails
Commdor, can you check your email about an issue that I think will be a problem. Thanks. Lancer1289 (talk) 17:22, December 27, 2012 (UTC)

Chat Policies
Commdor, I have finally seen enough. I am writing up new policies for chat and please check your email because there is an issue. Lancer1289 (talk) 23:06, December 28, 2012 (UTC)
 * Email out with what is going to go on. Please read entire email as there are other things in it as well. Lancer1289 (talk) 22:34, December 29, 2012 (UTC)
 * Another one. Lancer1289 (talk) 01:23, January 1, 2013 (UTC)

Hopefully the final email is in your email box. Everything is listed along with an additional item. Lancer1289 (talk) 05:37, January 4, 2013 (UTC)

"videos" link
since we're not even permitting vids one of you might have to remove it from the "on the wiki" part of MediaWiki:Wiki-navigation?

also, we have a leftover vid uploaded by wikiabot there. :p T̴̴͕̲̞̳̖̼̱͒͛̎͒ͫ̃ͧeͩ̈̽̈҉͓̝̰̼̦̫̤̀͠m̫̪̪̯̻͎̫̅̇̓̇͌̚p̸̙̝̓̓͌ͨ͆ͣͥ̂̕o͒̽͐̽͏̞̬̻͕͔͕͚̰͍͠͞ṙ̢̞͚͈̹̰ͨ̓ͭ̈́̌ạ̢̧̪̹̺̺̣̹̲͂͆̏ͪͨ͒ͭř̹͈͜͠y̷͍̻̜̹̼̾̽̈́e̵̹̼̟̦͚͐̈́͌͘d͉̲̣̻͉̱͗̅ḭ̷̻̆͋̆̓̔͝t̨͍̦̫̗͂̅̍̋̆ͩ͝ộ̫̟̬̳̝̲̾ͫ̒̿ͮ̑̚rͯ̎ͨͭ̄̿̽͛҉̠̫̱̠̘̘̲́ͅ7̩̻ͤͩͨ͝͡8̜̣̙͇̻ͨ͛͛̆͒̆̽̒͐͜͡ ͥ̍̉̃̇ͥ̓ͨ͏̕҉̥̹͓̗̤̠̖̤ (talk) 02:55, December 31, 2012 (UTC)


 * The "On the Wiki" part of the wiki navigation bar doesn't appear to be accessible, I believe it's one of those Wikia-wide features that individual wikis don't get a say in. But I got the file. Weird thing was it was showing up as having been deleted back in 2009. It might have reappeared due to some glitch. -- Commdor (Talk) 03:29, December 31, 2012 (UTC)


 * ...woops. didn't really thought that through when i posted that. regarding the glitch, i guess that proves (for us regular joes) EVERYTHING never gets deleted on a wiki, just tucked away in some corner of their servers. ah well, all is well regardless. T̴̴͕̲̞̳̖̼̱͒͛̎͒ͫ̃ͧeͩ̈̽̈҉͓̝̰̼̦̫̤̀͠m̫̪̪̯̻͎̫̅̇̓̇͌̚p̸̙̝̓̓͌ͨ͆ͣͥ̂̕o͒̽͐̽͏̞̬̻͕͔͕͚̰͍͠͞ṙ̢̞͚͈̹̰ͨ̓ͭ̈́̌ạ̢̧̪̹̺̺̣̹̲͂͆̏ͪͨ͒ͭř̹͈͜͠y̷͍̻̜̹̼̾̽̈́e̵̹̼̟̦͚͐̈́͌͘d͉̲̣̻͉̱͗̅ḭ̷̻̆͋̆̓̔͝t̨͍̦̫̗͂̅̍̋̆ͩ͝ộ̫̟̬̳̝̲̾ͫ̒̿ͮ̑̚rͯ̎ͨͭ̄̿̽͛҉̠̫̱̠̘̘̲́ͅ7̩̻ͤͩͨ͝͡8̜̣̙͇̻ͨ͛͛̆͒̆̽̒͐͜͡ ͥ̍̉̃̇ͥ̓ͨ͏̕҉̥̹͓̗̤̠̖̤ (talk) 03:45, December 31, 2012 (UTC)
 * Commdor is correct. Wikia put that into all navigation bars and we have no say in that matter. Wikia has been doing a lot of that lately. Lancer1289 (talk) 09:02, December 31, 2012 (UTC)

Hi anyone here
Hey I was just wondering if anyone was still here I see no one is on chat. Well that's all i have to say thank you. :) KnightmareS-C075 (talk) 00:40, January 1, 2013 (UTC)

Request for Mention
Hi I'm an Admin of Followers Wiki the Critic of other Wiki, I am asking permission to mention you by name in our Review of the Mass Effect Wiki please respond a.s.a.p. KnightmareS-C075 (talk) 00:59, January 3, 2013 (UTC)


 * I've got no objections to being mentioned, you can go ahead. -- Commdor (Talk) 18:51, January 3, 2013 (UTC)

Very High Priority Email
Commdor, please check your email ASAP as there is a very important matter that needs immediate attention involving the behavior of a certain user and their actions. One which we have precedent behind. Lancer1289 (talk) 07:24, January 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * Indeed. Please do. I eagerly await your reply. SpartHawg948 (talk) 07:55, January 6, 2013 (UTC)

One final email that I sent out before anything is done. Please read and reply. Lancer1289 (talk) 23:22, January 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * Replied. Both of you said it was overkill. I also added a truthful paragraph. Just need a reply to say you saw it. Lancer1289 (talk) 23:48, January 6, 2013 (UTC)

Important
I believe a serious issue needs to be brought to your attention. Admin seems to ignore his duties and abuses his power. For the full information, please refer to this page. I fear that if Lancer1289 does not feel like answering based protests against his decision, the very questions of this discussion are now addressed to you.

Best regards. -Algol- (talk) 21:05, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

A misconception has occurred
Please refer to the talk page in question. Seems like we were discussing completely different things.

Good day. -Algol- (talk) 22:39, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

Anon user
An anonymous user posted an insulting/troll comment with language violations on a blog. Trandra (talk) 23:25, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

i did say i would get back to you on some things in at most a month
and the original batarian codex pic is up.

speaking of which, where do the cut content for ME go? we have one for ME2, and what constitutes as "cut content" for ME entries are currently just scattered across the various articles.

only asking/posted in your talkpage in the first place because 1) admin list says you're just semiactive now, and 2) specifically for the ME harvester codex image, text entry and even audio file (open question to anyone reading this, actually). see article's talkpage for details. if we ever do decide to include that entry and/or setup some sort of all-inclusive cut content page for ME (and possibly ME3) i can easily pull those up from the files. T̴̴͕̲̞̳̖̼̱͒͛̎͒ͫ̃ͧeͩ̈̽̈҉͓̝̰̼̦̫̤̀͠m̫̪̪̯̻͎̫̅̇̓̇͌̚p̸̙̝̓̓͌ͨ͆ͣͥ̂̕o͒̽͐̽͏̞̬̻͕͔͕͚̰͍͠͞ṙ̢̞͚͈̹̰ͨ̓ͭ̈́̌ạ̢̧̪̹̺̺̣̹̲͂͆̏ͪͨ͒ͭř̹͈͜͠y̷͍̻̜̹̼̾̽̈́e̵̹̼̟̦͚͐̈́͌͘d͉̲̣̻͉̱͗̅ḭ̷̻̆͋̆̓̔͝t̨͍̦̫̗͂̅̍̋̆ͩ͝ộ̫̟̬̳̝̲̾ͫ̒̿ͮ̑̚rͯ̎ͨͭ̄̿̽͛҉̠̫̱̠̘̘̲́ͅ7̩̻ͤͩͨ͝͡8̜̣̙͇̻ͨ͛͛̆͒̆̽̒͐͜͡ ͥ̍̉̃̇ͥ̓ͨ͏̕҉̥̹͓̗̤̠̖̤ (talk) 11:28, January 16, 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for getting that uploaded. The ME2 Cut Content page was devised after we found a large amount of cut content from that game all at once, it seemed prudent to collect it all in one place. That never really happened with ME or ME3, so there wasn't much of an impetus for CC pages for those games. If we can gather all the ME and ME3 cut content we can find, get it all in one convenient pile and take stock of it, we can see about making an article(s) with it. -- Commdor (Talk) 20:45, January 16, 2013 (UTC)

leaving
As I am | leaving for good, there is one last thing I have to ask you: please, kindly delete all my blogs and pictures at your earliest convenience. I have already tagged them for deletion. Thank you. --Ygrain (talk) 11:44, January 21, 2013 (UTC)


 * Done. -- Commdor (Talk) 17:44, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

General comments
I've been having a look at some of the content on the wiki and I believe that there are some issues (particularly with categories) that should be addressed. For one thing, you don't have a unifying categorical concept that shows appearances (and mentions) of characters in each of the games. If you would like assistance in this I would be more than willing to help. As an example, my home wiki (the Fallout wiki) uses categories differently than you do and I believe a similar approach could work here as well. Let me know what you think. Yours, A Follower


 * A set of categories to track characters as they appear in ME media could be useful, although if we choose to implement such a system it would most likely not be as fleshed out as Fallout Wiki's ("Category:Mass Effect 3 Characters" and "Category:Retribution Characters" and so on would be specific enough for our purposes, I'd imagine). However it may turn out, though, a large undertaking like that would require the approval of the community via the Project Forum. Once my Characters article split project is out of the way, I'll certainly see about devising a potential character category system for ME Wiki. -- Commdor (Talk) 03:23, February 14, 2013 (UTC)


 * I agree, separating by game, DLC, and other media would be sufficient to begin with. I will follow your project forum closely and contribute anything I may think useful.  Should your project continue, I would be happy to assist in any way possible.  Cheers, --A Follower

Vandal
LolLazer has vandalized two articles (as of this writing). TheUnknown285 (talk) 03:32, February 15, 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you. The user has been blocked. -- Commdor (Talk) 04:02, February 15, 2013 (UTC)

ME1 Armor Upgrades Updates (Alleged Edit Conflict)
I welcome information but the page I recently updated was poorly organized and had several bits of misinformation. I have spent the past few days verifying information and tracking rumors as to what many of these undefined effects do. I have performed extensive time trials and experiments to confirm or deny these assumptions. I welcome debate but I do not see the point in tabling the information.

Braking this into talks will only brake the page up into further edits that will only consume a massive amount of time to correct minor changes. If there is a point that is not factual then that is what should be changed. Review my corrections and you will see the page is better organized and formatted in accordance with the posting rules.

All of the information is reserved in the history and thus it is a poor way to debated a blanket revert. Also, two people do not make a majority. If we are to have talks about this what is the basis of deliberation. Facts or a few disgruntled fans?

No one has responded to the talk page so this seems more of a stall rather then an attempt to resolve the information. According to the talk pages I am not the only one who has run into this problem. Is this a Wiki or do you have to have community favoritism to post information? Not accusing you of such, But the last few hours I have been adding facts to the page that no one bothered to check on, for a game that has been on the market since 2007. TellNo1 (talk) 01:48, February 16, 2013 (UTC)


 * (Edit Conflict) As I mentioned on the article's talk page, the veracity of your changes has been called into question. When edits are disputed like that (especially on older articles, where the info isn't fresh in everyone's minds or readily at hand to examine), we err on the side of caution and require that they be verified by other users before they can be allowed in the article. The verification process may take several hours, days, or even weeks depending on community response, but we can't ignore it and risk potentially incorrect information being added to the article. You claim to have tracked down rumors and conducted tests to confirm your findings, but we can't just take you on your word; we don't know what rumors you tracked or what tests you conducted, and it's possible other users may have different experiences. If you are impatient with the pace of verification, you can always try contacting the users who disputed your changes and get more details about their complaints. If you can resolve the concerns they have with your changes to their satisfaction and no additional problems present themselves, then that should be enough to allow the changes back in. -- Commdor (Talk) 02:29, February 16, 2013 (UTC)


 * Again 2 people? If 4 people don't like the structure of a page are they simply aloud to delete it?  This hole case is exaggerated.  Furthermore it is the job of Posters to support facts not beliefs.  Just because two posters did not take the time to research it and based their opinion on belief rather then fact does not justify deletion.  Supporting such actions only discouraged investigation as others previously posted on the same talk page.


 * If information is missing it should be welcomed. If an articular is bulked down with fluff or unsubstantiated information, it should be cleaned up to aid people in finding the information they are searching for.


 * I have detailed a simplified test on the talk page, that anyone with the game can preform to determine the same results. Science calls that proof.  If you can find a Fact in contradiction to my findings I welcome it.  Regardless the page lacks information and recomposing it in your own words does not change that, nor is it justification for reverting the original correction.TellNo1 (talk) 03:55, February 16, 2013 (UTC)


 * You don't seem to understand. The burden of proof is on you as the user adding the new content in this case. Other users (it doesn't matter how many, be it a thousand or only one) have called your info incorrect, so it's up to you to provide evidence or otherwise satisfactorily explain that your info is actually true. All we're asking is you back up your claims; if you aren't willing to follow our policies and do that, then why should we trust your changes at all? Anyway, it appears Temporaryeditor78 is pursuing this matter and has already confirmed some of the info. If you can wait, your changes will likely get the green light soon. -- Commdor (Talk) 04:41, February 16, 2013 (UTC)

Bug Confirmation Question
Hey, I know bugs require confirmation from either the developers or from at least three users on the talk page. However, what if there is video evidence of a bug? Is that sufficient evidence or do we still need more confirmation? In particular, I direct your attention to here where I've posted a link to a video on Youtube showing a particularly amusing bug. Thanks! TheUnknown285 (talk) 03:47, February 16, 2013 (UTC)


 * That should be sufficient. -- Commdor (Talk) 04:41, February 16, 2013 (UTC)

Someone Leaving Personal Attacks
This user left a message on Lancer's wall that was not only a personal attack but included homophobic remarks. I went ahead and undid the edit (that is okay, right?). TheUnknown285 (talk) 13:05, February 17, 2013 (UTC)


 * Taken care of. And yes, you did the right thing by reverting the edit. -- Commdor (Talk) 20:03, February 17, 2013 (UTC)

Bad language/ threats
It have becomed a page in forum calle kill all retards http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Forum:Kill_all_Retarders Please remowe this --Perkins98 (talk) 01:48, February 18, 2013 (UTC)


 * Im attempting to talk some sense into him.--TW6464 (talk) 02:15, February 18, 2013 (UTC)

Not that it affect me, but it has nothing to do at this wiki, good that you clean up in this!--Perkins98 (talk) 02:24, February 18, 2013 (UTC)
 * thanks. I hope he sees reason...--TW6464 (talk) 02:25, February 18, 2013 (UTC)


 * The offending forum page has been deleted and the user blocked for harassment. -- Commdor (Talk) 02:37, February 18, 2013 (UTC)


 * Okay. That's good.--TW6464 (talk) 02:41, February 18, 2013 (UTC)


 * The offending user seems to have resurfaced.--Zxjkl (talk) 03:22, February 18, 2013 (UTC)

oh my god, not again...thanks for the notice! :), only Wikiacontribiturs, should only be allwed to look, not edit before they have made a wikia profile.--Perkins98 (talk) 03:29, February 18, 2013 (UTC)
 * They do more good than bad IMO, it's just the occasional troll that gives them a bad rep. Aleksandr the Great (talk) 04:23, February 18, 2013 (UTC)

Taken care of. If there are any more incidents from this guy, just keep posting them to this thread. -- Commdor (Talk) 06:40, February 18, 2013 (UTC)
 * can and will do--TW6464 (talk) 12:02, February 18, 2013 (UTC)

Overhaul to Mass Effect page.
I mentioned I was thinking of overhauling the Mass Effect page in order to make it more streamlined with the ME2 and ME3 pages - I.e referencing characters, gameplay, etc. If it goes down well I'll also update the ME2 page.

The thing is I have completed my proposed changes but wanted to put them somewhere on the site so an admin could evaluate them before I implemented them, but I'm not sure how - can you help? Is there a way to sandbox it on my talk page, or should I put it as a blog or forum post? I tried looking in the Manual of Style but wasn't really sure what I'm looking there for...Garhdo (talk) 02:14, February 19, 2013 (UTC)


 * You can create a personal sandbox page (ex. "User:Garhdo/Sandbox") and place your proposed overhaul there. -- Commdor (Talk) 03:10, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * Ok it's up. I'm fine for removing some of the Gameplay section if it's mentioned on other pages. The main changes have been made to the Plot section to streamline it with the ME3 page. Looking forward to admin input! Garhdo (talk) 03:16, February 19, 2013 (UTC)


 * Alright, I'll be sure to take a look at it and provide feedback tomorrow (have an exam to study for right now). -- Commdor (Talk) 03:44, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * No worries. I've got all the redlinks fixed except the references I took from Wikipedia, but they can be fixed if it gets implemented. Good luck in the exam, my friend. Garhdo (talk) 04:00, February 19, 2013 (UTC)

After taking that look, I decided to go ahead and carry out a cleanup and update of the Mass Effect article based on your proposed changes. The article was definitely in sore need of such an overhaul. The few touches of my own were one or two sections related to extant ME media (the Soundtrack, for instance), and I also trimmed down the Gameplay section to be more of an overview since we already have several guide-type pages that cover specific gameplay aspects in much greater detail. -- Commdor (Talk) 22:46, February 19, 2013 (UTC)


 * Awesome! Glad I could help. Permission to update and streamline the Mass Effect 2 and Mass Effect 3, and perhaps later the Galaxy and Infiltrator, pages to match these new changes? In fact some elements of the template could also be applied to the comic and novel pages I'm sure. I'll put the Mass Effect 2 page adjustments I've worked on so far in the sandbox later if you want to look? Garhdo (talk) 00:06, February 20, 2013 (UTC)

A question, my good man
I have a question: is it possible to make a template for the Mass Effect Infiltrator enemies something like the me3 enemies template? Could you please respond here: http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/User_blog:TW6464/Lack_of_ME:_Infiltrator_Content?s=wl#WikiaArticleComments --TW6464 (talk) 16:51, February 19, 2013 (UTC)


 * If you don't mind, I'm going to respond here (to keep a record of my response directly associated with this thread for later reference). We could do a template for Infiltrator's enemies, but we'd need to make sure we have all of the requisite info first. What are the different hit point indicators (Health, Shields, Barriers, other)? What weapons and powers/abilities do the enemies use? How do enemies vary in terms of resilience (how much health they have, and this compares between different enemies)? What locations in the game does each enemy unit appear at? If all of those variables can be figured out, we can see about using the gathered info to produce an infobox and propose its implementation to the community. -- Commdor (Talk) 23:00, February 19, 2013 (UTC)

Yet Another Vandal
One that can't spell. TheUnknown285 (talk) 19:16, February 19, 2013 (UTC)


 * Lancer has blocked him. -- Commdor (Talk) 23:00, February 19, 2013 (UTC)

thanks
Thanks for cleaning up the Turian Soldier page--TW6464 (talk) 23:42, February 19, 2013 (UTC)

Howdy...
I was actually just about to drop you a line when I saw you've edited one of the relevant pages. 4Fereldan asked me about the new category he created for ME Galaxy adversaries. It appears to be working, but he wasn't sure since it doesn't appear when you try to add categories. You have to type out the whole thing, and even then you need to refresh the page before it appears. Since the more technical aspect of the wiki was never my strong suit, I figured I'd run it by you. SpartHawg948 (talk) 20:30, February 20, 2013 (UTC)


 * That should just be the usual lag. It sometimes takes a few hours for new pages/categories/etc. to appear in the automatic link fill-in system thing (I'm not sure what the layman's term is :P). -- Commdor (Talk) 20:38, February 20, 2013 (UTC)


 * Cool. That's actually what I was thinking it might be, but again, this stuff isn't my strongest suit. SpartHawg948 (talk) 21:05, February 20, 2013 (UTC)

Reckoning and Citadel announced
http://blog.bioware.com/2013/02/21/mass-effect-3-citadel-reckoning-dlc-announced/ now can I make the pages?--TW6464 (talk) 17:00, February 21, 2013 (UTC)
 * That is currently my job. Lancer1289 (talk) 17:03, February 21, 2013 (UTC)
 * Aww.... I found it. JK, you're an admin, that's your job...--TW6464 (talk) 17:09, February 21, 2013 (UTC)
 * And I woke up just over an hour ago. Lancer1289 (talk) 17:14, February 21, 2013 (UTC)
 * 0_0... Didnt realize that... Sorry--TW6464 (talk) 17:28, February 21, 2013 (UTC)

Over Moderation
I'm seeing a trend. There are some poor administration policies in effect. I tried correcting false information = got shot down. Alphabetizing a list that was not in any organizational format = got shot down. Got both of them confirmed and approved = got shot down

Today = Added a one line game effect to a talent ability (AKA a missing game fact) = Hum a trend.

Today excuse? The moderate did not think it was necessary.

Its getting to the point where the only pages that succeed are the ones the praise the moderators. This is not a hate letter but this is ridiculous. We cant add a missing game fact without prior approval from every moderator? No wonder so much information is incorrect or missing.

I dont fault an admin for wanting discussion before change but the this is gone far beyond micro-managing. Game facts are facts. When it can be proven there should not be a debate or red tape. Its obvious a grate deal of correct information was offered to these pages only to be shot down by moderation dogma. Not to say that there should not be moderators, but proving a point should not take a Volus negotiator and an Asari attorney. If it can be proven in game then it belongs in the wiki.

Today's example. I noticed that someone question why they could use Assassinate when it was recharged and they where out of range from Dampening. The answer was obvious but probably no them. Sniper Rifles overheat all the time. While waiting to reuse the weapon most players will attempt to use powers. This stops the clock. Thus if the only time they are activating powers is while their sniper rifle is over heated then Assassination will be grayed out, even when fully recharged. I bet that issue drove the player nuts for sometime. It may have even turned them away from the sniper rifle.

As a result I added "Assassination can not be activated while the weapon is overheated."

Gasp the major change!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

A one line (small sentence) added to Assassination. A game fact. whats wrong with this picture?03:55, February 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * And this is incorrect and one very biased statement from someone who is not presenting the whole truth. You got one of those things approved, the incorrect data, but not the other, the major restructuring of the article. Changing the way the structure is organized from a system broken up by what the upgrades do to an alphabetical system is a major change to formatting and organization. It is also inconsistent with other pages where things are organized by what they do, what they are about, and what they derive from.
 * The talk page thing showed up just a half hour ago, where the edit being described was almost 4 hours ago. Big time difference and not was is being presented here. Now the circumstances around it are getting extremely suspicious. Even then, it might not even be related. Do not give false information, very incomplete information, or cherry-picked information, in two cases to someone else. Lancer1289 (talk) 04:08, February 23, 2013 (UTC)


 * Regardless; your interpretation of the system applies so much red tape and jumping through hoops for "MINOR CHANGES" (not yelling) hinders and discourages page progress. Its no wonder why the information is lacking or inadequacy.  As for that Big time difference.  There is such a thing as messengers.  People communicate.  Someone hand a question that was not on the pages so I added the information.  In my experience the 4th time someone asked me the same question.  I expected it to be on the pages.  It was in fact a game fact and it took up very little space to state.  Regardless you casually deleted.  Justification?
 * This is not a fight. You choose it to be a fight and your actions do not reflect good moderation.  You can cherry pick the issues as much as you like but on merit you lost the high ground.TellNo1 (talk) 06:14, February 23, 2013 (UTC)

Some technical stuff...
Now that some real work has finally started on the IOS games’ articles, I believe there are some technical issues to clarify.

Firstly, several enemies from mainstream games (Geth Trooper, Geth Juggernaut, Assault Trooper and Centurion) are also encountered in Infiltrator. Since the usual practice is to separate the article into sections, as was the case with Collector troops post-Retaliation. In this case, however, do we put the Infiltrator section before Mass Effect 3, as it occurs somewhat earlier in the timeline, or after, as ME3 is a more important game overall? There’s a similar dilemma with Stasis and Overload, which are present both in Galaxy and in mainstream games. It gets even better with abilities and equipment: should we split the abilities and equipment pages into their separate articles, or keep things as they are and instead add disambiguation messages to Incisor, Mattock, Eviscerator and Pull pages?

Then, the Infiltrator and the Galaxy enemies would eventually need their own infobox like the mainstream enemies. I have managed to extract the shield and health bar images from the game file, but I'm afraid I'll have to ask you or someone else to create the complete infobox. For the Galaxy, is it possible to make the shield bar go right above (but not over) the health bar, so that it would match the screenshots as seen [ign.com/articles/2009/06/23/mass-effect-galaxy-review here]?

Finally, I noticed that we have a Trooper disambiguation page when creating pages for Infiltrator. I believe we should also have Sniper, Engineer and Vanguard disambiguation pages, since those enemies are encountered almost as often as the trooper enemies. the current Engineer and Vanguard pages would then have to be moved to Engineer (class) and Vanguard (class), respectively.

Best regards. 4Ferelden (talk) 05:28, February 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Personally, I think that the standard for enemies of if they have the same name, then they go into the same article has been well established. BUT this becomes a problem with the second issue you pointed out.
 * When it comes to the powers, well that is where the problem happens. We have already established separate pages for the equipment and abilities, so it would seem that having separate pages for the equipment and powers in Infiltrator would be the way to go.
 * What I see is that the powers, weapons, armor, abilities, and enemies in the main games have similar ways of working, unlike the mobile games, which have to work differently for obvious reasons, which is why they are in the same article, but in different sections.
 * Overall, I think that because Infiltrator and Galaxy have different structure than the main games, and different ways of doing things. I think that the current structure of how they work should be fine for both mobile games unless they start to get too big, we just need to separate the enemies into different articles because having them all in one might get a bit unwieldy, however that should be tested first. On the other hand, I think the abilities and equipment should be fine as is. Sorry for the change in comment, but I didn't read carefully enough.
 * As to an info box, well that was probably going to happen anyway so feel free to start a work up though at least. Lancer1289 (talk) 05:40, February 23, 2013 (UTC)


 * Pretty much what Lancer said. Mobile game enemies get separate articles ("Geth Trooper (Mass Effect: Infiltrator)" and so on), abilities and equipment go into dedicated hub pages ("Abilities (Mass Effect Galaxy)", "Equipment (Mass Effect: Infiltrator)", etc.), and since you got the Infiltrator health bar assets we can see about making the enemy infoboxes (there's some technical stuff involved in health bar asset displaying that I'm not entirely adept at handling, but I'm sure we figure that out). As for the disambiguation pages, you can go ahead and make a "Sniper" disambiguation page, but I can't say I like the idea of turning "Vanguard" and "Engineer" into dedicated disambigs. Player classes are a fundamental part of gameplay in the trilogy, they define your character and your experience with the game. There are likely scores of articles that link to Vanguard and Engineer precisely because they need to link to that class information, so moving that info would require a considerable effort to update all of the links, and I doubt anyone goes to the Engineer and Vanguard pages expecting to find out about the Eclipse Vanguard or Senior Engineer enemies anyway. We can always add disambiguation links for the enemy pages to the top of the class pages (by my count, there are 5 enemies with Engineer in their title and 2 with Vanguard, so this method is still feasible for the time being) but I don't think there's any great need for or worthwhile benefit to moving the class articles out of their current titles in order to link to something of relatively lesser importance like common enemy units. If you disagree, the final decision will be up to the community via the requisite move discussions. -- Commdor (Talk) 06:26, February 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Perhaps we can take a leaf out of Wikipedia's book for the disamb pages. Because Engineer and Vanguard are key elements, the article titles should stay as they are. However, instead of having each enemy listed in a long message, we could do something like:
 * This page is about the Engineer Class. For other users of the word "Engineer" see "Engineer (disambiguation)"
 * And create said disamb page with all of the enemies using it, other things that use Engineer, and of course back to the page itself. I think this might get us around certain issues and perhaps even reduce the amount of Disamb messages as we wouldn't have as many of them, and maybe even cut down on the amount of text in others. Lancer1289 (talk) 06:41, February 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, that would do quite nicely. Also, I re-read your first response and mine, and I confused myself. Do we agree that mobile game enemy units get separate pages, or do we not (I'm in favor of separate)? I think we're on the same page with everything else. -- Commdor (Talk) 06:45, February 23, 2013 (UTC)
 * Clarification: Yes I do believe that enemy articles should be separated because of the amount of them. A single article for all of them would get cluttered quickly.
 * Sorry been playing KotOR. Lancer1289 (talk) 06:48, February 23, 2013 (UTC)

let me just butt in and say that if an MEi/MEG enemybox is to be made the proper color schemes should be set up in our MediaWiki:Wikia.css. we regular peons can't access it. i noticed the spoiler tag for MEi is some variant of green, maybe we can start things from there (no idea how MEG's interface looks like though).

minor disclaimer: i ain't volunteering for the job of actually making the boxes, just helping out where i can T̴̴͕̲̞̳̖̼̱͒͛̎͒ͫ̃ͧeͩ̈̽̈҉͓̝̰̼̦̫̤̀͠m̫̪̪̯̻͎̫̅̇̓̇͌̚p̸̙̝̓̓͌ͨ͆ͣͥ̂̕o͒̽͐̽͏̞̬̻͕͔͕͚̰͍͠͞ṙ̢̞͚͈̹̰ͨ̓ͭ̈́̌ạ̢̧̪̹̺̺̣̹̲͂͆̏ͪͨ͒ͭř̹͈͜͠y̷͍̻̜̹̼̾̽̈́e̵̹̼̟̦͚͐̈́͌͘d͉̲̣̻͉̱͗̅ḭ̷̻̆͋̆̓̔͝t̨͍̦̫̗͂̅̍̋̆ͩ͝ộ̫̟̬̳̝̲̾ͫ̒̿ͮ̑̚rͯ̎ͨͭ̄̿̽͛҉̠̫̱̠̘̘̲́ͅ7̩̻ͤͩͨ͝͡8̜̣̙͇̻ͨ͛͛̆͒̆̽̒͐͜͡ ͥ̍̉̃̇ͥ̓ͨ͏̕҉̥̹͓̗̤̠̖̤ (talk) 06:49, February 23, 2013 (UTC)


 * First can we please stop using the lines? They just cause formatting issues and really don't do much apart from make things a bit harder to read IMO. They also look unsightly. I don't know when someone started using them, because no one has, and I don't think it should continue.
 * As to the CSS code, you can create the code in your own css file. "User:[Name]/Wikia.css", which you can use to test, then everyone copies to theirs to see, then to the main if approved. This is how that has worked in the past. Lancer1289 (talk) 06:52, February 23, 2013 (UTC)


 * I use lines sometimes.... But yeah, it'll be no problem to add in the CSS code to the wiki page once we get the infobox design finalized. We've done it before. -- Commdor (Talk) 06:56, February 23, 2013 (UTC)