User talk:SpartHawg948

User:SpartHawg948/archive1

ME 2 Talk Page clean up
Would it be pertinent at this time to get rid of a good chunk of the topics on the talk page? It's beginning to get rather long, cluttered and seems to repeat itself quite often, there's a talk for Tali and one for a quarian squad member, two concerning the Normandy and its fate, and overall a lot of topics that have direct sources in the article and are redundant such as ones concerning importing Shepards and romances from the first game there's also ones about box art and release dates which are moot. So is a clean up necessary or a good idea?--Xaero Dumort 03:00, October 17, 2009 (UTC)


 * At the moment, I would say no. Once it has released, we can take a look at it. For starters, issues like the box art, release date, import and romance stuff are believed to be moot or redundant. We won't know for sure though till it releases. Things can change quite drastically over the course of a few months. Same w/ the Tali and squad member stuff. It is unresolved, so at the moment I would not really feel comfortable going in and changing it. Also, when the time comes, I don't believe we should just "get rid" of the items on the talk page. It should be archived. SpartHawg948 10:16, October 17, 2009 (UTC)


 * Archived of course, I understand that. Alright, no problem then. I was just curious as it was feeling cluttered to me. Thanks for the response.--Xaero Dumort 17:53, October 17, 2009 (UTC)


 * Didn't want to start a new talk for this, just wanted to say thanks for wording that edit about husks and geth better and yeah I realize that it was one offensive in which they lost, but I wasn't sure how to state their return to the Perseus Veil after the battle without spoiling ME, as I know a lot of people haven't played the first who will be playing this, and as I type I realize it wouldn't really matter would it as they would learn the back story when they start ME2. Ha. Thanks again Spart.--Xaero Dumort 19:54, October 20, 2009 (UTC)


 * No problem! After all, I am here to help! :) SpartHawg948 21:59, October 20, 2009 (UTC)

Desicions
By desicions will be transferred will that mean like the assingments as well or just the more important stuff like Virmire and the romance subplot?--Matt xMan 21:52, October 20, 2009 (UTC)


 * Now, bear in mind that this is just an opinion, as I don't know for sure, but I believe that it mainly refers to the important choices (Virmire, the rachni, maybe the asari commando from Feros, romance, etc...), but there may also be some stuff from "less critical" assignments that carries over too. Maybe even stuff like the consort, Samesh Bhatia, stuff like that. We'll just have to wait and see to know for sure. SpartHawg948 22:02, October 20, 2009 (UTC)

ME2 Tali squad changes again
I saw that changes were made, and I looked at the direct source link provided, and while it seems as though they are stating Tali is part of the squad, the wording still isn't definitive, thought I would let you know if you hadn't seen so you could make a judgment call. Here is the "Source". I hadn't checked the links in previous alterations, but I'm sure this is the same one that keeps getting spammed.


 * Yup. This is the same one everyone else uses. It states Tali will return in the game. That's it. They don't say anything about Tali being a squad member. And as I have also pointed out, in the paragraph before the one where it is confirmed Tali will be in the game, Mr Lee says not to make assumptions based on the tiny amount of info that had been released. So no, they do not state at any time that Tali is part of the squad. SpartHawg948 11:51, October 21, 2009 (UTC)


 * Thought I signed the first post, whoops. Just got pointed to two more forum posts, one with a marketing manager saying Tali is a squad member scroll down a bit or Ctrl+F "E3 (demo)" and this one from Patrick Weekes, talking about writing for Tali and another unrevealed squad member Again scroll or Ctrl+F "murkiness". What do you think? Enough to put it as definite as it comes from two sources of the company? And I put the Ctrl+F parts cuz I couldn't figure out how to single out the post, and thought they would take you quickly to the point.--Xaero Dumort 19:31, October 21, 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm seems Wilsonator went ahead and made the change, and he seems pretty on the ball so, I guess just take a look when you get a chance.--Xaero Dumort 20:16, October 21, 2009 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. It's sourced, I'm happy. All I ever wanted was for a valid source to back up the claims, and we now seem to have it. SpartHawg948 21:52, October 21, 2009 (UTC)

RE:User Page Comments
I understand now that it was a poor attempt at humor, and will let it go. However, alleging that I had questioned whether you "REALLY LOVE Mass Effect" (which of course is what you entitled this thread" certianly is putting words in my mouth. So is alledging that I suggested your response was "violent and hostile" when I of course did nothing of the sort. I am sorry, but I do not take kindly at all to people putting words in my mouth. SpartHawg948 04:37, October 22, 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok....I know this argument is pretty much over, but I just want to say something. To quote Liara..."You must think I am a complete and utter fool!"...I had no idea what I was talking about. I can see I had a typo in the "My Home Page" and I am a dumbass (sorry if swears aren't allowed). It is pretty funny!--Colinissile 22:34, October 27, 2009 (UTC)--Colinissile 22:34, October 27, 2009 (UTC)
 * Hooray! That's all I was driving at, was that I found it funny that your user page stated you were a "huge Mass Effect". I was trying to point it out to be helpful, but to make it humorous instead of sounding rude or condescending. Well, it's all cleared up now, so again, Hooray! SpartHawg948 02:20, October 28, 2009 (UTC)

Normandy SR-2
I can't seem to post it on the site and make it clear, but if you search through the screenshots that have been released, you'll come across one that has Than standing in front of the ship. It is sort of distorted, but you can clearly make out Normandy and SR2 on the hull. Thanks for the warning though. --Jdunn1 02:53, October 28, 2009 (UTC)
 * This one? The SR-2 is definitely clear, but I sure can't make out Normandy. I can make out an N, then after that everything is pretty indistinct. There are plenty of other battles that start w/ the letter N. So until something clearer is released, I'm gonna have to chalk this up as speculation. However, if you were referring to another image, please let me know. SpartHawg948 06:30, October 28, 2009 (UTC)

Reaper Theory
I agree, it's nice to have an intelligent debate. As to the theory, my counter-points are as follows:


 * As per the analogy, you have to remember your transplanting your mind/soul/whatever into this baby. Your old body is dying, but your new one isn't.


 * There is no proof that it occurs every 50000 years, I know, I've checked.


 * The quantum mechanics is needed for less intelligent people who don't understand why energy beings can't exist today. To a smart and creative person, this is common sense.


 * Here's the thing: If you were a 5000 mile long, potentially 13 billion year old dreadnought, how long do you think it would take for you to tear apart things like the Citadel and the several hundered relays, and rebuild something to replace them, but fill the same highly generic role, while filling a different specific role? And how do we know that the Citadel and Relays the Protheans know to be the same? They were possibly similar to the Conduit, either small, planet bound, and vertical, or large, planet bound, and vertical? The Reapers would have likely torn these apart during thier last little visit, and built the relays we know before they left. As to the Citadel, why replace something that works perfectly? The Conduit was likely a Prothean pre-ME relay, and they went to Ilos with normal FTL. I know this is a lot of "likelies", but its a theory.


 * Addressing the EXTINCTION, they seek the EXTINCTION of sentient ORGANICS, while they CREATE sentient SYNTHEICS out of THEM. LOL.

I hope this proves my point. If not, please respond. I could go for some more debating.

--Nra &#39;Vadumee 21:15, November 6, 2009 (UTC)


 * I recently completed another ME playthrough, and with Sovereign's voice fresh in my head, I have to say that it disproved my theory to an extent. Also, your right, It is more like theoretical astrophysics (my prefered field), however, I'm used to less intelligent people in my conversations, so I tend to call my prefered fields something they're used to (i.e. "astrobiology" rather then the more appropriate xenobiology). However, the more theoretical portions still stand. My points:


 * While difficult, I can explain it. Realistically, after the Reapers created thier bodys, they would transfer thier energy into the ship's reactor, jumpsarting it with themselves, and downloading thier conscious into the ship's computer(s). Analogically, try to imagine draining your brain of energy, killing your body, while somehow (this is for physical beings; its easy for energy beings)) preserving your mind. Then, you jump start the clinically dead infant body with the brain power, and download your mind into the body. Bingo! You're free from a dying body.


 * Again, I recently finished ME again. I recall most of the scenes with Liara, and not once do I recall her saying it happened roughly every 50,000 years.

While I admit semi-defeat, half my theory is still neutral: It cannot be proven nor disproven. If I'm wrong, then prove it.

--Nra &#39;Vadumee 20:53, November 8, 2009 (UTC)

You didn't read the entire above entry, did you. Read it thoroughly. I admitted defeat, to an extent. I remember the conversation with Sovereign quite well, and it disproved much of my original theory (I hadn't played ME in a few months when I first posted). However, I did state that a few points were impossible to prove or disprove, you need to prove that it is not neutral. The points you mentioned I admitted that were false and disproven. I've rested my case.

--Nra &#39;Vadumee 23:26, November 8, 2009 (UTC)

No offense intended, but your intelligence seems to surpass your commen sense. I had assumed that since these points were not involved, you would add 2 and 2 together. The points you mentioned, relating to the knowledge that Soveriegn says but not explains, I said were false, and so they were ejected from my theory, making quite neutral. No one can prove nor disprove it (with the obvious exception of a BioWare employee) with current knowledge. We will likely have to wait until Mass Effect 2 comes out, and if Bioware tantalizes its players, we will have to wait for the legendary Mass Effect 3 (I like the sound of that...like Halo 3, it gives you a sense of absoluteness of completetion) to give us enough information to either foward or disprove this theory. Until then, I see no point in continuing this debate.

--Nra &#39;Vadumee 22:34, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

That wasn't ment to insult you. I won't bring it up more, since my lack of contact with human culture may lead me to "insult" you furthur (I do get out often, but that doesn't mean I socially interact much.). As to my theory, I see no reason to modify what remains of it in any way. By discharging the points refering to "recent" events, i.e, those relating to the Prothean extinction, I do not need to alter the points referring to the young universe time. In other words, destroying the top of a building (the recent events) doesn't destroy the foundation (the ancient events). I wasn't "dodging", I was explaining in a way you may not have understood (thats not an insult, just a statement referring to the idea that I may have miscommunicated). Also, Tullis is right, if we continue this debate, we should move it to the forums. But, like I said, until we have more knowledge and better understanding of the Reapers, we cannot go any further with my theory. Anything else?

--Nra &#39;Vadumee 23:39, November 16, 2009 (UTC)


 * Sigh... the scientific method maintains that once evidence that disproves a theory is presented, the theory must by necessity be modified accordingly, else it will be know as disproved. But I suppose that doesn't really mean anything these days, does it? Any further attempts to attain a victory in the name of science, reason and rationalism will obviously be the equivalent of banging my head against a wall, as there is no way to prevail against someone who refuses to apply the scientific method to their theory.
 * And on a related note, does anyone else out there see a way in which "your intelligence seems to surpass your common sense" is not insulting? Maybe I'm just missing something? My superiors in the Air Force regularly commend my common sense, which is, in fact, not that common these days. Of course, I am also the one who realizes that the scientific method is not a sometimes thing, that it is necessary in the formulation of ANY theory, so maybe the lack of common sense is not on this end? SpartHawg948 02:09, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

User 92.10.200.91 and Legion
I somehow stumbled upon what you wrote on this guy's talk page. I'll start by saying 'what an a$$', and finish by thanking you for the response. Good to see there's smart, decent, and sensible people running the place. Phylarion 21:27, November 6, 2009 (UTC)


 * Hey, I do what I can! I don't take kindly to that crap around here, and appreciate being referred to as smart, decent and sensible. :) SpartHawg948 10:30, November 7, 2009 (UTC)

Titles and formatting
Apologies if I trod on anyone's toes regarding the formatting - I was under the impression that it was best avoided in titles so I decided to "correct" it. Part of the reason I did so was that the titles were left-justified when I originally looked at the article, so I assumed the added HTML code was in error. In hindsight, I guess it was probably just one of those odd caching problems you see with Wikia now and then. --vom 08:16, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

RE: Legion Source
http://pc-mmo.nowgamer.com/previews/pc-mmo/644/mass-effect-2?o=0#listing There's the Legion source.

LordDeathRay (Comm Chatter)  03:50, November 28, 2009 (UTC)


 * Ummm... thanks? I don't recall ever asking for it, as I have seen it several times already. However, as has been stated here and here, this source is considered unreliable. That's the crux of the issue right now. We need a reliable source stating whether or not Legion will be a squad member, which I stated in the edit comments. Legion's existence was never in doubt. So, thanks again for linking something I never asked for that ultimately advanced this issue not one iota! :P SpartHawg948 09:15, November 28, 2009 (UTC)

Trivia adjustment
The monolith is a device which induces evolutionary jumps. The vision is of data off a data recorder. There's no reference going on. We've installed video recorders on turtles, so there's solid precedent. 24.62.83.8 19:57, November 28, 2009 (UTC)


 * Fair enough! Now see, if that had been in the edit summary box in the first place, I would have had no problems with it. SpartHawg948 20:02, November 28, 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually though, now that I think about it, in the film the monolith was all about evolution, but in the original novel, wasn't the monolith for observation and alteration? SpartHawg948 20:06, November 28, 2009 (UTC)

It's observational capability was for allowing remote operation rather than anthropological study. 24.62.83.8 09:06, November 29, 2009 (UTC)


 * Are you sure? Pretty sure the monoliths were intended to search for intelligent life and then, if possible, encourage development of said life. In which case there is definitely a similarity. SpartHawg948 09:25, November 29, 2009 (UTC)

Spelling
Alright, thanks for the explanation, I'll keep that in mind. :)--Mytharox 23:19, November 28, 2009 (UTC)

Not to mince words, but...
You're wrong. There are a number of times in the game you have the option to introduce yourself as an Alliance Marine, and at any rate, "soldier" is an improper arbitrary designation for a naval infantry officer or enlisted man; the correct term is "marine" or "sailor," depending on branch, or MOS as it appears to function in Mass Effect, with their Marines simply being a different occupational category. The game makes no mention at all of "soldiers."


 * If I'm wrong, then why was Shepard an XO on a warship, a warship that also has a Marine Detail commander, Kaidan Alenko? Speaking of arbitrary designations, how about marine? Soldier is a generalized term for someone serving in an armed service. Shepard would seem to qualify, wouldn't you agree? And how about the fact that the Spacer background mentions that your parents were both Alliance Navy (Navy, not marines) and at the age of eighteen you followed in their footsteps? Not to mince words, but you are wrong in stating it would be improper to refer to Shepard as a soldier, which again, is a more generalized term for a service-member than marine, as evidenced by it's definition "soldier- a person engaged in military service." Pretty straightforward, that. SpartHawg948 04:35, November 30, 2009 (UTC)

I quote from the "assignment complete" dialog given after completing the mission on Nodacrux: "Exogeni's second-rate mercs proved no match for a trained Alliance Marine. With the last of the science crew dead, there's no reason to linger here." You have to keep in mind that although customs and courtesies and some general terminology remain the same in the Mass Effect universe as compared to contempory military forces, it appears a great deal has changedwith regards to rank structure and command billets. And "Oops" for not signing my last post. Great wiki, by the way, a lot of good info on here. 65.188.211.244 22:32, December 1, 2009 (UTC)


 * Again though, as I point out... there is NOTHING wrong with calling him a soldier as opposed to small "m" marine (as the quote refers to Marine, as in the service). Again, "soldier- a person engaged in military service." Wait a second... doesn't that definition match Commander Shepard to a T? Pretty sure it does! :P SpartHawg948 23:07, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

You know, maybe, just maybe, the writers have made a mistake and been inconsistent with regards to what Shepard is? It wouldn't be the first time they made a mistake. Since that's possible and it's not 100% on what he is, the generic 'soldier' should suffice. JakePT 00:59, December 2, 2009 (UTC)


 * Indeed! That's why I wanted to stick with soldier! It's a general, all-around, works no matter what term. SpartHawg948 05:08, December 2, 2009 (UTC)

Capitalising "commander"
I know Commander is a military rank, but here it's being used as a substitute for a male-female pronoun. It's in lower case throughout the wiki when used as such, and frankly it looks really odd if it's capitalised. It draws attention to the fact we're keeping it gender-neutral. Don't we normally keep ranks lower-case when we're referring to, say, "the admiral's family"?

Also, I added it in the Style Guide as being lower-case, so shouldn't this have been addressed well before now? : ) --Tullis 13:48, November 30, 2009 (UTC)


 * Honestly, never really noticed it in the style guide. As for the admiral's family, that one is lowercase b/c it isn't a direct reference to the individual in question. Referring to the Commander is such a direct reference. And honestly, wouldn't it be a good thing to bring attention to the gender-neutral referencing (not that I really think it does, any more than when you see say, General Petraeus referred to by name in one part of an article and then as the General later on)? People seem to forget that around here. Anywho, at the end of the day, military ranks are earned honorifics, and as a service-member I would prefer to see said honorifics acknowledged properly by correct use of capitalization. I will, however, hold off on making any more edits for the moment till we reach some sort of consensus. SpartHawg948 20:22, November 30, 2009 (UTC)
 * Soooo... thoughts? SpartHawg948 01:37, December 1, 2009 (UTC)
 * I think the problem is, we're up against different military cultures here : ) . My brother's a captain whether he's the captain or the Captain (though to be honest, normally he's just known as "boss"). To me, giving someone their honorific is more important than whether it has a capital letter or not. If I was one of Shepard's marines, I'd likely speak (and write) the Commander out of respect, but I have to say it sounds much too formal for our purposes. However, I imagine one who's earned the rank has strong and differing views on the topic.
 * I checked elsewhere but the Elements of Style has nothing useful concerning this, unfortunately--unusual, it's normally my go-to book for grammar. Doh. Thoughts? --Tullis 01:58, December 1, 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that's my POV on this issue... it's something that is most definitely an earned honorific, and after all, military ranks are made to sound formal. That's why it's Commander Shepard, and Admiral Ahern, and Captain Anderson, as opposed to admiral Ahern or whatev. I mean, there's precedent. Why do we refer to the Council as the "Council" and not the "council"? It's to distinguish them. There's a difference between a commander (someone who comnmands something) and a Commander (someone who holds the rank of Commander or Lieutenant Commander). That's where I'm coming from here. SpartHawg948 02:18, December 1, 2009 (UTC)
 * Discussion continues here. --Tullis 15:56, December 8, 2009 (UTC)

Mass Effect Fan Wiki...
Hey, I've been on the Mass Effect Fanon, I like to call it, and it's not very social like. I mean Halo Fanon has tons and tons of users. I've been on the ME Fanon a few times and it's not as, y'know, social as ME Wiki. Could'nt you guys, like, promote Fanon? I'm just asking, I'm not forcing. --Matt xMan 05:42, December 1, 2009 (UTC)


 * Can you provide a link to it so I can check it out before making a call on it? SpartHawg948 05:44, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

Here ya go: http://masseffectfanfiction.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page. You could'v also found it on the Related Communities box. Should we put it on the news, talk page or what? --Matt xMan 05:52, December 1, 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, it's not news... so not there... and no offense, but based on the content I really wouldn't feel comfortable with it being in one of the main articles. Why not post it on your user and/or user talk page, maybe start a blog or forum about it or something? SpartHawg948 07:05, December 1, 2009 (UTC)


 * I know this is an old post, but it's on topic, so I'm going to update my response and say that, No. As long as I have any say in the matter whatsoever, this wiki will not in any way, shape, or form promote the Mass Effect Fan Fiction Wiki. I have been over there and seen the way it is run and I am appalled. I will, of course, do nothing to stop people from promoting it on their own user pages, but I cannot in good conscience condone using the "official" sections of this site to promote them and send our editors their way. SpartHawg948 01:33, December 24, 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, I had a nice discussion with one of the other admins over there, and the situation was resolved quite nicely. So, the jury is still out on whether or not we'll actively promote them here or not, but I am certainly more favorably disposed towards them than I was when I wrote the previous post! :) SpartHawg948 06:01, December 25, 2009 (UTC)

Talk Page etiquette Response
OK, OK I get it. It's not my fault though, it's how he said. He made it sound like he doubts the whole dismembermant thing and he seen any gameplay vids and by the way I did re-read it and it still sounds the same. Mabey not as much as the first time reading but it sounds the same. I hate to be rude, but I don't care if you agree or not but yeah. Finally, though does it really matter? I shouldn't even matter in my opinion. Like the rest of us, I've seen the gameplay and I've seen that their bodies can come off. My opinion, and yes I'm putting this on the talk page, their the only adversaries that body parts can be blown off. I think that the humans can be targeted too, but not blown off. Mabey they'll drag an blood might come out, unless head was targeted. Mabey the geth as well can have parts blown off but we'll have to wait for that. So, whoo(!), with that said, I'll try do better next time.--Matt xMan 00:04, December 7, 2009 (UTC)


 * Wowee! Well, for starters, Ocd said "My understanding is that ME2 includes location specific damage (targeting heads/limbs) as a universal mechanism, so it would hardly be notable that you can target and disable specific limbs of the LOKI mech." Notice how nothing in there says anything about not being able to blow a LOKI's limbs off, just that it maybe isn't too noteworthy. Weird. Isn't that exactly the point I was trying to make? It sure was! Also, I could honestly care less whether you care or not. I'm not gonna try and not be rude. I really don't care what your opinion is, which I freely admit. I bring it up, however, because rude or insulting comments towards other users on talk pages CAN get you blocked, which is why I suggested not calling other users wrong for expressing an opinion. SpartHawg948 00:38, December 7, 2009 (UTC)

It's a free country. Stop useing vinlifying assertions because I'm certanly not. It's in our first amendment, you should know that since you're in the air force. Like you, I'm just stating what I think is right. Oh, by the way I DON'T CARE THAT YOU BOLDED! Guess what "ADMIN" anyone can do it. --Matt xMan 01:46, December 7, 2009 (UTC) (PS. Thank you, I love ranting)


 * Really? ANYONE can put text in bold? No way! I had no way of knowing that! It's not like you did it before me or anything! Whoa! Cool! Turns out though, that not just ANYONE can take a joke, as that's what my bold text usage was meant as. Also, vinfliying? Not sure what that means. I know I never claimed you were doing anything involving vinyl. And crazy thing. The first amendment does cover freedom of speech. However, in this free country of ours, private organizations ARE allowed to regulate speech to conform with their own rules, regulations and by-laws. This is a well-established principle of American constitutional law. That's why we have rules here, including the one about how rude or insulting comments towards other users can get you blocked. I know this since I'm in the Air Force, where free speech is very regulated. Again, all I ask is that you please not call other users wrong for stating their opinions. Not a hard concept to grasp. SpartHawg948 01:55, December 7, 2009 (UTC)

Fine, whatever. I'm over this. --Matt xMan 02:19, December 7, 2009 (UTC)


 * Fair enough. Frankly, not sure what there is to get over, as all this started as me just requesting that you please refrain from calling other users wrong for expressing an opinion. As long as that happens, I'm happy. All the other stuff was introduced to this by you, and I merely answered with my usual overwhelming logic, which if I may say so myself, seems to have won the day! :P SpartHawg948 02:23, December 7, 2009 (UTC)

You vs Matt xMan
You and Matt xMan really seem to hate each other. Why? --FernanMan 14:14, December 7, 2009 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I don't know what's going on here, but is there any way you two can resolve this? --Tullis 15:16, December 7, 2009 (UTC)


 * As far as I know it was resolved last night. He made some comments I thought untoward, so I asked him to refrain, pointing out that calling someone wrong based solely on an opinion was not appropriate. He has, unintentionally I'm sure, had a rather spotty edit history which has caused him to receive numerous corrections and such from myself and other admins, and I guess this was one too many for him, as he lashed out at me. And I don't handle being lashed out at for no reason very well, so while I tried to avoid being goaded into something, my words may have served to escalate the situation a bit. Regardless, the situation seems to have been resolved for oh, about 19 hours or so, so not sure why this is even being brought up, as I find that reminders of past disputes only serve to stoke old fires. So maybe let's not ask why two people "really seem to hate each other" when 1) Nothing could be further from the truth (I don't hate him in the least) and 2) The dispute in question was resolved some time ago. Thanks. SpartHawg948 21:17, December 7, 2009 (UTC)


 * My apologies. I mentioned it because I seem to keep seeing flare-ups periodically on talk pages over different issues, and I'd rather such discussions be kept to email if possible. But if it's been resolved, that's good enough for me. Thanks. --Tullis 21:27, December 7, 2009 (UTC)


 * Fair enough... not to sound like I'm trying to start something else here (fingers crossed!) but my comments about not bringing up resolved issues were more directed at FerenMan, a new editor who seems to have created an account solely for the purpose (thus far anyway) of bringing up a resolved but still somewhat contentious dispute, and that rarely ends well, which is why I tried to nip it in the bud. SpartHawg948 21:30, December 7, 2009 (UTC)

Well, I'm not here to edit, though I sometimes edit for Halo, Fallout, and Fable. I'm actually Matt's cousin and he told me about what happened. I read the talk page and no offense but when you puted the whole "I can bold words too" I think he thought you were trying to to insult him. Something that he doesn't really like, like you hate being lashed out. Some of the stuff you said made it sound like you were a gloating know-it-all. And last but not least, when you said "Really? ANYONE can put text in bold? No way! I had no way of knowing that! It's not like you did it before me or anything! Whoa! Cool!" I'm sorry, man, but you sounded like a jackass. Look I'm not just saying all this because I'm helping a family member out. I'm not fighting for him if that's what your thinking, I'm just trying to find out why and by reading what happened it's no wonder wh you guys got into a argument. I'm just hope you guys just get along and stop arguing over a game. ( Yes I know edit video game wiki sites but I never got into an argumen, but you know where I'm getting at). So until we meet again, bye. --FernanMan 22:26, December 7, 2009 (UTC)


 * Ok, if this can of worms is getting opened again, 1) The I can bold too thing was a joke. He had himself previously bolded words, which is why I said I can bold TOO (too as in addition to) which made it downright hilarious when he came back and said, so what! anyone can bold! Talk about a Captain Obvious sighting! I was so incredulous when he said that, that I had to respond the way I did. I mean, come on. It was so blatantly obvious (and should have been even more so to him, as he was the one who started bolding words). As for sounding like a know-it-all, all I was trying to do is inform him that it's not cool to respond to someone else stating their opinion with "you're wrong". That is a total dick move right there. I tried to inform him of that, and then he lashed out at me. If he can't play nice with other editors and can't take a joke, I hate to say it, but maybe this site isn't for him.
 * And see? This is why I didn't want to bring this up again! I tried to nip it in the bud, and it should have stayed at that. But no, instead the first individual had to inform me that he is Matt's cousin, and then reopen the issue. Why can't people just let sleeping dogs lie? If you aren't here to fight your cousin's battle, than it should be clear to you that I never intended things to go this far. Matt's tone in his first response "Thanks Spart for correcting me again" is what got this going. I wasn't correcting him, just asking him not to call other users wrong for expressing opinions, but he started acting like a little kid about it. Regardless, I didn't want this brought up again in the first place, so please, I beg of you, NO MORE COUSINS!!! SpartHawg948 23:16, December 7, 2009 (UTC)

Apology
Look, dude I'm sorry about this whole argument. Look, I heard him wrong and I simply thought he meant that he didn't see any of the gameplay footage. It just made it sound like you were corecting. It wasn't that big a deal anyway. If that was a "dick-move" I would have puted "Dude, your an idot" or "Don't be stupid". There's more dick moves than you besides I put "No offense" so what was the problem. I thought as long as you put that that was fine. It's not like he was complaining and lastly it's kind of hard not fair for me to take a "joke" when it's all in text. So I can't tell a person's emotions in text. So I just wanted to end by saing I'm sorry and because I'm worried if this got on, it would've been the same argument me and CommanderTony (of Halopedia) had while back. So yeah, I'm sorry. --Matt xMan 05:01, December 8, 2009 (UTC)


 * Fair enough. I have no idea whatsoever who CommanderTony is or what any of that is about (and no, I don't care), but I WILL NOT tolerate people telling other editors they are wrong for expressing an opinion. As for no offense, no, you can't just put that in front to make something not offensive. I can say all kinds of horrible things, end with no offense, and you would still be offended. I can give you examples, in fact. A little ways up this very page some guy said to me "No offense intended, but your intelligence seems to surpass your common sense." He said no offense, but it was clearly an insult. As for whether I was correcting you, as you thought, I said "Please in the future don't make statements toward other users such as you're wrong when they are, in fact, not wrong." I don't see anything in there that sounds like a correction. Finally, as to whether or not my bold comments were a joke or not, I thought the smiley face made it pretty clear. "No problem Matt! Happy to help, again (I can do bold words too!) :)" Isn't that the entire point of emotes, to convey emotion over text? That's why I included it, so you could get a sense of the nature in which the comment was meant, since it is all just text. Please though, in the future read other users' comments thoroughly and don't respond to someone else's opinion with "Well, no offense guy but your wrong." That is just not called for. Thanks, SpartHawg948 05:22, December 8, 2009 (UTC)

Sorry to bug you, but...
Hey Spart, sorry to bug you, but can you check out this Klixen page? I got on, and an unregistered user added it. He said it was revealed in Game Informer Issue 201, but it's not showing up on the site. I may be totally wrong, but it just sounds a little made up. I didn't know what to do about it, so I just brought it up to you. Thanks :) Effectofthemassvariety 05:44, December 9, 2009 (UTC)


 * Yeah, sure thing! And no worries about bothering me, it's what I'm here for! SpartHawg948 05:50, December 9, 2009 (UTC)


 * Update: As of now, it does appear to be (at least somewhat) substantiated, so basically I'm gonna clean the article a bit, I will nominate it for deletion pending sources, as it is unsourced and as yet all the substantiation is still referring me to the magazine, and I will attempt to get my hands on a copy to verify for sure. SpartHawg948 05:57, December 9, 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for looking into it. :) Effectofthemassvariety 06:05, December 9, 2009 (UTC)


 * No problem! Thanks for bringing it to my attention! I probably wouldn't have noticed it on my lonesome. I'm not feeling very observant at the moment. SpartHawg948 06:11, December 9, 2009 (UTC)


 * Haha. Yeah, I know what you mean. Effectofthemassvariety 06:30, December 9, 2009 (UTC)
 * Hey, maybe you've seen, maybe not, but check out this link

again. They've included scans of the actual article from the actual mag. Effectofthemassvariety 01:08, December 10, 2009 (UTC)

Hey
Hey, I just wanted to say thank you for the welcome and I hope I can find a place in this little community. I have actually been using the site for well over 6 months now and have been incredibly impressed so far. I just hope my opinion adds something to the discussion. --Jax Montag 08:26, December 11, 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your edits on Kal'Reegar
Still pretty new to this wiki, so thanks for the edits. Also I have no clue how to do a 'Redirect' so you can go to that page by just typing Kal instead of Kal'Reegar etc. The reason for the character box is just to get a head start, so to speak, because a character being voiced by Adam Baldwin is bound to get a lot of attention soon enough.


 * No problem, it's my job, after all. Also, no need to do that redirect. if you type Kal into the search box, you'll see Kal'Reegar. After all, no other character has redirects based on just their first name (ie, if you enter Donnel you aren't redirected to Donnel Udina) so no need for a thus-far minor character to get a special redirect. And just because the character is voiced by Adam Baldwin, that's no reason to assume the character will be major enough to warrant an info box. After all, Michael Hogan (who is arguably as big as or bigger than Mr Baldwin in the SciFi world atm) is also voicing a character, as is Michael Dorn, and it doesn' appear that either of them will be major enough for infoboxes either. Also, please remember to sign your posts, which can be done by entering four tildes (this guy ~) at the end of the post. Thanks, SpartHawg948 06:19, December 12, 2009 (UTC)

Kal'Reegar
Ja, soon enough he'll get that character box either way. Anyway the 'Redirecting' the reason I asked you about this is because i've tried just 'Kal' instead of 'Kal'Reegar' and the thing draws a blank and since he doesn't warrant enough momentum to have a redirect would maybe spacing, like so, "Kal 'Reegar" be easier to find the character or will he just be hidden as Kal'Reegar until warranted a redirect? Not that its a big problem I just know that I, myself don,t take the time to type, for example, Tali'Zorah in the search box and instead just Tali it up. --Wehrmacht007 06:36, December 12, 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, A) we don't know that he'll get a character box. I for one don't believe it will happen, but we'll see. B) again, there isn't going to be a redirect because one is not necessary. We do not do redirects for partial names except in a few rare circumstances. He won't be "hidden" because if you are looking for info about him, you probably know his name already. Also, it should be easy enough to find him thanks to links from other pages. C) is there a source for the claim that he fights alongside Shepard? I have yet to see one. There is an un-named quarian in a red suit fighting alongside Shepard in the Stars of Mass Effect 2 video, but he is not named and never speaks, so there is no way to confirm if this is Kal or not. If there is no source, then it is speculation. SpartHawg948 06:41, December 12, 2009 (UTC)

A ok
Still new to the Wiki regs, so if whatever needs whatever I'll remember next time. Oh and I still stand by him getting a character box soon enough if characters like Conrad Verner and random alien Diplomats get one then it's a no brainer that a character voiced by a somewhat major actor and appears to be a somewhat major character in ME2 will get a character box as soon as a character pic is released. haha ^^ Last sentence ment to sound kind heartedly and not like a stubborn fool. Thanks again. --Wehrmacht007 06:52, December 12, 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, now I'm confused. Conrad Verner doesn't have an info box. As for random alien diplomat, not sure who that is but the only name that comes to mind is Nassana Dantius, and she doesn't have one either. Basically, the only people who get info boxes are squad members, major adversaries like Saren and Benezia, and major allies like Joker and the Illusive Man. Unless Kal turns out to be one of those things, he isn't going to get one. SpartHawg948 06:56, December 12, 2009 (UTC)

A ok you win retracted I guess
Nevermind --Wehrmacht007 07:06, December 12, 2009 (UTC)
 * Udina gets one b/c he is a major ally, which is one of the categories I stated above that will get you an info box. I'm not being hard-headed, just informing you of policy. You are the one who keeps bringing it up. Also, BioWare did not announce that they will be big characters, just that some big name actors will be voicing them. There is a very big difference between the two. Take the Halo games for example. In Halo 2, Laura Prepon (who was big at the time due to That '70s show) and Michelle Rodriguez (big at the time due to Lost) were voice actors. In Halo 3, Adam Baldwin, Alan Tudyk and Nathan Fillion all provided voices. None of them voiced a major character. All were background character voices. My point is, just b/c there is a big-name actor voicing the character does not mean the character will be a major character in the game. As I stated above, there are three very clear categories for who gets infoboxes and who doesn't. Having someone famous providing the voice is not one of them. Sorry if I seem hard-headed, but again, you are the one who keeps bringing this up. SpartHawg948 07:15, December 12, 2009 (UTC)
 * (note, I typed this out before you retracted your comment, but feel it is still valid and still needs to be said.) SpartHawg948 07:15, December 12, 2009 (UTC)

Retracted long before the speech
Nevermind me I don't want to get sucked into an arguement over a nothingless "haha joke". Settle down and don't get your panties in a bunch over a kind hearted haha didnt mean to weind you up. ** and The Serenity cast in H3 they were all main playable characters. --Wehrmacht007 07:34, December 12, 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but you did call me hard-headed when I was just trying to explain to you the policy since you kept bringing the character box thing back up (and no, there was no "haha" or anything else to suggest it was a joke in that message you retracted). I am trying to be polite and patient, especially since I take it that English is not your first language (as your bio would imply) but please understand that bringing the same thing up over and over again, calling me hard-headed when I attempt to explain the policy to you every time you (not I) bring it up, and then telling me "settle down and don't get your panties in a bunch" does not seem kind hearted in the least. It's actually making me quite agitated, which again, I am doing my utmost not to show, trying instead to stay civil. So please, let's just drop this and move on, shall we? SpartHawg948 07:39, December 12, 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, no, that was in Halo 3: ODST that they were all playable characters. In Halo 3, they provided the voices of random marines. Halo 3 and Halo 3:ODST are, of course, two seperate games. SpartHawg948 07:39, December 12, 2009 (UTC)

Umm ok
Yeah I ended it back at the "A Ok" quote from end "Last sentence ment as kind heartedly and not stubborn fool" and since then dont understand why you keep defending/etc this so hard. Ok ended now, and I have no clue why you are agitated. --Wehrmacht007 07:50, December 12, 2009 (UTC)
 * No sir, you ended the message AFTER the one in which you called me hard-headed with "Last sentence ment as kind heartedly and not stubborn fool". It's in the history, look it up. In fact, I will do you one better. Here it is:
 * I can see how I got you with that just got off reading about Verner and referenced wrong. Characters like Udina etc. And what the heck why are you so Hard headed on this 1 thing. It's common sence that big characters that are specificly being announced as The Stars of ME2 will get more attention and more information put on them. I'm sure that Bailey guy, you referenced earlier, and the quarian admiral,etc will get one aswell. Because if they are being announced by Bioware as big characters I'm pretty sure they'll be a big character. --Wehrmacht007 07:06, December 12, 2009 (UTC)
 * Funny. The sentence you claim to have ended it with isn't there, now is it? You call me hard headed, with no attempt to pass it off as a joke. When I called you on it, you told me not to get my panties in a bunch! Is it any wonder I'm getting agitated? SpartHawg948 07:56, December 12, 2009 (UTC)

What is it
that seems to make people want to just butt heads with you Spart? I've seen more people do what seems to be their best to get under your skin than anyone else I know lol. Kudos to you for remaining as fair and balanced as you do.--Xaero Dumort 07:50, December 12, 2009 (UTC)
 * I have no idea. It's like moths to a flame. Funny thing is, it's not just here, either! I do a little MMO-ing in my spare time, and I attract all the argumentative crazies there too! I mean, is it so hard to understand why someone might get mad when you call them names and then tell them not to get their panties in a bunch? Oh well. Gotta keep it civil, or at least something approximating civil. To quote Frank Costanza from the classic show Seinfeld, SERENITY NOW!!! There, I feel better already! :) SpartHawg948 07:59, December 12, 2009 (UTC)

That's my long before retracted
Still new to the Wiki regs, so if whatever needs whatever I'll remember next time. Oh and I still stand by him getting a character box soon enough if characters like Conrad Verner and random alien Diplomats get one then it's a no brainer that a character voiced by a somewhat major actor and appears to be a somewhat major character in ME2 will get a character box as soon as a character pic is released. haha ^^ Last sentence ment to sound kind heartedly and not like a stubborn fool. Thanks again. --Wehrmacht007 06:52, December 12, 2009 (UTC)

OK, now I'm confused. Conrad Verner doesn't have an info box. As for random alien diplomat, not sure who that is but the only name that comes to mind is Nassana Dantius, and she doesn't have one either. Basically, the only people who get info boxes are squad members, major adversaries like Saren and Benezia, and major allies like Joker and the Illusive Man. Unless Kal turns out to be one of those things, he isn't going to get one. SpartHawg948 06:56, December 12, 2009 (UTC)

Quote From "A ok" what else are you talking about? --Wehrmacht007 08:14, December 12, 2009 (UTC)


 * I was of course referring to your post which I specifically cited in my last response, which was the one you entered as Udina-Verner. Mostly it's the "settle down and don't get your panties in a bunch" comment that angered me. You made no attempt to phrase that as a joke, and there really isn't a way to do so. Regardless, I have already asked you once to just drop it. Unless you wish to apologize for the panties in a bunch quote, which was in rather bad form, I would ask (again) just to please drop this. SpartHawg948 08:26, December 12, 2009 (UTC)

Panties?......In Bunches!
Nevermind me I don't want to get sucked into an arguement over a nothingless "haha joke". Settle down and don't get your panties in a bunch over a kind hearted haha didnt mean to weind you up. ** and The Serenity cast in H3 they were all main playable characters. --Wehrmacht007 07:34, December 12, 2009 (UTC)

Haha I see nothing wrong with this. Read it again without the crazy goggles. I dont understand what you mean. --Wehrmacht007 08:34, December 12, 2009 (UTC)


 * Fair enough. You have shown yourself as incapable of just letting this go, despite my request (twice, I might add) to do so. Please kindly refrain in the future. SpartHawg948 08:39, December 12, 2009 (UTC)

New Trivia Policy
Hey man, i usually edit some of the trivia facts or add new ones, and i noticed that u removed one of them because of the "new trivia policy". Just wondering what is it exactly. Ty very much :) Acmcear 01:17, December 16, 2009 (UTC) Acmcear
 * Please refer to either my blog entry on the policy or Talk:Pressha. Basically, if it's sheer coincidence that something in real life has the same name as a planet (like Pressha, Alko, and Camaron) it isn't trivia. SpartHawg948 01:26, December 16, 2009 (UTC)

Help with ME Builds page
Hi all, I've been noticing some of the more tested builds from the official forums missing from the builds page. I added one of those unique ones for the Nemesis Adept by copying the existing code used, pasting it after what was already there, and editing reflect the build i wanted to add. I do not mean to alter any of the existing builds there and have not so far. After saving, it posted fine, listed right after the two that were already there.

Yet some how, that same technique seems to not work as well in the Soldier section. I tried to add my two favorite Soldier builds and yet after saving the Vanguard section is not displaying properly after the Soldier section. I have no idea what went wrong, I've check the code several times and it is all exactly the same as what was there before. Help!

(Also, the Vanguard build you have listed as APurpleCow's is wrong i think. I believe he had Shotguns at 00.  He also had Barrier at 12, Warp at 06, and Tactical Armor at 08.  Of course since then many on the official forums seem to agree that the better build would have Throw at 12, Warp at 12, Barrier at 07, and Tactical Armor 07.  Of course that should be listed as a different build entirely from the what should be corrected APurpleCow build.)


 * Ok, well first, before I get to the substantive issues, please remember to sign your posts, which can be done by entering four tildes (this guy ~) at the end of the post. It's nice to have some idea of who left you a message at a glance, without having to check the page history.
 * Now to the issue at hand. I'm not the best person to ask for two reasons. 1) I'm not very computer literate myself. I'm pretty good with spelling and grammar and know my way around an edit, but when something goes wrong I'm generally clueless. And 2) I don't believe in putting class builds on this wiki. I am actually the one who championed the deletion of the Gold Standard Class Builds page, as it was entirely opinion-driven and didn't have any place on a factual wiki. Forums are the place for class builds, not an encyclopedia. SpartHawg948 21:20, December 17, 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh! It's on a forum page and not an actual article! That would've been some useful info, as it could have saved me the whole "we don't do class build pages" spiel. Well then, unfortunately, even with that confusion cleared up, I still have no idea why it didn't work. And upon further reading, I would like to point out that, contrary to the statement that "Also, the Vanguard build you have listed as APurpleCow's is wrong i think..." no, I don't have anything wrong, as I have never contributed to that forum. Please take any discrepancies up with whoever actually entered that build. Thanks, SpartHawg948 05:50, December 18, 2009 (UTC)

Vorcha Codex Pic
I've cropped out and uploaded a pic of the vorcha from ME2's codex. I haven't put it in yet on either the vorcha or races page as I wasn't sure if it would qualify as a spoiler as it is lifted from the codex and if the quality was ok. http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/File:Vorchacodex.jpg Is it ok to put in?--Xaero Dumort 20:42, December 17, 2009 (UTC)


 * Ok, quality looks good, and as it's just an image of a vorcha it shouldn't be a spoiler. However, at this time I would say feel free to put it on the races page but not the vorcha page. Reason being you can't really see much detail of the vorcha's face, unlike the picture currently there. Actually, now that I think about it the new pic should be fine on the vorcha page, but placed somewhere else in the article, with the current picture left where it is, again, b/c the current pic shows you more detail. SpartHawg948 21:15, December 17, 2009 (UTC)

Ok cool beans.--Xaero Dumort 00:18, December 18, 2009 (UTC)
 * It's a little wide, I'll try to get around to cropping it a bit more later. The screenshot is ok quality so I'll try and touch it up but the height of the original image makes it so I can't do a 300x300, I hafta do XXXx300. Actually, just did it, should look decent at least.--Xaero Dumort 00:28, December 18, 2009 (UTC)

Hello
Thank you for the warm welcome. Obviously, I am new to Mass Effect Wiki. I like to keep myself updated on the world of Mass Effect and this wiki has done a good job at that. Any tips for a new user? --Aeon117 21:50, December 17, 2009 (UTC)

No problem
If the vandals want a fight, I'll give it to 'em. There are few things I can't stand more than irritating people with too much time on their hands and a mischievous bent. Glad to be of help. -- Commdor (Talk) 00:59, December 20, 2009 (UTC)

Party Members Footer
Hey there! I was wondering if the Party Members Footer for Mass Effect 2 should be changed to include Legion. There are a multitude of sources that verify this. Lazarusadamus 22:26, December 20, 2009 (UTC)


 * Please provide sources, then we can talk. Thus far the only source that has been provided is the NowGamer source, even though it has been repeatedly stated that this is not valid, as they are known to print false or blatantly speculative materials. SpartHawg948 22:35, December 20, 2009 (UTC)

Mass Effect 2 achievements leaked
I figure you might want the heads up: List here. There's so much stuff here that I'd rather not act on it myself; not only are certain plot events named, but there's several details for the squadmates. Your judgment on how to use this or not is probably best. -- Commdor (Talk) 20:58, December 21, 2009 (UTC)


 * I really don't want to look too much at it! It's like the Ark of the Covenant from Raiders of the Lost Ark! Well, I guess if someone wants to post this info, fine with me, as it appears to be properly sourced, and I'm sure JakePT will be thrilled with what it says about Garrus, but I'm sure not gonna be the one to look at/post it all! Plus, I'm lousy with images, and it'd be nice to get the achievement icons in the article too. SpartHawg948 21:02, December 21, 2009 (UTC)

Powers - Sentinel
It's clear that you know more of all this of Mass Effect than I (Mathius17) 02:10, December 22, 2009 (UTC)), but if you look at the sentinel video, you can actually see this "Slam" power on the power's tree
 * Hmmm... I've been steering clear of that kind of stuff, but I'll take a looksee and see what it says. SpartHawg948 02:15, December 22, 2009 (UTC)
 * Slam is a Bonus Talent, it receives no attention in the video or interview, and on the class select screen at the beginning of the video there is no mention of slam at all. Add that to the fact every class has 6 powers, then it's pretty obvious Slam isn't a Sentinel ability and is far more likely something learnt later through other means. JakePT 02:23, December 22, 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, upon review of the video that's the way it appears to me, as well. SpartHawg948 02:55, December 22, 2009 (UTC)

News blogs
Have you guys thought of using the blog functionality for news, like we do at The Vault? It's working out pretty well for us (see: The Vault:News. I've just added it to the Dragon Age Wiki as well. Ausir(talk) 23:32, December 22, 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, Tullis does a monthly news blog. I personally have no real interest in starting or maintaining something of that nature, but that's because I tend to focus on content more than anything else as far as admin-type stuff. SpartHawg948 23:41, December 22, 2009 (UTC)

Long term IP blocks
As you know, I always defer to Tullis and yourself on administrative issues. Realizing that you may have already discussed this and arrived at a policy, I though I'd nevertheless check what the stance is for long term blocks on IP addresses. Right now, I see several one year blocks and even a number of infinite blocks. I would hope that the nature of vandalism being what it is, that the perpetrators lose interest in a couple of days for the most part. (Again, I have little operational experience here, and defer to your collective judgment.) I mention this since blocks on NAT addresses are going to constitute collective punishment for anyone who happens to be under the same umbrella. Perhaps a uniform policy of a zero-tolerance three day block, with progressively stronger penalties might be in order? --DRY 04:39, December 23, 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, as for all that- the one year blocks is a recent thing that was discussed by Tullis and myself, primarily over email, as a response to a wave of vandalism we had a while back. The "official notification" can be found here. We pretty much decided on a blanket policy of one year blocks for vandals, although Tullis has amended this a couple times to 6 months. No real end date was set for this policy, but we pretty much decided on only a couple months, so probably no later than February we'll be back to business as usual. As for the infinite blocks, please see your email. :) SpartHawg948 04:57, December 23, 2009 (UTC)
 * All good &mdash; just wanted to make sure that the impact on NATs had been duly considered. As an aside, I wonder if a watch on a user page will trigger on a blog posting?  I don't recall seeing any in the past, which is probably how I missed the announcement.  (That being said, I also don't follow the forum.)  --DRY 05:23, December 23, 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it wasn't something that was done lightly. Coming down harder on vandals isn't something I enjoy doing, but we've been seeing unusual amounts of vandalism lately. Hopefully once ME2 releases it'll cool down and we can go back to normal. As for the blog watch thing, I also have no clue on that one. SpartHawg948 05:30, December 23, 2009 (UTC)

Mass Effect 2 Achievements
I don't know who the admins are but you, so I just wanted to ask you that now that the achievements of Mass Effect 2 has been revealed, shouldn't we create a new article for this achievements? And when the game is released, we could update the info and images (sorry if there is something wrong with my english). Mathius17


 * I already addressed this issue above, under the heading "Mass Effect 2 Achievements Leaked". SpartHawg948 03:16, December 24, 2009 (UTC)

Archangel
With all the info that we have about Mass Effect 2, we can certainly say that Archangel is Garrus... Any problem with the article I created about Archangel? I made it redirect to Garrus Vakarian. --Mathius17 03:37, December 24, 2009 (UTC)

RE: RE: me fanfic wiki
Actually, we could definately still use your help but what are the changes that you had in mind?--Kamikaz 04:20, December 24, 2009 (UTC)

I cannot believe that 144-Patient Appelant would act in such a manner, especially since he was the one who came up with half of those rules. I'll talk to him about that, unblock ralok, and then deal with the canonical stuff. Thanks for letting me know about those issues and I apoligize on behalf of my.....aquintance. By the way, Happy Holidays!--Kamikaz 04:54, December 24, 2009 (UTC)

Proposed addendum
Concerning a recent entry on your user page, an addendum would be nice. Also a formal appology from myself that situation was sort of embarassing. ralok 05:02, December 25, 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm not going to lie, I am really tired and stuffed at the moment, so my thought processes aren't really up to snuff right now. I think I may have just figured out what you're talking about, but if not, bear with me here. SpartHawg948 06:03, December 25, 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, no apologies necessary for any of that. SpartHawg948 06:09, December 25, 2009 (UTC)

SuccessFull Website
I see several people citing an achievements list on this website as the source for posting confirmed information on Mass Effect 2, specifically characters that are recruitable as squad-mates. While my French is not that great, I understand that the purpose of the site is to post accomplishments for the Xbox 360 games, so it would list achievements for Mass Effect 2. What I don't understand is what sources the website used to confirm and list them for a game that has not been released yet. I cannot find anywhere in the SuccessFull website that posts the basis for confirming and listing the achievements so what makes it a reliable source to confirm squad-mates for Mass Effect 2? Is it employees or beta testers violating their NDA? --Dagmar H 04:58, December 26, 2009 (UTC)


 * I would assume that it is sourced from someone inside BioWare and/or the beta testers, although I don't think it necessarily involves violation of an NDA. It could be an intentional "leak". Achievement lists frequently get "leaked" for highly anticipated games a month or so before they release. SpartHawg948 05:19, December 26, 2009 (UTC)

Oh, my bad.
Sorry 'bout that, I thought that was the guy's talk page that I had posted to; just trying to help out a fellow Mass Effectee, Staff Sergeant. Griever0311 06:50, December 29, 2009 (UTC)


 * No worries. Yup, it was an article. If it was a talk page, it would have said User talk:___ (insert name here) at the top of the page. No harm done though. Again, sorry about mistakenly posting that on your talk page. SpartHawg948 06:52, December 29, 2009 (UTC)

Eh, poor situational awareness on my part. :p Griever0311 06:54, December 29, 2009 (UTC)


 * No worries, happens to us all from time to time. :) SpartHawg948 06:55, December 29, 2009 (UTC)

Pretty cool glitch...
I loaded up a saved game on my 360 a few minutes ago and experienced a glitch I'd never seen before: my Shepard is wearing his BDUs (no armor) and is missing his assault rifle, and all my weapons except the pistol disappear when I switch away from them, and the assault rifle fails to show in the radial menu. I had Wrex and Garrus as my away team; they still had their armor, unlike me, but like me, their assault rifles were missing. The specific location is right outside Lorik Quinn's office, prior to the encounter with ERCS Sergeant Kaira Sterling in Port Hanshan. Loadout was unmodified Specter X gear across the board, with unmodified Predator H X, Mercenary X Medium, and Agent X Light for myself, Wrex, and Garrus, respectively. During the encounter and all subsequent cinematics, Shepard remained unarmored, including when I had him mount and dismount the Mako where your party usually activates the environmental seals on their helmets. It was pretty cool walking around looking like a C-Sec officer for a while, but when I went to the inventory screen to try to select my armor or assault rifle, the game became unresponsive. Not to say it locked up, but it seemed like there was a null value for the rifle, and it wouldn't let me navigate away until the non-existant thing loaded. Subsequent saves and reloads contiguous to the original file propagate the glitch, with the sole change of my other weapons staying on my back with subsequent reloads (excepting the assault rifle). I looked on the wiki and couldn't find a glitch like this, and figured I'd toss it to a featured user to see if you guys had ever encountered it. Thanks in advance. MarinesNeverDie 06:17, December 30, 2009 (UTC)
 * No, I've never heard of any such thing. Very interesting... SpartHawg948 06:19, December 30, 2009 (UTC)

Question?
Mr. Hawgg according to the history of the miranda lawson age you posted something concerning commies, i am sure it was an accident. I think you undid the incorrect edit, it appears taht 72.235.11.235 actually undid his comment and you somehow undid the undo that he did. I want to beleive this was a mistake, please tell me that it was sir. Otherwise i will be dissapointed in you for calling the users of this wiki commies. ralok 00:55, December 31, 2009 (UTC)
 * Indeed. As I posted on your talk page, and as my edit summary made clear, I was intending to undo the speculation, as I had done several times previously today. Please do not lecture me unless you have your facts straight. Even a cursory examination of the situation would have told you it was a mistake, and I SAID AS MUCH MYSELF on YOUR talk page. Also, one G. SpartHawg, not SpartHawgg. SpartHawg948 00:58, December 31, 2009 (UTC)


 * I didnt even read my talk page until after I had wrote this, soooooooooo sorry about spelling you name wrong (thats like the 50th time ive done that) sorry about the mini lecutre i gave, i sorta panicked when I idnt know what was going on. My big fear was that your account was hacked and that the SpartHawg that everyone on this wiki knows and loves would have been gone forever. But that didnt happen. ralok 01:26, December 31, 2009 (UTC)


 * Well I don't know about "loves", not really sure if there's a Spart fan club out there or anything. No worries. Sorry about being a little abrasive, I just wasn't in the mood for a lecture at the moment, this whole Miranda Lawson thing is getting pretty annoying. SpartHawg948 01:43, December 31, 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome SpartHawg. But I have a question. Have you read anywhere at all that that ECRS makes their tempest sub machine gun for the Eclipse mercs? I can't find any relevant information on that topic. I'm thinking it might be speculative. Thanks. --TDuncan 06:11, December 31, 2009 (UTC)TDuncan


 * Not sure... all I can suggest at the moment is to check the issue of Game Informer magazine that is used as a reference. I don't have a copy handle, or I'd do it to verify. SpartHawg948 07:27, December 31, 2009 (UTC)


 * The text is copied directly from the official ME2 website, Arsenal section. JakePT 08:49, December 31, 2009 (UTC)

Confusion Re: Armours and Pre-order on ME2
Sorry, I think I got my wikis crossed here. I meant you could add the fact under the 'Trivia' header (several other wikis I read use the 'Behind the scenes' heading for same).

I'm fully in agreement a separate page would be a waste of time for what little info it gets across. I just thought that a note on the page for the armour itself under that 'misc crap people like to know' kind of header (that'd be 'Trivia', right?) that 'This armour was available immediately to customers who pre-ordered via blah blah blah' would be worth leaving on the armour page for the sake of historical posterity. I dunno about anyone else but I like knowing all these facts years after the game was released, I think it ought to exist *somewhere* after release. :) --LeathamGrant 07:33, December 31, 2009 (UTC)


 * Fair enough... we'll see how it pans out when the game releases and go from there as far as placing trivia sections for the relevant armors. SpartHawg948 09:11, December 31, 2009 (UTC)

cool. You're right JakeHT. Thanks for clarifying. --TDuncan 16:48, December 31, 2009 (UTC)TDuncan

RE: Speculation Policy
On the talk page you said there was a possibility for Adams to be in Mass Effect 2, so I... forget it. LordDeathRay (Comm Chatter)  04:49, January 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmmm... didn't know that comments I make on talk pages are now considered approved sources for speculation on this site. Must have missed that memo... :P SpartHawg948 04:55, January 2, 2010 (UTC)

No. I'm not saying what you said is a source. I SAID that what you said there was a POSSIBILITY. So I put: THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT ADAMS WOULD REAPPEAR IN MASS EFFECT 2 on the Engineer Adams page. I didn't put down: ADAMS WOULD DEFIDENTLY REAPPEAR IN MASS EFFECT 2. Prove me if I am wrong. LordDeathRay (Comm Chatter)  05:01, January 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Again, didn't know that my comments on talk pages are sources for ME2! As I said on your talk page, speculation needs a source. Your response was that I had said on a talk page that he might reappear. This made it look like you were citing my comment on the talk page as a valid source, which it clearly is not. I think I just proved you wrong. SpartHawg948 05:05, January 2, 2010 (UTC)