User talk:SpartHawg948

Welcome to the Wiki, we have a lot of work to do before the release. I saw your post on the Citadel Council and I changed a spelling error for Specter>Spectre just so you know and I'm glad you are taking up the Council as your pet project. As you will be reading up on the Citadel a lot could you also do that article as well just so there is no confusion. I am currently working on the creation of new articles mainly form the Wanted Pages. If you want me to do anything just send me a message in my talk page. Good work so far. Bioevil087 14:37, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

About Admin
Well Kirkburn is the only admin but he has offered to make me one so if I am 'promoted' then I will make you one too. And thanks for taking the article. Bioevil087 13:47, 8 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Ok I have made you an Admin or sysop as they are called. I think it should just be us for the time being until we get a few more people. Check here http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Help:Administrators%27_how-to_guide if you need help. I say we focus on the front page, new pages and filling out those articles that are small. Bioevil087 03:06, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Did you start this wika
hi did you start this wiki 67.77.123.132 02:28, 6 September 2008 (UTC)Troy 027


 * Unfortunately, I cannot claim credit for starting this wiki. I did come on at a very early stage (I was the second person to be made an admin and to make any major contributions) but I didn't start the site.SpartHawg948 03:25, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

ME2 pages
Can you do me a favour for the next couple of days and keep an eye on the ME2 pages? I'm spoiler-dodging. :( (Unless you are too.) --Tullis 04:50, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Roger copy. SpartHawg948 06:01, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I don't want to read those pages but I don't want to let them fall into disrepair either. I really appreciate this. : ) --Tullis 19:58, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't mention it. I'm happy to help. :)SpartHawg948 04:44, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Complaints & Bugs page
The Complaints & Bugs page has been bugging me for a while but I'm not sure what to do with it. It either needs a massive overhaul, where we finally tidy it up, kill the signed edits and put "answers" to complaints so they're more visible, or... huh. I'm still not convinced it's a legit page; glitches and bugs, yes, but the complaints still seem forum-worthy rather than belonging in a dedicated article. We already have a page for Glitches, so maybe a merge and a clampdown is in order. Thoughts? --Tullis 13:04, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm now going to delete Complaints and Bugs verbatim. It's not worth merging what's there. Glitches also needs a look-see: there's glitches mentioned on their relevant pages (like Lorik Qui'in and the Space Monkey) so I'm tempted to just delete them both. Again: we're not a forum. --Tullis 14:56, September 5, 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd like the opportunity to salvage something from this page. I agree that most of it is junk, but there might be something of value in there that is not in the Glitches page.
 * About the Glitches page, I just think that we should keep what is relevant and useful, as you mentioned. --silverstrike 15:55, September 5, 2009 (UTC)
 * K, sounds good to me! SpartHawg948 20:34, September 5, 2009 (UTC)


 * Okay, went through the Complaints & Bugs page and only found those points relevant (edited them to fit in one paragraph):
 * Skip Dialog and Select Answer are both mapped to the space-bar, which can very easily result in also choosing a dialog options by accident.
 * It is sometimes possible for an enemy to be trapped in an unreachable location (usually, inside or behind a wall). This makes it impossible to kill him. Using Throw or Lift can sometimes dislodge them. Alternatively, switching to " fly-cam" and shooting them from the location they are in, also works (PC version, only).
 * On some machines, it is possible to trigger the "Overheat bug" that force the weapon to stay in its overheat state until reloading the game, or returning to the Normandy. This but is the result of the Dog of war and Geth Hunter Achievements. The only solution here is to remove those achievements from the profile.
 * There are certain NPC's that upon trying to interact a conversation with them, or choosing a certain dialog option, the game cannot initiate the conversation or the an action as part of the conversation.
 * Saving while inside elevators will cause inability to do anything other then going to the options screen, when reloading that save point - the game can sometimes auto-save in elevators.
 * Elevator doors occasionally do not close when you press them to go. This jams them and leaves you unable to move or do anything. Holstering the weapon before entering the elevator can sometimes prevent this from happening.
 * While you are lifted or thrown by biotics and a cutscene initiate, you can get stuck inside walls, or above ground, while unable to move when the cutscene finishes.
 * After you reach 550 MB of pagefile (Task Manager Windows) the game crash or lead to loop graphic sequences and you need to reboot your system or manually clean the pagefile. This bug is caused by nVidia graphic cards and Realtek audio card. One solution is to run the game in window mode and disable music and speech.
 * On Therum, in the PC version, after Bring Down the Sky is installed, certain areas of the terrain become solid black, regardless of terrain type. Sometimes going to the configuration window (exiting the game, running the game launcher, and selecting configure, or running ) and selecting Repair > Delete Local Shader Cache Files, may sometimes fix the problem. Vista users will need to run the application in Windows XP SP2 compatibility.
 * Quickly pressing the Enter key in confirmation prompts can sometimes leave a window stuck on the screen ("Convert this item into omnigel?"). The game no longer responds to keyboard or mouse input. However, it's still possible to autosave and autoreload through the console or rebounded keys.
 * If you are playing the game with a bonus talent, the talent may mysteriously disappear from the Power Wheel once you obtain enough other powers. To get around this problem, max the power before it is removed, so you will still be able to use it.


 * I also checked Glitches, and it seem that most of it can be separated into relevant pages of the character or location. --silverstrike 20:42, September 5, 2009 (UTC)
 * With those points noted here, I'm deleting Complaints and Bugs forthwith, and Glitches will be handled in due course. --Tullis 21:13, September 5, 2009 (UTC)
 * I thought about merging those points with the Glitches article, and maybe renaming it to "Bugs and Glitches" (or something of the sort). Regarding the glitches page, do we really need to indicate where you can force a bug to happen? I'll can try to make a revision of that page in my Sandbox, including what I think is relevant and have a place on the wiki, if you agree with me on that point. --silverstrike 21:48, September 5, 2009 (UTC)
 * To be honest, I really question whether we need a glitches page at all. I mean, that then runs the chance of degenerating back into a "I had this glitch!" page like Complaints and Bugs. I wouldn't have a problem with just keeping the glitches that are relevant to gameplay, like the infinite morality points glitch, and the one for the space monkeys, and get rid of them both. --Tullis 22:18, September 5, 2009 (UTC)
 * I think that morality glitches, should be noted on the Morality article, infinite credits on the Rich Achievement Guide (which I think that it already contains), kill/save David Al Talaqani on his character page (I believe that this is redundant information), etc.
 * The issues with bugs, should be noted because they refer to actual results that visitors may encounter. Instructing how to cheat, seems redundant in my opinion - it can stay if it's in regard to a certain achievement, but give nothing about the game, otherwise.
 * To avoid mess to this article, it's possible to lock this page, and let visitors suggest it on the talk page. --silverstrike 22:32, September 5, 2009 (UTC)
 * I've added some of the points listed above into their relevant articles, and crossed them out from the list. --silverstrike 23:42, September 5, 2009 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I tend to agree that other than glitches that directly affect gameplay (ie morality and credits), a glitch page is unnecessary. Pointing out glitches that don't change anything, just for the sake of pointing them out is kind of "gee whiz" info that really contributes nothing. SpartHawg948 08:27, September 6, 2009 (UTC)


 * I've updated all relevant pages with the items on the list, apart from the elevator bugs. I can now move to the items on the Glitches page - which most of it can fit in separate pages like the list above. --silverstrike 14:17, September 6, 2009 (UTC)

Glitches Page
I have checked the glitches page and made two lists:
 * Items that I believe need to find their place on relevant pages:
 * Use Mako on Therum Mini-Boss Fight - should be moved to the Mako or Mako Guide page.
 * Free Mako Repairs / Instant Full Mako Shields - should be moved to the Mako or Mako Guide page.
 * Flying Mako - should be moved to the Mako page.
 * Infinite Paragon and Paragon Achievement and Infinite Paragon and/or Renegade - should be moved to the Morality or Morality Guide page. - already on the Morality article.
 * Infinite Experience - should be moved to the Experience Guide page.
 * Infinite Credits - should be moved to the Rich Achievement Guide page. - already on the Rich Acievement article.
 * Equip Armor Glitch - should be moved to the Equipment or Armor page.
 * Double Discovery - should be moved to the Experience Guide or Minerals page.
 * Reload-Reloot Crate of Plenty - should be moved to the Equipment page.
 * Items that have no place on the wiki:
 * Kill David Al Talaqani (The Feros Guy) and Save David Al Talaqani - should be removed. It contributes nothing.
 * Resurrecting ERCS Guard - should be removed. It contributes nothing.
 * Low Framerate Problem - should be removed. Forcefully create visual bug.
 * Hopping Off the Fountain - should be removed. Forcefully create visual bug.
 * Walk on the Map - should be removed. Forcefully create visual bug.
 * On Top Of Normandy - should be removed. Forcefully create visual bug.

I can make those updates, if there are no objections. --silverstrike 14:56, September 6, 2009 (UTC)


 * Those sound fair to me, though I'd also remove the "flying Mako" glitch. It's given as a no-repro bug so there's not much point in mentioning it. --Tullis 15:12, September 6, 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, the "flying Mako" glitch happened to me a few times (mostly on Noveria). --silverstrike 15:29, September 6, 2009 (UTC)
 * I've updated the relevant pages. --silverstrike 16:21, September 6, 2009 (UTC)


 * Do you mind if I do a remove-links pass on this section? Between redlinks and spelling errors, it's responsible for a chunk of wanted pages. --Tullis 15:09, September 26, 2009 (UTC)
 * Saved you the time :). Dead links are now gone. --silverstrike 15:22, September 26, 2009 (UTC)
 * That question was actually to SpartHawg, as this is his Talk page. --Tullis 15:24, September 26, 2009 (UTC)
 * Whoops, didn't notice - sorry about that :]. --silverstrike 16:12, September 26, 2009 (UTC)
 * CURSE YOU SILVERSTRIKE!!! No, in all seriousness that's fine with me. If you're doing cleanups and need to remove links from my talk page that are causing issues, that's A-OK! SpartHawg948 19:44, September 26, 2009 (UTC)

Cleanup
As part of the general cleanup I've been going through and deleting some of our apparently unnecessary short pages, mostly pages that are little more than a splitting-out of existing material (for example, the Rannadril page, the Sakharov Station page etc.) Some pages, like the Second Fleet page, easily lend themselves to a merge, but I don't want to be too rigorous and prune the wiki too far. Can you take a look at the short pages list and see if any pages leap out at you as good targets for merge or straight deletion? --Tullis 01:31, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

ME2 characters
What was wrong with listing them? The first three have they're own articles and have been confirmed to be squadmates, and the latter three, while as yet unnamed, have also been confirmed to be acquirable as well. The squadmates were put under the generalized "Major characters" heading because I thought it more efficient than having a section with only the Illusive Man and then another section with the squadmates. Squadmate characters were important in the first game, after all, so it shouldn't have made a difference. The latter three characters were sourced: the convict and scientist are pointed out on the official website, and the geth is specifically mentioned in the article I provided. Furthermore, the old section about squadmates that you restored isn't actually sourced (there is no source for the quarian, and the link at the end is just the recent developer video). Can we come to a compromise on how characters and squadmates are listed? -- Commdor (Talk) 20:26, 18 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Well... the Illusive Man, Jacob, and Miranda were all already mentioned in the article, as was the quarian. So I don't really see a need for a separate section, as it was okay the way it was. Also, on the page you cited as a source for the salarian scientist, I see no mention that they will be a squadmate, just that you will rescue them. There is a big difference, which is why I played the speculation card, as the sourcing did not say what you alleged it to say. The quarian appearing w/ Shepard in the video is sourced, while it doesn't explicitly state the quarian is a squad member, there is more supporting evidence in the video there was for the salarian. Lastly, I would like to reiterate that there was no need for a separate section. The layout I reverted to was fine. Properly Sourced materials can be inserted into that, as it was for Thane. I hope this answers your questions. SpartHawg948 23:53, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. Heliossoileh 02:09, 19 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I suppose the current layout is fine, I was attempting to organize everything by relative importance to the game so it stands out. I'm probably thinking too much that is is exactly like Wikipedia, when I need to remember that this wiki and WP are only similar. Oddly, WP would appear to have laxer sourcing standards than here. Sorry for the confusion. -- Commdor (Talk) 19:10, 20 July 2009 (UTC)


 * No probalo! Always happy to answer questions. And yes (puffs out chest and juts chin) we do pride ourselves on our sourcing standards around here. Nothing but the best for the best gaming wiki ever! SpartHawg948 19:38, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

There seems to be little to edit here so i think i'll be leaving everything alone unless its a grammar error i wish i could've helped on Rex he is so awesome. and i left my reply on my talk pageDerekproxy 20:08, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Tanks for the talk
I'm all for agreeing to disagree. Yes and I admit those tanks could take the Tigers but they never actually really fought them on equal terms but the others like the Cruiser Mk II whywere they burning with the Panzer3s driving by. I never said the M1 was a less safe tank in fact I meet a commander of one that survived a direct T72 125mm direct point blank shot. As for tigers they we're over engineered and out of fuel and airsupport played massive roles for the allies the battle of the bulge would have been worse if the airborne didn't air support when it did and as for the M1 the weakness is the same as the strenght why attack the tanks when you take out the fuel trucks which are constantly around and easy prey (i wanted to be Force recon level 5 and do special op raids) as for the M1 its faster then any Leo2 but the A6 varient however take into acount it needs to fill up less often then the M1 hell every tank in the world that used gas turbines have been modified for desiel. like the M16 when HK made the G36 and its less finiky gas cartrige. as for the tankers you've talked to there are guys who wished the damned thing didn't eat four gallons on start up i don't know what you think of the M16/M4 but I think anything that needs to be cleaned after three clips is garbage. The IS-2/3 were able to stand "toe to toe" with the Tiger 2 but they never saw full on action plus the red army ran stompt out every german tank by just ramming it with a T-34 by the time they hit berlin they had no supplies to return home thats why the russians stripped eastern europe. All I'm saying is we are the only nation that no other could take but I'm more concerned about the chinese and muslums hell we only have 141 and Obama cut their production how can we win a war against either if we still use equipment that are about 40 years minus the M1 M2 and the Stryker. on the last one be glad my friend Stone isn't here to talk about how glourious it is. well I just hope I can help I mean you made this one and a group of FEAR fans made http://fear.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page I should focus on Kill Zone so I won't be around it was nice to have a civil "dibate" I haven't had anything like this for sometime if I drank i'd buy you a beer.Derekproxy 19:07, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Ok I under stan but....
ok i get the who speculation thing but i put "possibly".

Thanks
Thanks man. Appriciate it.-Matt xMan


 * Not a problem, always happy to help! SpartHawg948 08:41, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

bureaucrat
Is there no Bereaucats on this wiki or only admins?--LoneMerc101 20:13, 23 July 2009 (UTC)


 * There is a bureaucrat and also a helper, but they only pop in from time to time. They generally leave the site in the capable hands of the admin team. SpartHawg948 07:23, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

ME2 New and Returning features help
I have been adding an edit to the ME2 New and Returning section as to the names of the downloadable items and what you get and how to get them, an IP only user keeps undoing my changes instead of talking about it on the talk page where I did put up a section to debate validity as one of the items was named in a parody video by BioWare making fun of the Prestige Modern Warfare 2 they are being irrational. I took it as fact for the name as most of the items listed are in the Collector's Edition of the game and it is known for pre-ordering you get a DLC Armor and for getting the Collector's Edition there is access to another piece of DLC. (Which is why I reserved it.) But the problem comes in that this nameless user has also decided to edit the wiki to slander me in a way for making the edits that they don't agree with, if you check the versions you can see how. I figured it would be best to ask someone to take a look at the information and make some sort of judgment call and perhaps do something about this person who can't act in a reasonable manner to an open site for free editing and information. Please take a look.--Xaero Dumort 03:33, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Downloadable Content
Misunderstand I did, my apologies. I thought it was a general DLC page for DLC linked to the series.--Xaero Dumort 21:07, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * It is, which is why I removed the Dragon Wars armor from ME2. We don't know whether this will be DLC, part of a pre-packaged limited edition, or if it will even make it into the game (as a lot can change in 6 months). Once ME2 comes out, if this is in fact DLC and not part of some Limited Edition, we can include it. SpartHawg948 21:39, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd label that "bonus content". There's not really been enough of it yet to justify an entire page on it; maybe a section on the ME2 page would suffice for now? (Unless there's already one there. : ) ) Also, I think the armour is called "Blood Dragon Armour", not "Dragon Wars Armour", though these might be different translations of the same thing. --Tullis 21:56, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Cool beans, gotcha.--Xaero Dumort 02:49, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I just couldn't remember the name and didn't want to look it up, so, Dragon Wars armor it was! SpartHawg948 10:42, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Love Child in ME 2?
Hey speaking from of a Mass Effect fan I keep hearing these rumors of of love child between Sherperd and his/her love intrest in the last one. Almost everywhere I see on the web and some of websites which I'm not sure if there accurate or not they keep saying that Shepard may have a kid. I kind of believe it since for one thing you and your love intrests have sex and Mass Effect 2 is supposed to be taking place two years after the first one and it only takes a little for female to become pregnant and give birth. You get what I'm saying right? Do you think that Shepard could get a kid in the next game?--Matt xMan 21:52, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * While I think it is a legitimate idea, I don't think it is something that will be implemented and only time will tell if it is true. I think it is a major issue for a limelight soldier to risk having a kid ya know?--Xaero Dumort 02:51, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Right off the bat, gonna have to say, I doubt it. Logistically it seems like kind of a nightmare, and I don't really see it fitting into the plot. There may be mention of a child, but I doubt that any hypothetical child will make an appearance. SpartHawg948 10:45, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Help Once Again...
Ok mabey not neccesarly help, but for the new article Afterlife Club there's a picture of it and I'm trying to download it to the article but either the website is messed up or my pc is crappy I can't add the image to it. I was wondering if you do it for me. Here's the link to the wallpaper:  Thanks man.--Matt xMan 02:56, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, pics are not my strong suit. Also, given that this appears to be concept art, I'm pretty sure it's not gonna fly on the site. I defer to Tullis on all things pictorial, but I don't think a concept drawing is up to snuff for an article. SpartHawg948 11:34, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Carying Files...
I've been thinking. Well, I know that ME 2 will cary over the files from the last one but what if it doesn't get it all right. I think it might be obvious they'll mention alot of the important stuff from the last but well... Lets say for example you let the Councle die in the last game and the next one they're still living. You get what I'm saying, right? Basicly I'm saying is that what if the files might screw things up?-Matt xMan 04:15, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * It won't be screwed up. They have accounted for every little detail.--Xaero Dumort 05:26, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, from what I'm hearing I seriously doubt continuity issues of the sort you are describing will occur. SpartHawg948 07:09, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Helium-3
I want to say- I find the info you are adding about Helium-3 interesting, however, it does not need to be included on the pages of every world w/ Helium-3. In fact, it doesn't even really need to be on any of them. As it is an ME specific topic, I would be fine with a separate page for Helium-3, provided that it still focus primarily on the in-game features (mining and facilities, applications, etc) and doesn't become primarily a discussion of contemporary scientific research in the field. SpartHawg948 21:01, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I proposed something similar for arcologies - a page that mentions what they are, and then lists planets they are present on, like Earth, Feros, and Junthor. But that wasn't accepted, so I just assumed that a page on helium-3 mining, listing planets, wouldn't either.  But I would be pleased to help, if you wanna create it. Shell Kracker 21:08, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, that is because arcologies are mentioned in about 2 sentences in the entire game. However, Helium-3 is very frequently mentioned in the game, and is a key element in society. So long as it is kept relatively on-topic and doesn't get bogged down in RL debates and discussions, I do not see a problem. It is certainly neater and, for lack of a better term, "prettier" than a big factoid at the bottom of every planet that has anything to do w/ helium-3, most of which have no real relevance and justification. Also, DO NOT make edits to my user page. That is my personal page. If you have a comment for me, use my talk page, as I am using yours. I do you the courtesy of not posting my thoughts and comments on your personal page, please show me the same respect. SpartHawg948 21:18, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that edit, it was an honest mistake from doing two things at once, rather than something deliberate - I clicked your user edit page instead of talk one. As far as I am aware, I have never shown you anything less than respect.  The helium-3 artcle sounds good to me - its about as important to the galactic community as element zero from the sounds of things - maybe they could both be added to the minerals page, since it discusses other resources. Shell Kracker 21:29, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

ME fanfiction wiki
Hello SpartHawg948, I am Kamikaz, the administrator of the Mass Effect Fan Fiction Wiki. I took a look at some of your contributions to this wiki and I was just wondering if you would like to come to the fan fiction wiki and help with some contributions there too. Think about it.--Kamikaz 02:02, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

RE: RE: Mass Effect fanfiction wiki
Any help at all whether it be adding articles, making a banner for the homepage, or helping to clean up some of the junk articles. Im really looking for people who I think I can trust and make administrators.--Kamikaz 05:30, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

This is hilarious.
Every single item in your tongue-in-cheek section is because of/related to me. :P I'm so flattered...*sniff-sniff*


 * P

Cheers! -Proconix 20:18, September 4, 2009 (UTC)Proconix


 * Well, it is just a section on what's on my mind at the moment, and lately that has turned into a what's bugging me in the world of wiki. And in all fairness, the bit about sourcing is about 3 individuals, which is why it's there. One occurance of someone sourcing an item w/ a source that doesn't say anything of the sort is one thing, but 3 people doing the same thing over the course of a week? Before this one it was a rant about people using discredited sources but not mentioning that the source was no longer valid, just hoping no one would call them on it. Give it a couple days, I'm sure it'll change. SpartHawg948 20:23, September 4, 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure it will, but I genuinely thinks it's funny. The Cathar thing I know is fairly popular, but I recently posted something about it on the Quarian talk page. And then the other stuff is fairly obvious. :P

Cheers! -Proconix 23:20, September 4, 2009 (UTC)Proconix

l have been hearing alot about commander shepherd in masseffect2 well be commanding a new ship before he well get the normandy back if that is true what is the name of the new ship


 * I'll tell you as soon as I know! :) What is known is that Shepard will "command the most powerful ship ever built" (see Mass Effect 2), but that's about it. SpartHawg948 03:15, September 8, 2009 (UTC)

Accident
It was a pure accident if you look into the history of it I accidently did it when I clicked on the window when I was typing on something else-Jio Freed 04:15, September 10, 2009 (UTC)

Singing Planet
SpartHawg, someone merged my Singing Planet article into the main rachni article. Is there a way I can restore it?
 * -- Gnostic 20:41, September 28, 2009 (UTC)
 * See Talk:Singing_Planet. --Tullis 20:45, September 28, 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, you could, but if you did it would be merged again. The admins talked it over for a while and we eventually decided that there really wasn't enough info at this time to justify the existence of the page. If you'd like to see the deliberation process for our decision, you can refer to Talk:Singing Planet. Thanks. SpartHawg948 20:47, September 28, 2009 (UTC

wait...were you stationed at Davis-monthan? worked 357th support? Skitz470 08:59, October 14, 2009 (UTC)


 * Indeed I was, and indeed I did! SpartHawg948 10:52, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
 * Holy crap! Is this Doobie? SpartHawg948 11:44, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

That would be the correct assumption in this case :-p Skitz470 17:27, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

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 (Briefing Room)  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)

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 Petraus 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)

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)