This page is the fifteenth archive of my talk page. If you leave a message here, I will not read it because I consider all conversations on this page closed. If you want to bring up an issue again, just leave me a message on my talk page about it. Thanks.

Mass Effect Wiki Twitter

Hi Lancer! I am the one responsible for adding the twitter feed to the main page after discussing it with SpartHawg who gave me the green light. What we are hoping for is to have a Mass Effect Wiki twitter feed that is run by both Wikia and the wiki itself. If you are interested, I can give you and the other admins the information to help run it! Also, with your permission, I was hoping to have it on the main page to help promote it. Let me know your thoughts! Bob @fandom (profile)•(talk)•(email) 17:33, March 28, 2012 (UTC)

I see that he did say it was ok, and I have since put it back on the page. However, I currently can't do anything about it in the near future as I have a lot of work. I actually don't even have a twitter account and personally don't like Twitter for a number of reasons. Commdor, Jake, or Spart probably would be better. I could really care less about it. It's there, it's there, it's not, it's not. I may do something later, but not now. Lancer1289 17:39, March 28, 2012 (UTC)
That's fine. Thanks for letting me put up the widget on the main page though! Bob @fandom (profile)•(talk)•(email) 17:45, March 28, 2012 (UTC)

Missing Title #1

Can you edit my page Batarian Victim because somebody put it up for deletion and I want it fixed. If you could do it, thank you.

I'm only two messages in, and about two hours after archiving my talk page and I already have someone who can't follow a simple request.
As to the point, I put it up for deletion, and I will not remove that tag because of the issues with it. If you think the article should stay, then argue it on the talk page. And FYI, that isn't your page, as soon as any mainspace article is created, it no longer belongs to that user, it is the property of the wiki. Lancer1289 18:20, March 28, 2012 (UTC)

RE: Trivia

Hey, I've read the MOS section on trivia, but in seeing you remove so much "trivia" I wanted to check with you before I add a piece I discovered for the Awakening mission on ME2. I put it on the talk page there, but no one has replied.

When you're questioning Miranda at the end of this mission, one of her responses is, "This is the only shuttle off the station. If you want to stay here and rot with the mechs, be my guest." However, before you open the final door, if you look over the railing of the landing outside (look on the opposite side from where you initially enter the area) there are three more shuttles parked below. --Martolives 18:29, March 28, 2012 (UTC)

Well, for all we know, those shuttles have been disabled. I really wouldn't classify that as trivia. Lancer1289 18:39, March 28, 2012 (UTC)
Fair enough. Just something I noticed on my last run through. Still getting a grasp on some of this Wiki's policies, so bare with me when I make a mistake or two, if you will :p

Cheers. Martolives 18:42, March 28, 2012 (UTC)

Missing Title #2

Hi Lancer, I'm aware that the Rewards sections I've been adding don't fit into the MoS. If I wanted to compile a list of what the player can receive from the mission where should it go? Perhaps as a subsection in the Walkthrough? --Ngene 23:59, March 28, 2012 (UTC)

It is now so blatantly obvious that no one can follow simple directions anymore, even when said directions are in plain, and simple English. I specifically state at the top of my talk page directions for contacting me, but I do not see what is so hard about following them. I have only five messages since last archive earlier today and already three people can't follow directions.
As to the point, even with the current standard, that isn't an opinion. No walkthrough has anything even resembling that, and to allow it now is really not an option. Things like are to be integrated into the walkthrough, not listed out and duplicated. That is so redundant. Not to mention it looks horrible. Lancer1289 02:18, March 29, 2012 (UTC)

Uh, what? I just clicked 'leave message'. Sorry if I got anything wrong, I'm new to Wikia editing.

Anyway I just wanted to make a list of what's in the mission so players won't miss out on mods, weapons, etc. Is something like the item list at the top of Priority: Sur'kesh acceptable?--Ngene 02:30, March 29, 2012 (UTC)

And considering I just removed it, along with a duplicated section, no. Again those things are to be integerated into the walkthrough, not in a list format. This wasn't done for ME, it wasn't done for ME2, and it will not be done for ME3. Lancer1289 02:35, March 29, 2012 (UTC)

Okay, thanks, got that.--Ngene 02:46, March 29, 2012 (UTC)

Missing Title #3


I just want top discuss with you the edit I made and the later removal by another person claiming what I put was wrong.

The edit I did of the rank structure was based on things I've seen in Mass Effect 3 and the real life military structure.

The things I'm talking about are how Doctor Chakwas holds the rank of Major which in the real structure is below the rank of Commander yet is shown on the page as equal to a Captain.

The reason I noticed this error is cause while she knows Sheppard personally, she speaks to him as though he is like in the real structure, her superior.

Another person who similarly speaks to Sheppard as though he is his superior is the Captain you meet in the C-Sec office on the Persiduim who after stopping him, looks down at the floor in the same way a child of a subordinate would after being told off.

Lastly you have Kaiden who if you saved him instead of Ashley is now a Major (which is equal to a Lieutenant Commander) will like Ashley does after you recruit her, salutes Sheppard which further goes to show the rank structure as it current listed is wrong.

There is also no indication that the Systems Alliance is any different from Starfleet in Star Trek which uses standard military rank structure, plus the Mass Effect universe is only 150+ years ahead of where we are now so even if we did end up meeting other intelligent races in the galaxy, unite into world government and start exploring the stars, we would change the military rank structure to the point where a Marine Major and a Naval Captain are equal ranks.

So I ask you this, do you believe as I do that the creator of Mass Effect used the standard military structure as used by all militaries around, or do you think they actually spent time thinking up a whole new one which bares no resemblance to what we currently use?

I await your response on this.

It is now so blatantly obvious that no one can follow simple directions anymore, even when said directions are in plain, and simple English. I specifically state at the top of my talk page directions for contacting me, but I do not see what is so hard about following them. I have only five messages since last archive earlier today and already three people can't follow directions.
The problem is that you edited the Codex, which is verbatim from the game. If it isn't in the Codex form the game, then it isn't listed here. It is plain and simple. Not to mention that your "observations" about this are irrelevant. What matters is that is what we have to go on and since we haven't had anything else to contradict that, then we have to go with what we have.
As to the question, I really don't want to voice my opinion because things like that have a very bad habit of getting out of control. If you want to discuss that, please take it to a forum or a blog post.
And it's "Shepard" not "Sheppard". Lancer1289 02:18, March 29, 2012 (UTC)

You really should sign your messages. You do this by adding four tilde marks at the end. You also shouldn't alter Codex pages, as they are directly from the game's text. The main Codex page says: "Please note: These entries are quoted verbatim from the game and should be kept pristine. Edits and updates should be placed on non-Codex pages relating to the same subject (e.g. don't update the Mako's Codex entry, update the Mako article instead.)"
The Codex page is what developers of Mass Effect intended, so yes, the rank structures differs from the standard US or Western rank structure. The ranks of Operation Chief or Staff Commander should have tipped you off to that. Mass Effect places fast and loose with chain of command, as seen in Mass Effect 3 by turian generals saluting Garrus. BTW, Shepard is a Lieutenant Commander, not a Staff Commander. Seburo 02:26, March 29, 2012 (UTC)

Spoiler template violates guidelines

The spoiler template for Mass Effect Invasion Violates community guidelines on profanity in articles.--BrewCrew4Life21 04:09, March 29, 2012 (UTC)

And that is a quote, and therefore doesn't violate policy. Now please remove the tag from my page as it puts a category on my talk page and that is a violation of site policy. If it isn't removed, then I will do it myself. Lancer1289 04:11, March 29, 2012 (UTC)


is there a dedicated page where I can find all the arguments that take place between people in ME3. IE: Joker bugging Liara over her "hair tentacles"

No. And I do not see a need for one. Lancer1289 15:01, March 29, 2012 (UTC)

Missing Title #4

Forgive me for getting lost in all the pages here, I have searched through and am not finding the simple answer I am looking for. I have never edited or written anything on Wikia before, but added a bit of information for the first time that I noticed missing. It was a simple paragraph and a list of clusters, but for some reason the separation isn't coming out how I originally typed it in. If you could be so kind as to inform me on how to format the simple paragraph I would appreciate it. I am sorry for the trivial request while you are so busy with other things, but I cannot find the answer through the resources provided on my welcoming message. Thank you

It appears to have been squared away. In the future, note that just hitting the return carriage button will not provide a line break. You need a full empty line to get separate paragraphs. Lancer1289 15:01, March 29, 2012 (UTC)

Character infobox images

So The Illusive Man keeps reverting to the previous infobox images for Kai Leng and Javik saying that the ones I took with flycam aren't standard for the infoboxes. Can't find such paragraph in the MoS, but that's beside the point. The images he reverts too have the characters both tinted by the environment and/or not showing a good closeup of their head/shoulders. I'd like your opinion on the matter instead of going on an edit war spree. --Kainzorus Prime Walkie-talkie 18:09, March 29, 2012 (UTC)

Yes, this was something I thought about asking Lancer about too, so I was probably a bit too hasty in reverting your edits, my apologies. The main reason I reverted them is the character infobox images thus far have been taken from cinematics and conversations, thus look more livelier and not as dull and flat as opposed to one wearing an empty expression in flycam? Those types of screenshots work for the adversary infoboxes but I'm not a fan of their use here. I do not agree with your "tinted" argument because one could say the same for Kaidan, Ashley, and Jack. It isn't that I dislike your images, I just feel that the main character image should have more than a blank, empty expression. Lancer may disagree with my evaluation, of course. The Illusive Man 18:19, March 29, 2012 (UTC)
I'd have no problem with getting a cinematic shot, if there was a way of using flycam in there, prefferably coupled with playersonly freezing, as it makess for good positioning.--Kainzorus Prime Walkie-talkie 18:26, March 29, 2012 (UTC)
While I am hesitant to make some kind of ruling, it seems that the situation is beyond that. After looking at a number of shots, I honestly can't tell what images are what. However, I would have to say that we should go with the better image. I'd strongly favor the new Javik one over the old one as it shows up better, and is in much better lighting. Overall, I'd say just go with what renders better in terms of size, focus, lighting, elements, etc. Lancer1289 18:37, March 29, 2012 (UTC)
If that is feasible? I'm not sure. It has been my experience that the cinematic screenshots can be burdened by timing if taken normally. The Illusive Man 18:40, March 29, 2012 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Again, I would just have to say that going with which renders better in general, or specific terms, is probably the best way to go. Javik's could definitely use some kind of improvement and while Kai's isn't as big of an issue, the other image had things going for it as well, yet so does the current image. I'd say that one is more personal taste than anything.
If we need to get more specific on this issue, then I don't have a problem with that, but for now, just go on what renders better. Again, I don't take images, and in fact, I don't own ME3 for PC, I do have ME and ME2, and I'm still with images to say the least. Lancer1289 18:46, March 29, 2012 (UTC)
Kainzorus Prime is acquiring images through this method, navigating the camera to an idle character and taking a screenshot, rather like at the 0:26 mark on the video. It is my opinion that the shots are a little on the stale side for the character infobox but work wondrously for taking screenshots of enemies. There is no rules on how the images are acquired, of course, but there is a bit of a precedent. The Illusive Man 19:20, March 29, 2012 (UTC)
True, however pulling them from YouTube vidoes usually don't end up well. Lancer1289 19:25, March 29, 2012 (UTC)
What TIM meant is using the same method as shown in the YouTube video, Kai can take a screenshot from anywhere. Anyway, I have to agree with Lancer. Whichever is the best picture, however the method is obtained, should be used. I believe there's some pictures in this wiki (probably walkthroughs) here are taken in this method. — Teugene (Talk) 21:31, March 29, 2012 (UTC)
You're right, Garrus: Eye for an Eye is a good example of this. I do want to reiterate that my qualm is not with the nature of how these images are being taken, just that the image of the character infobox be more personable and animated than the use of the flycam outside of cinematics and conversations can grant. I'll defer judgment on the matter to others. The Illusive Man 22:24, March 29, 2012 (UTC)
I know. I was saying that pulling images from YouTube videos never turns out well. Lancer1289 21:59, March 29, 2012 (UTC)

Baria Frontiers split

Not sure if you remember, but back in January you proposed splitting part of the Baria Frontiers article off into a shop page. Somehow we all forgot about the split. I've tallied the votes and you've got the okay to carry it out now. -- Commdor (Talk) 18:44, March 29, 2012 (UTC)

I saw that and it jogged a few memories. A lot of things happened right in that time frame, and I probably forgot about it. I'll take care of it now. Lancer1289 18:48, March 29, 2012 (UTC)

Delete images

Lance, could you please do me a favour and delete these images?

  1. ME3Enemy_Container-A.png
  2. ME3Enemy_Container-B.png
  3. ME3Enemy_Container-H.png
  4. ME3Enemy_Container-S.png

Thanks a bunch! — Teugene (Talk) 22:47, March 29, 2012 (UTC)

I got it, Lancer. -- Commdor (Talk) 22:53, March 29, 2012 (UTC)
Thanks a bunch! — Teugene (Talk) 22:55, March 29, 2012 (UTC)

Missing Title #5

Regarding Tali'zorah datapad dialog.

Should I add a note to the end of the page with a link, much like unique dialog?

Is anyone capable of following directions anymore? I ask people to follow a simple set of directions and that seems to be impossible to follow. This section has nothing to do with the one above, so why, in direct opposition to my directions, does someone edit there. Perhaps I should start removing messages where people can't follow directions.
As to the point, it doesn't belong anywhere as it is already being covered in the Mail (Mass Effect: Datapad) article. Lancer1289 14:17, March 30, 2012 (UTC)

Unnecessary Title #1

Hey, that piece I added about Javik, it's true, but if it's not trivia, what is it? Where should I put it? --Martolives 14:00, March 30, 2012 (UTC)

Why can't people follow directions? I specifically ask people if a section is entitled something, yet if what is being asked doesn't have anything to do with what is already in that section, then don't edit there. Make a new section for a separate conversation and a separate topic.
As to the point, if anything, it belongs on the UD page, and even that is questionable. Lancer1289 14:17, March 30, 2012 (UTC)
Ok, I though I had added that Javik thing here, so to answer your first question, that was a mistake. Mistakes happen. Chill. I usually do try to follow "directions", but everyone makes mistakes, and I don't think chiding them for it will be very helpful.
As for UD, it's not dialogue, it's still trivia. The fact that he doesn't show up in engineering at all if you find the hamster straight away may imply he makes the trip to grab a player's attention to that area of the ship - I left out that little piece of speculation as according to site policies, which I just went through regarding trivia again - it does not explicitly forbid this little tidbit. In fact, "Trivia is classified as information players may not have been aware of and is impactful or interesting. Ideally trivia sections should be no more than half a dozen snippets of information, not more than a line or so long."
End of the day, I don't care if it's there or not, whether it's on Javik's page or UD, but it's trivia. And it's harmless. --Martolives 14:32, March 30, 2012 (UTC)
Except it isn't trivia because that has nothing to do. Wouldn't anyone explore a new ship that they've never been on before? It isn't trivia and even the UD page is questionable. Lancer1289 14:49, March 30, 2012 (UTC)
Whatever. I thought you might like to know that the above reply that I made that started with "Ok, I though I had added that Javik thing here..."
To add that post, I clicked on the "edit" button beside the post titled "RE:Trivia" to add it to that section - for some reason, it added it down here. Don't know why. That's where I tried to add my initial post, btw. So it wasn't my mistake, there's either something wrong with the Wiki, or your talk page... I dunno.

You know what, I just looked at your edit history cuz I was curious about why my posts were showing up down here instead of the relevant section I was posting in, and all I have to say is, I followed directions just fine, thank you very much. I posted in a section I had set up myself, "RE: Trivia," which my TRIVIA-RELATED inquiry was DIRECTLY related to, and you moved it, and made me look like a moron for being incapable of following "direction", which I did PRECISELY. Would you prefer I posted a whole new section entitled "RE: More Trivia?" I added my query EXACTLY where I intended, and EXACTLY where it was relevant. It was a section I fully intended to use for further trivia inquiries, considering it is a subject I find rather ambiguous, since you actually have very vague guidelines on what is and isn't trivia except for a few specific points.

I want to be able to contribute here, Lancer, and I believe I've already been of some service in combating vandals, although I understand I've made a few mistakes here and there, but being relatively new to this particular arena, I would expect that people would understand. But if you can't figure out what's going on on your own talk page, why should I bother?

Please clarify your directions, Lancer. A section entitled "RE: Trivia", especially one I put up myself, seems like a perfect place for me to continue my trivia inquiries. --Martolives 15:14, March 30, 2012 (UTC)

Except that this question had nothing to do with the previous question. The previous question was asking about something in a completely different game. This question was asking about something recent, and in ME3. The two are only connected by the fact that they were "trivia" and that is it. I actually state this at the top. "If you have a question that has no bearing on a conversation that is under a heading, then please don't edit there. Just leave me a new message. For example, if you see a section called Help, but your question doesn't relate to what the conversation was about, then PLEASE don't edit in that section, just leave me a new message. The comments will be moved to the end and I'll create a new section for it." It doesn't matter who created it, or anything else. If the conversation doesn't relate to the one already in there, then don't edit there. Leave me a new message. I don't care if there are 15 headers saying trivia. This has no relevance, no bearing, no nothing to that conversation because it doesn't relate to it. This allows me to keep my talk page organized, and keep all conversations about specific topics under one heading for ease of navigation, ease of reading, and ease of finding information. Lancer1289 15:23, March 30, 2012 (UTC)

Delete this?

[1] Could you delete that image? I was able to figure out around what I thought I was going to need it for, and don't need it now, so no reason to have it on the wiki, getting in the way so to speak.

Done. Lancer1289 20:15, March 30, 2012 (UTC)
Much Appreciated.--Xaero Dumort 23:35, March 30, 2012 (UTC)


My edit to Arrival in regards to the autosave was not incorrect. It has happened to me with everyone of my characters and it has happened to all of my friends I have talked to. Don't just assume it is incorrect unless you can back it up.--- BrewCrew4Life21

So what The fact it doesn't happen to me say different, or are we only using your game experience and ignoring everyone else's if it happens to be different? Lancer1289 23:21, March 30, 2012 (UTC) Skip to 7:40 and watch the loading screen and further gameplay and you will see no save logo--- BrewCrew4Life21
and another instance at 4:10 ----BrewCrew4Life21
and once more at 9:35 --BrewCrew4Life21 23:34, March 30, 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict x4)If you are not even going to give me a chance to respond, then I will cease responding. It is common courtesy to give someone a chance to respond, and not spam them with messages.

And what I see is not what is experienced, and I'm also seeing a lack of a save icon at locations I know it occurs. I think that the video, now videos have the autosave function disabled, and therefore I'm not willing to call this evidence. Again, do we ignore what happens to me or only what happens to you. Every time I have seen this played, there is an autosave right before the conversation with Hackett. I've even had my console freeze during that conversation and not had to repeat the fight. Lancer1289 23:36, March 30, 2012 (UTC)

The evidence I have provided is irrefutable, there is NO autosave after the conversation with Hackett. So far you have provided no evidence aside from your questionable word that says what I have stated is incorrect. Just because you are an admin doesn't mean your right about everything you like to think you are and that we are supposed to take your word on it. I have evidence, you don't. And I apologize for spamming, that was immature.--BrewCrew4Life21 23:43, March 30, 2012 (UTC)
And you have yet to address everything in my comment. There are save points which I know exist that I didn't see in any of those videos. Therefore, a logical conclusion is that they have that feature turned off. Not everyone leaves it on you know. And FYI, there are plenty of times that I've been wrong. Lancer1289 00:00, March 31, 2012 (UTC)
Then explain why it happens to me and my friends who never have autosave off. It happens to me every time I go through and replay it. And I know you have been wrong, it just seems like you expect us to take your word for things--BrewCrew4Life21 00:05, March 31, 2012 (UTC)
And then explain why all of my friends have an autosave just before the conversation with Hackett? And don't tell me something, when you want to do the same thing. There are clear instances where an autosave should have happened, yet they didn't. Lancer1289 00:08, March 31, 2012 (UTC)
Can we compromise? Your happy and I'm happy? Can we agree to put this on the page: "In some cases the autosave function does not work and will cause you to repeat the final battle and conversation with Hackett. This can also lead to alternate dialogue in Mass Effect 3 which implies you never played Arrival."--BrewCrew4Life21 00:22, March 31, 2012 (UTC)
I guess I can live with that. Lancer1289 00:43, March 31, 2012 (UTC)
Done! :D --BrewCrew4Life21 00:47, March 31, 2012 (UTC)

Cheevo Archive Wiki Afiliation Request

Hi Lancer1289,

I am here on behalf of the Cheevo Archive Wiki in order to make a request of the ME Wiki.

Firstly, I guess I should give you a rundown on exactly what Cheevo Archive Wiki is. Well basically it is a wiki that was made in order to provide easily accessible guides and to Video Game (such as Mass Effect) achievements/trophies. The wiki was formed on February 28th 2012 and so far is going pretty well. We were approved of Wiki Spotlight on the 22nd of March and are now working on getting some partnerships going with other affiliated Video Gaming wiki's such as this one.

So now the big question, would the ME Wiki be interested in forming some kind of affiliation/partnership? We would add a link to the ME wiki on our main page and add the ME Wiki to our list of Affiliated Wikis. We believe the partnership could be mutually beneficial.

I would be interested in hearing your thoughts on this request.


.50CalAssassin - Talk To Me Fellow Editors! 23:50, April 1, 2012 (UTC)

Spart has already given you an answer to this question on his talk page. Lancer1289 14:57, April 3, 2012 (UTC)

Dr. Brynn Cole - Edits

Hello! I'm pretty new and trying to figure out some edits to the Dr. Brynn Cole page. I had added a citation where it was noted one was needed, and both my citation and the reference to the voice actor were both removed as being an invalid source. I can't find anything about what would be a valid source, and I've seen IMDB referenced on other wikis - is it not acceptable here? If not, could you give me some examples of what would be valid? Given that the actors for individual smaller parts aren't given in the credits for the game, I'm not sure where else to reference the information. I had a trivia note removed previously for not being confirmed, but the trivia note giving further information about the voice actress (who is no longer noted on the page) is still there. Any clarification you can give would be greatly appreciated, as I'd like to improve what I'm adding. Thanks! Cyberwench 20:08, April 4, 2012 (UTC)

We have never, nor will we ever, accept IMDb by itself as a valid source. We need a much more reliable, valid, and inddependely verifiable source before we allow voice actor/actress information that isn't listed in the credits. I will remove the trivia since it was missed. Lancer1289 20:19, April 4, 2012 (UTC)
Could you give me an example of a valid source for this information? It seems like there wouldn't be any other possible source for voice actors listed in the "additional voices" section of the credits. Voice actors are one thing that I specifically come here to find, so I'm wondering what the best way would be to make sure they are listed correctly.Cyberwench 20:23, April 4, 2012 (UTC)
Some reliable gaming websites, Gameinformer, Offical Xbox/PlayStation Magazine, BSN, BioWare's own website. Basically any site that has a reputation for being truthful, reliable, and that isn't a blog or forum site. We never take those. Lancer1289 04:26, April 5, 2012 (UTC)

I have been taken to your leader!

Hey there,

I'm quite unsure as how to word this, so I figure I'll just bluntly make my point. My name is Adam, and I'm an HTML5, CSS, PHP, and JS coder and head of 2 wikis, and adopter of 1, founder of 1, editor on 11. I'm also a big fan of the Mass Effect universe, and reading through your userpage, you and I have a lot of the same interests and opinions, so I figure you (seeming to be the leader of MEWiki) should be the person for me to talk to about this. I'd like to at least make you aware that my specialty is web graphic design, mostly with HTML5 and WMP/MW coding, and that I'm more than willing to help tackle any tasks you might want help with, not to mention I've got access to some neat coding toys that aid with the Wiki, (like UTC clocks and adding contributions to your user menu, customizing userpage rights buttons, etc.) and I would be greatly interested in helping out here, as well as helping work with minor page edits and things. I like big projects (if you can't tell), and I'm at your disposal, if you wish, as an editing VI for ya. So, hit me up if you've got anything you want to sic me on. Adam-Commander

While I have already left a message about templates, we don't have objections to things like that, they just require discussion first. Multiple times people have done things and no one has shown interest or they have been removed entirely. Lancer1289 18:39, April 5, 2012 (UTC)

new images

i have uploaded new improved versions of my old images please take a look and tell me what you think --MSV Estevanico 16:17, April 6, 2012 (UTC)

Aria: Blue Suns

The quest Aria: Blue Suns does not appear in the search box; typing in Aria: Blue S results in only Aria: Blue Sins, a deleted page. Just wanted to bring your attention to this. --Go Bruins!/Go Red Sox!/Go Pats! 16:50, April 6, 2012 (UTC)

And there isn't anything we can do about that. That is a problem with Wikia, again. Anything related to things like that are almost always a problem with Wikia. Lancer1289 16:57, April 6, 2012 (UTC)
Ah well sorry to bother you. It isn't anything more than slightly annoying; mostly when you type "Aria: Blue Suns" and it autocorrects you to "Aria: Blue Sins". One thing you might be able to do is create a redirect on Blue Sins to Blue Suns. --Go Bruins!/Go Red Sox!/Go Pats! 17:07, April 6, 2012 (UTC)
It is more than likely a caching issue that will go away in time. Therefore, all we end up with is a useless redirect. If it persists, then it may be necessary, but for now, not really. Considering I just tried it and I went to the correct article. Also, please remove the red link. Lancer1289 17:09, April 6, 2012 (UTC)

Red link removed. --Go Bruins!/Go Red Sox!/Go Pats! 02:50, April 7, 2012 (UTC)

Regarding the Resurgence Pack Source

Regarding the Resurgence Pack source:

As I stated, if you decided to actually read the summary I put: The info is on the gameinformer page, which is already there at the end of the paragraph, I deemed it not necessary to put it there, since it was already there. So there. I also put the EXACT writing. Here: The pack is available to download on April 10 on Xbox Live, Origin, and PlayStation Network in North America. Its available on PlayStation Network in Europe on April 11. Thank you for your time.


Hi Lancer. I just thought I'd let you know that User:Sandros12 appears to be a spambot. He/She/They/It has posted a blog post and a link in an article linking to some fishy health insurance site.--WouldYouKindly 15:30, April 8, 2012 (UTC)

Missing Title #6

Hermia glitch

So did the glitch I mentioned not count for anything? Just wondering since it was taken down pretty fast. --XavierGTR 21:38, April 8, 2012 (UTC)

Because it is unconfirmed. Having done this myself several times, I never seen it happen. Lancer1289 22:47, April 8, 2012 (UTC)

Piercing/Shredder Mods

This kind of content belongs elsewhere - pray tell, where? I'm serious, that's rather important information when picking mods, isn't explained anywhere ingame, and one would expect it to find it on the mods' page. - von Boomslang 23:45, April 9, 2012 (UTC)

More than likely the Combat (Mass Effect 3) page or a similar page. The Weapon Mods page is for noting the specifics of the mod and any bugs directly associated with that particular mod. Not for noting things like that. Lancer1289 03:07, April 10, 2012 (UTC)

My Feros: Geth Attack edits

On the Feros: Geth Attack page I added the warning to the start as an actual warning to tell the player to have those specific requirements BEFORE starting the actual mission. I understand that it is labeled farther in the article itself, but by that point the player will not be able to go back and fix the problem before it happens. I am trying to save the player from having to replay hours of gameplay by putting the warning at the start. This is taken from personal experience as I am playing through Mass Effect again for fun, and I had to redo a little over two hours of gameplay because I had forgotten that this was required (as it is NOT mentioned at the start of the mission article) but I had a save file before so my case was easily fixable. Thanks for listening! Daniel7400 19:36, April 10, 2012 (UTC)

And no other article does that as it is both redundant and unnecessary. Lancer1289 19:43, April 10, 2012 (UTC)
As a wiki that is dedicated helping players and displaying accurate information, I feel that it makes sense to place that warning at the start to inform the player what they are getting into before they begin the mission. I understand that you might think that it is "both redundant and unnecessary" but the purpose of redundancy is the duplication of critical components or functions of a system (article in this case) with the intention of increasing reliability (how reliable is something if it makes you restart the mission because of the lack of warning) of the system, usually in the case of a backup or fail-safe (the warning will serve as the initial point, and is shown again when it is that point) as stated from Redundancy (engineering). Think of this warning at the start of the mission article as a form of an "Early-Warning System" to avoid replaying this part over because of not knowing what was coming ahead. Daniel7400 21:00, April 10, 2012 (UTC)
Except we have no need for duplicated information, especially in the same article and especially when it is noted elsewhere as well. I also find the link to be an insult as you assume I have no idea what redundant means. Lancer1289 21:04, April 10, 2012 (UTC)
I don't understand why you would be insulted about something that happened in a conversation over the internet... As my intentions were not to insult but to use the word you used against me and repurpose it for my own argument. If I were to insult you I would have clearly stated it. As I look through what I said, I can see that I did not say that in any way, and that is because I meant no disrespect to you and only posted the link to have a backing to my point (so you would not assume that I was just making stuff up.) It is obvious to me though that you have a pre-decided opinion on this and nothing I will say or do will change that, sorry if you can't understand my intentions which were only to warn players what they were getting in to before they realized they have to redo twoish hours of gameplay. Daniel7400 21:31, April 10, 2012 (UTC)
And now I feel more insulted. You think just because it is the internet that anything said is not offensive and that no one can take offense to what you say or do? Wow, I really have no words to describe that. Lancer1289 23:52, April 10, 2012 (UTC)
-.- You take everything I say out of context and make it offensive... What I meant was that this should not be such a big deal; I have not once tried to offend you. I probably could have done a better job so that they could not have been seen as offensive, but let me assure you that I have not once intentionally tried to insult you. So let’s cut this conversation here because you don't agree with my point and so that I do not "insult" you again. I apologize if I hurt you feelings. Daniel7400 00:03, April 11, 2012 (UTC)

Menae Template

Menae should have it's own moon info template. In game all stats are listed as "CLASSIFIED" and you can't do that with the curresnt template.--BrewCrew4Life21

Or you can be completely rude and ignore me --BrewCrew4Life21 22:21, April 12, 2012 (UTC)
Cut Lancer some slack. He gets more posts on his talk page than just about anyone else around here, and it's easy for some topics to get lost behind others that are posted later. The "New Messages" pop-up doesn't tell us how many new messages we actually have. -- Commdor (Talk) 22:27, April 12, 2012 (UTC)
Well then what do you think Commdor?--BrewCrew4Life21 22:31, April 12, 2012 (UTC)
I'm looking into a few possible solutions. -- Commdor (Talk) 22:34, April 12, 2012 (UTC)
Awesome! Thank You!--BrewCrew4Life21 23:06, April 12, 2012 (UTC)

Missing Title #7

User:Nohead13 has been editing the article Illium:_Liara:_The_Observer with some nasty commentary. Edited out two comments so far - these comments are being made in the article itself, under the mission summery section.

I have seen to the matter. Lancer1289 14:51, April 12, 2012 (UTC)

Datapad edits

Hi, I saw that you'd removed the images I added to the Datapad section.

I'm sorry if I boobed somehow, but I followed the simple 'add photo' process in edit. Can you let me know what I did wrong?

If there's a better way to add visual information, I'd be keen to know that too. VEry new and just wanted to help.


S. --Silesti 15:20, April 12, 2012 (UTC)


Just thought you might like to know that in one fell swoop TheEliteBrit has not only violated language policy but they did so to a sever degree while they edited -S- User page as well as are editing warring over that stupid Marauder Shields thing.--Xaero Dumort 17:09, April 12, 2012 (UTC)

Took care of it. He's a repeat offender. -- Commdor (Talk) 17:34, April 12, 2012 (UTC)
Thanks Commdor. Just realized I forgot to leave a message on your page.--Xaero Dumort 17:37, April 12, 2012 (UTC)
Yeah I was sitting in math class learning about vectors and the law of cosins. I remember this guy, and apparently some people can't learn. It's sad really. Lancer1289 18:17, April 12, 2012 (UTC)


What time zone is used here on the Wiki? It is only 9:31 where I live (central time), but when I post it says it is hours ahead.--BrewCrew4Life21 02:33, April 13, 2012 (UTC)

That would be UTC (also known as GMT: Greenwich Mean Time). Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem 02:34, April 13, 2012 (UTC)
Thanks--BrewCrew4Life21 02:39, April 13, 2012 (UTC)

Our unfinished discussion

I'm not surprised you withdrew again and I don't care if that's because you don't care anymore, don't have the time or just realized you were wrong. I don't take it lightly that you just come over with the self-righteous attitude of yours threatening to ban me because of rules that only exist in your head. I've contaced Wikia support about the maintenance edit I made (and yes, it was nothing more) and that's what they answered:
Thanks for contacting Wikia. If it's the same picture but of higher quality, I'd say that's totally fine. There are some taboos when it comes to editing other people's user pages, since most people view them as their personal space, but in general maintenance-related edits are fine.
--ShardofTruth 13:43, April 13, 2012 (UTC)

You know the reasons, I got sick of your rude, arrogant, hostile, bigoted, complete self-righteous attitude, and of trying to make you see reason, which you are clearly incapable of. I informed you of a site policy, which I even pointed out to you, yet you ignored it, threw everything back in my face, insulted me at every turn, and you continually think you are above the rules here on the site. The fact you went to Wikia is not only a further insult, but also tells me exactly who you think you are, someone who does think they are above the rules and regulations here, despite being informed of them at least three times. We do not allow other users to edit the user space of another user. That is site policy, yet you flat out refuse to see it for whatever reasons. This is not my problem it is yours. Until you realize this, I see nothing further to discuss. You violated site policy, refuse to see it, and that is what happened. Lancer1289 14:14, April 13, 2012 (UTC)
I went to Wikia to ask about their opinion on userspace maintenance edits, not to blame you our drag this conversation out to light to some admins, which I didn't by the way.
You violated site policy
No, for the hundredth time no. There is no site policy that says that, only you. That's why I don't see reason and that's why your behaviour is indeed the hostile one. I did a maintenance edit, you came to me telling me this is a banable offense, which it isn't. I'm not above rules and regulations, you are, because you making this stuff up. That's not my problem but yours. I would have had no problem if you reverted the edit and told me (or not told me) "We don't usually do this stuff here, I will restore the missing images later." But no, you took the most agressive and offensive way possible, although you were in the wrong. That's your attitude, face it. --ShardofTruth 15:34, April 13, 2012 (UTC)
As stated previously, I have nothing further to say. You violated site policy, you were warned about it in the same way that everyone else is, and you refuse to accept that. Lancer1289 18:15, April 13, 2012 (UTC)

Apologies if I'm interrupting, but I was going to quote the policy that mentions about editing other user pages but... all I've found was disallowing edits of other users' comments. There's no mention of disallowing edits of other user pages, not even under banning. I thought there was a policy about this but I can't find it myself. So, I know it's has been common practice since who knows when, but unless I'm unaware of another policy page somewhere, ShardofTruth has a point here. — Teugene (Talk) 19:40, April 13, 2012 (UTC)

He doesn't have a point, leg, or anything else to stand on because, even though I've quoted it, he doesn't listen, is incorrect, and now I find that I have to repeat what I've already said again. It is listed in the CG. "A user's page and Talk page belong to that user, and they have control over what goes on it." "A user's page" is any page inside their user space and "they have control over what goes on it" is saying that they are the only ones permitted to edit their user space. That said, even that only goes so far within the bounds of other site policies. Attacks against users, profanity, or illegal images are not permitted in any circumstance.
For the last and final time I again, have nothing further to say because I am done repeating myself on this issue. Lancer1289 19:48, April 13, 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for replying. I supposed this is where it is mentioned which I read earlier and thought that could use some clarification, especially it comes under a slightly misleading title "User Talk pages". — Teugene (Talk) 19:57, April 13, 2012 (UTC)
I was actually going to comment pointing to where site policy does state the each editor is the owner of their own user page and, as such, has editorial control over it, but Lancer already highlighted it. SpartHawg948 20:02, April 13, 2012 (UTC)
Having read this discussion, perhaps it's time to make this stipulation of the policy much clearer and highlighted, so that any user can find it very easily. Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem 20:05, April 13, 2012 (UTC)
Couldn't hurt, that's for sure. SpartHawg948 20:08, April 13, 2012 (UTC)

Sounds much better now. Not that I ever intend to edit other user page anyway :P — Teugene (Talk) 20:29, April 13, 2012 (UTC)

I'll tell you what ShardofTruth does have a point on, Lancer's attitude. Honestly Lancer, your a total dick. I'm sorry man but the way you treat and talk to people is just down right rude and disrespectful. You quote the rules about attacks against users but the way you treat users and insult them is an attack in and of itself. You jump down people's throats and if someone breaks a policy, even if they didn't know about it, and you threaten to ban them. You could say "Hey, just wanted to let you know that you broke a site policy. (Explain what they did). It would be much appreciated if you read our Community Guidelines so your'e informed on how to help keep this wiki running the way we have tried so hard to do. If you are ever unsure of what to do please ask me or any of our other admins. We'd be happy to help! Just please know that if you break site policy again we may have to ban you. We aren't trying to be mean, we just have enforce the rules. And if you ever need tips please read our Manual of Style. Thanks" But nope you just go "Do it again and your done." So if your such a stickler about upholding the rules, which appear to be your Holy Bible, then you need to ban yourself. Have a wonderful day (said with the utmost sarcasm). Yours truly --BrewCrew4Life21 21:36, April 13, 2012 (UTC)

Oh man you just kicked the beehive. I agree sometime Lancer can come off as a bit hostile, but most of the time its when he is provoked by a user doing something, that is, to put frankly, stupid.This happens all the time. Also who are you to judge Lancer, you just attacked him and broke the language policy. Have a pleasant day.--Legionwrex 21:46, April 13, 2012 (UTC)
I didn't break the language policy. And I didn't attack him. I told him the truth about what he's like. It's not like I said anything vulgar to him. I told him what he's doing wrong and how to fix it.--BrewCrew4Life21 21:54, April 13, 2012 (UTC)
You did actually, try third word from the end on your first line. JediSpectre117 21:59, April 13, 2012 (UTC)
"Dick" is by no means whatsoever a curse word. And if we're going to be a real stickler about the language policy than any quote with a curse word in it, in fact ANYTHING with a curse word in it, be it template or quote, needs to be changed.--BrewCrew4Life21 22:05, April 13, 2012 (UTC)

I think this problem is resolved now, but I'm still feeling like I should add two things: I never intended to took control away from SpartHawg's personal pages nor did I vandalise them. I edited the page in good faith to get the two missing images back on, nothing more. Even with the updated guidelines this could hardly be taken as an "extremely bannable offense", even a Wikia staff member herself said so.
Lancer pulls out an agressive tone really fast, lecturing and admonishing wherever he can, even if he is cleary wrong about something. I'm only active again on this wiki since march but I've witnessed many examples of his plain rudeness. Maybe this is only my personal perception, but I don't like if someone talks to me like that time and time again, regardless if he has 20.000 or 90.000 edits. --ShardofTruth 22:27, April 13, 2012 (UTC)

I couldn't agree more. I have proven him wrong in the past, I even provided evidence to prove I was right, but he blatantly disregarded it and expected me to take his word on the subject. In the end he got his way. He needs treat people with respect, not as an object he gets to control.--BrewCrew4Life21 22:36, April 13, 2012 (UTC)

Its not a curse word? Really, do you honestly believe that.--Legionwrex 22:39, April 13, 2012 (UTC)

Uhh yes I do. How is it a curse word? It's a slang word people use to describe someone they don't like. It's not a curse word and if you think it is then you really shouldn't be play Mass Effect 2 because the words you will hear Jack say will set your ears on fire.--BrewCrew4Life21 22:44, April 13, 2012 (UTC)

Menos Avot Trivia

Hello again, I do understand we did not get off on the best of cases but I apologize for it and I hope we can put it past us. I do indeed believe that what I put was considered trivia (going to quote the Mass Effect Wiki:Manual of Style as evidence, not as an insult! :c ) "Trivia is classified as information players may not have been aware of and is impactful or interesting." I would indeed say that what I added to the Menos Avot article would classify as "trivia" in the sense of how it is described in the Manual of Style. Thanks for listening and let me know what your side is! :) Daniel7400 23:24, April 13, 2012 (UTC)

It isn't trivia because female officers being addressed as "sir" really isn't that out of the ordinary. One of the biggest examples of this recently is Battlestar Galactica where all senior officers are addressed as sir. The practice isn't that uncommon. Lancer1289 23:41, April 13, 2012 (UTC)
Ok, that makes sense... Now that you put it that way I guess my thing doesn't really qualify as trivia after all. Thanks for the insight! Daniel7400 03:02, April 14, 2012 (UTC)

Adding images without messing up the format?

So, after a few weeks here, I've decided to stop just posting on ending-argument blogs and get down to actually helping with the wiki. One of the things I wanted to do was add this image [[2]] to either the Cerberus or Starships page - it's currently nowhere, and either page would be a good fit. However, I can't figure out how to add it neatly. As you can see, I'm not sure how to resize it, but besides that, I'm also not sure how to fit it in without messing up the page.

I don't want to cause any trouble here, so any help you have would be appreciated. Thanks.

--Zxjkl 06:44, April 14, 2012 (UTC)

First please remove the image, and just link it because it is huge and breaking up the formatting on the page. Just link the image at most, and please use the preview setting to see how it would look.
As to where it should go, I'm not entirely sure. It really doesn't fit into either article. Lancer1289 14:40, April 14, 2012 (UTC)

I removed the image and just put in a link. As far as the pages go, I figured it could go next to the Alliance fighter on Starships, similar to how we have pictures of the turian and Alliance cruisers higher up on the page.

It should probably be added to the Starships category, anyway. For a wiki on a science fiction game, it sometimes seems like we have a shortage of images of spaceships. --Zxjkl 21:29, April 14, 2012 (UTC)

I'm not to sure about that because of the lack of space in the article already. It will more than likely end up causing formatting issues. Lancer1289 23:23, April 14, 2012 (UTC)

I can see that, which is why I was asking. You may be right that it can't be added, and I'll probably just put in the Starships category instead. But for future reference, how do you resize images? I can't seem to find it in the Help.--Zxjkl 04:35, April 15, 2012 (UTC)

My Edit

Hi, the reason for my edit was that you dont need to be a spectre. This time I saw the Summary field, but when pressing return for a new line it got published right away...

--Virsacer 13:58, April 14, 2012 (UTC)

Ver well then. Lancer1289 14:40, April 14, 2012 (UTC)


How do you access the sandbox? --Dragonzzilla 19:56, April 15, 2012 (UTC)

Create a page with any name under your user page.
Then under the sandbox, you can create subpages under it.
Example:,, etc.
Teugene (Talk) 20:31, April 15, 2012 (UTC)
There is also the wiki's main sandbox. Mass Effect Wiki:Sandbox. Lancer1289 21:15, April 15, 2012 (UTC)

Well, I tested it. Could you check? --Dragonzzilla 18:52, April 22, 2012 (UTC)

Check what exactly? I can't check anything without a link and what I'm supposed to be checking for. Lancer1289 18:55, April 22, 2012 (UTC)
Click the first link you gave me; I'm lazy like that. --Dragonzzilla 19:04, April 22, 2012 (UTC)

War Assets and minimum EMS

I have given it some consideration, and perhaps you are right: the comment belongs on an article titled War Terminal (like the Intel Terminal). However, There is no reason to have such a page when it would essentially be a redirect to the War Assets page. It could alternatively redirect to the Galaxy at War page. I'm weighing the options at this point, but I do wonder at this point whether a separate War Terminal page is more apt or if information about the War Terminal should be integrated into another page. At this point, the only reference to the War Terminal is in the War Assets page (the page where I placed my edit about it). What do you think? Gamemako 04:22, April 18, 2012 (UTC)

The problem with that is there would be massive overlap and that isn't an option. The GaW page porbably is the best for now, but it didn't belong there. And please remove the red link. Lancer1289 16:39, April 18, 2012 (UTC)
Done. Anyway, organization is a problem. Both additional sections on the War Assets page are not actually about war assets but rather about the GAW system and how it affects the endings to Mass Effect 3. Logically, we should merge all information regarding GAW that is not directly about war assets to the GAW page and leave only short info and a {{main}} redirect the the GAW page in its place. However, with all that merging, the GAW page could quickly get out of hand. Not to mention all the issues with naming: you access the War Terminal to see your War Assets and their combined Total Military Strength as well as your Readiness Rating and Effective Military Strength, with GAW seemingly as a separate page; however, in the Coalesced, it's all referred to as GAW, and it is all directly controlled by GAW. I don't know that there is a good answer, but the current setup doesn't make much sense either. Gamemako 20:46, April 18, 2012 (UTC)
Actually the current system makes a lot of sense as that is how we do things here. War Assets are distinct from the GaW system and deserve a seperate article. Lancer1289 20:57, April 18, 2012 (UTC)
Perhaps I was unclear. We currently discuss Readiness and ME3's outcome in the War Assets article. I do not believe that is correct in any sense. I agree that War Assets are distinct from the GAW at large, but they are still a part of that system. For an (admittedly-lazy) analogy, Combat (Mass Effect 3) is a part of Mass Effect 3, but it is not Mass Effect 3 and wouldn't be in the same article. There is a lot of information that feeds into GAW, and I am just wondering how best to organize the information. I believe that the current distribution of information is poor (e.g. the Readiness in the War Assets article) and should be revised. Gamemako 02:29, April 19, 2012 (UTC)
Well they are still relevant there, but perhaps they could be cut down. Readiness probably shouldn't be in that article as much as it is because while it is still relevant, it really belongs on the GaW page. Lancer1289 02:46, April 19, 2012 (UTC)
I have created a quick mockup for a GAW page redesign on my user page. Most of the excess info would be trimmed out of the War Assets page and appropriately labeled there on the GAW page. Let me know what you think. Gamemako 04:00, April 19, 2012 (UTC)

Missing Title #8

why did you delete the trivia about the crucible/tower of babel? its in-game, relevant, and interesting. Not subjective in any way.

Can no one read instructions anymore? Considering that this is the eighth time I'm doing this, I guess not. I specifically ask people to not do edit in sections that have no relevance to what they are asking.
As to the point, it is subjective because of the differences between the two. They were for different reasons and even Mordin's comparison is stretching it. Therefore, it isn't trivia. Lancer1289 16:43, April 18, 2012 (UTC)

New Editor's Question

Hi there. I'm probably not going to be a very active contributor at Wikia, I signed up so I could make minor edits. That being said, I didn't think I'd be a top 1500 of all time contributor at Wikipedia, so I really can't judge how I sink hundreds of hours of my time in advance (really, I must have no life at all).

I have a few 'settling in' style questions. Well one major one:

What's Wikia's or at the very least Mass Effect Wiki's policy on copyrighted images? You all are using an absolute ton of screenshots, something that wouldn't fly over on Wikipedia, and I'm not finding license tags on the images. Well, that's not entirely true... some of them have Template:Fairuse on them, and I spotted a claim of Public Domain on File:M490.jpg (which I must say, unless I'm missing something and Bioware gave a release, is incorrect).

Do you have some policy pages you could point me to? (If there's any need, I can clean out images and image license very easily, it's something I've got a ton of experience doing.)

Cheers, Sven Manguard 16:15, April 19, 2012 (UTC)

The main reason that License tags aren't found is because very few people even bother to add them, and even some of them are incorrect as you pointed out. We really have no official policy on that, but to date we have yet to get into trouble about them, and considering we know we have had BioWare devs on the site, including lead writer Mac Walters, I really don't see a problem with it. That said, Commdor seems to be the one to deal with images more than myself, and may be working on something to that end, I usually focus on article content and only rarely on pictures, so I'd recommend asking him before doing anything.
As to policy pages, the main ones are linked on your talk page in the welcome message, but Mass Effect Wiki:Manual of Style, Mass Effect Wiki:Community Guidelines, and anything in the Category:Mass Effect Wiki category. Be aware however that some of those pages have never been updated, or updated a long time ago. Lancer1289 17:11, April 19, 2012 (UTC)

Prologue: Earth

Hi. Recently you reverted an edit of mine on the Prologue: Earth article, deeming it "Irrelevant". How is this fact that I posted to the article irrelevant? Numerous other trivia sections in this wiki contain references to things far more obscure or ambiguous, and even some pure speculation. I fail to see how something such the presence of real-world building does not merit mention, when Mira's supposed reference to Microsoft Office, Joker's references to The Hunt for Red October, or the references to (and appearances of) Big Ben, do. Please help me understand.


CamossDarkfly 16:15, April 19, 2012 (UTC)

And it is quite irrelevant because there is no reason to mention it. The Mira trivia is devconfirmed trivia, Joker's trivia is shove it in your face trivia, and the Big Ben thing is relevant to the character. Not to mention he says that and only appears in one article I might add. Each has more support than yours does, and just to say this, each trivia item is evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Your "trivia" is trivial, not trivia, and therefore not relevant. Lancer1289 17:06, April 19, 2012 (UTC)
In that case, why state that the 'save game files' indicate it takes place in Vancouver, but not a known Vancouver landmark? Or for that matter, why not just say that Anderson stated he got out of Vancouver? Plus, the presence of Canada Place establishes that this is Vancouver, Canada, not Vancouver, Washington. Finally, the role of Canada Place was mentioned by art director Derek Watts in an article in The Globe and Mail on March 6, 2012. You can find it right here. CamossDarkfly 17:38, April 19, 2012 (UTC)
I agree it's not irrelevant. They went out of their way to put a landmark in the game. Also the surviving character (Kaiden/Ashley) talk about English Bay (an area in Vancouver). Anyone who hasn't been to Vancouver, which I will guess is a large amount of the players, will not realize that Canada Place is an actual building. The book The Art of the Mass Effect Universe, on page 158 states "We knew we wanted a beautiful harbour setting and kicked around many ideas for the city, including Rio de Janeiro and Hong Kong. In the end we stayed closer to home, choosing Vancouver". --Interitus 18:13, April 19, 2012 (UTC)
And it was irrelevant until the article was presented. There is no reason to mention landmarks in trivia to say the same thing because they aren't relevant to the item itself. However, now that the article was presented, the trivia can be modified accordingly based on developer statements. Why none of this was presented when the edit were made is beyond me. If you don't add things without sourcing them, then you have zero right to complain when they get removed because they don't meet site standards. Lancer1289 18:26, April 19, 2012 (UTC)
Thank you Lancer1289. I did not mean to sound like I was complaining so I apologize if I came across as such. I'm still fairly new to editing on a Wikia that has actual enforced standards, and am more than happy to learn. If you don't mind, I can re-edit the article later (with the reference intact).CamossDarkfly 18:33, April 19, 2012 (UTC)
I already did that. Further expansion shouldn't be required as the link is present and we don't need to bring up everything. Lancer1289 18:35, April 19, 2012 (UTC)

Councilor Names

I have a question. I added the name of the Turian Councilor from ME1 to the Notable Turian page, why did you remove it? If it's simply because the Turian Councillor in ME3 can have a different name, then why not put both of them in? And yes, I know that if you click on the Turian/Asari/Salarian Councilor link it takes you to a page with all of their names, but I still think it would make more sense to refer to them with their actual names. Also, please note that when I added this via your "Leave a Message" button, it was added to the Priority: Earth discussion by default, and I had to edit it manually into a new section. As a new wiki editor, I have to ask, did I do something wrong when I submitted it, or is that simply an oversight with the "Leave a Message" button, that unless a title is given it automatically adds it to the previous discussion? Ataki Uchiha 15:58, April 20, 2012 (UTC)

Because of the fact they can change after ME, so therefore just saying Councilor is for the best. Lancer1289 18:52, April 20, 2012 (UTC)
Okay, that's fair enough. And do you have any ideas why I may have had that problem with the "Leave a Message" button? Ataki Uchiha 19:52, April 20, 2012 (UTC)
Apologies for missing that. I'm guessing you didn't leave a title in the "Subject/Headline" box in the upper right of the edit window. Lancer1289 19:54, April 20, 2012 (UTC)
Ah. I completely missed that line in the window, so no, I didn't leave a title... Thanks for telling me that, I'll be sure to remember next time. Ataki Uchiha 20:15, April 20, 2012 (UTC)

Banshee Edit

Regarding my Edit of Banshee Tactics. I've seen countless players be careless around a Banshee during wave 11s. Since there is a significant XP decrease in Full and Partial Extractions and the fact I've seen many players make this mistake I felt like this is information that is beneficial. Where do you suppose I include this information? I am a new editor so I'm just asking for my own edification. I'm not trying to dispute your removal of my edit.

And my question is how is that relevant or not pointing out the obvious? Things like that aren't notes and are not noted because of the fact they stare you in the face. Lancer1289 22:02, April 20, 2012 (UTC)
Lancer, maybe you could consider creating a Multiplayer Guide page, where players can put all the little tips and tricks they've found for ME3 Multiplayer, sort of like a "Player Notes" page for Multiplayer. That way, people who want to know what others have found out could look there for tips, tactics and stuff, but you keep the main pages clear. Ataki Uchiha 23:45, April 20, 2012 (UTC)
Things like that are noted as appropriate. However, pointing this out that are already noted, or are obvious, are not worth making a note out of. Lancer1289 00:05, April 21, 2012 (UTC)

Question on creating an article about the ME3 weight system.


Firstly, I hope this is the right place to ask this, I am a long-time reader of various Wikia (mostly for game series, including this Mass Effect one), however I have never contributed before. I apologize if this should be directed somewhere else.

While sifting through the ME3 Coalesced.bin I noticed several things pertaining to gun weight, or as it's called internally, "Encumbrance". After a couple hours of tinkering with various gun's encumbrance, the various class's encumbrance bonuses, and the power cooldown bonuses (or penalties) related to encumbrance, I feel I have a good understanding of how the system works.

I would like to create a page on encumbrance detailing the system. Including but not limited to: a list of all gun weights, how the cooldown bonus scales with encumbrance, and how much encumbrance each class can handle when speced for it.

My main question is about proof. I don't have solid evidence (in the form of a developer post or something of the sort) outside of the data within the coalesced file, which is probably a bit too complex for the average wikia user. How would I go about providing evidence for this page, or is it necessary at all?

I would be happy to provide a short summary here before beginning work on the page if you or someone else would like to verify with their own coalesced file.

Thank you, --Nikx 11:16, April 21, 2012 (UTC)

The thing is that we don't accept interpretation of game data as fact. This has been around for a while now. Not to mention there is absolutely no way for anyone to confirm what you come up with. We need backup for something like this. Lancer1289 18:58, April 22, 2012 (UTC)
Oh OK. It would have saved me a lot of time if someone who had discovered these things before me were allowed to make a page on it. The exercise was fun nonetheless. Perhaps I'll make a post on the Bioware Social Network and/or /r/masseffect so at least it'll get out there and maybe help someone. Thank you for your time.--Nikx 22:44, April 22, 2012 (UTC)
It isn't that a page like that wouldn't have been welcome, it is just that it would need backup, and that is crucial to a page like that. We've been mislead by things like this before, and that is the reason we are so cautious. If you can find backup for it, in the form of a dev, then we can see, but again, it is at this point, mainly an interoperation of game data and original research. Lancer1289 22:48, April 22, 2012 (UTC)

Missing Title #9

Hi just wounding why you removed the (Ultra-Rare) thing on the Javelin page as it is a Ultra Rare Multiplayer weapon by BioWare mass effect 3's own Multiplayer Manifest I did have the info for it in the Player Notes but some1 moved it to the location that you removed so where is that info meant to go then??? --Cpt Kent James 21:55, April 22, 2012 (UTC)

Sigh, I guess no one can follow simple, plain English directions anymore. They this can't be followed is beyond me.
As to the point, relevance and redundancy is the main issue. We don't need something like that when it is noted in a link. Not to mention it looks sloppy, and crude at best. Lancer1289 21:59, April 22, 2012 (UTC)

Adding CSS

Hey Lancer, could you add the following CSS to the global CSS to implement adjustments to the templates as listed in Forum:Update Milky Way Templates?

/* Galaxy template styles */
.galaxy-details {
	width: 270px;
	color: #fff;
	line-height: 15px;
	padding: 1px;
	margin: 0 0 1em 1em;
	border: 1px solid #334 !important;
	background-color: #1e1e2e !important;
.galaxy-details th {
	background: #334;
	text-align: center;
.galaxy-details .col-header {
	padding: 6px 0 3px;
.galaxy-details .col-title, .galaxy-details .col-caption {
	font-size: 1em;
	text-align: center;
	font-weight: bold;	
	padding: 4px 10px 6px;
	background-color: #334;	
.galaxy-details .col-left {
	width: 125px;
	font-size: 0.9em;
	text-align: right;
	font-weight: bold;
	padding: 4px 10px 4px 0;
	background-color: #223 !important;
.galaxy-details .col-right {
	width: 125px;
	font-size: 0.9em;
	text-align: left;
	font-weight: normal;
	padding: 4px 0 4px 10px;

/* Point of Interest template styles */
.point-interest {
	font-size: 0.9em;
	text-align: center;
	line-height: 18px;
	padding: 2px;
	margin-top: 10px;
	border: 1px solid #1E293D;	
	background-color: #0a1627;
	display: table;
.point-interest th {
	font-size: 13px;
	font-weight: bold;
	background-color: #36445a;
	padding: 8px 10px;
.point-interest td {
	background-color: #1E293D;
	padding: 8px 10px;
.point-interest .poi-bullet-red {
	background: #1E293D url('') center center no-repeat;
.point-interest .poi-bullet-yellow {
	background: #1E293D url('') center center no-repeat;
.poi-bullet-red, .poi-bullet-yellow {
	color: #1E293D;
	font-weight: bold;
	font-size: 18px;

Thanks in advance for your help! — Teugene (Talk) 04:22, April 23, 2012 (UTC)

Yeah no problem. I just have to find my glasses, then my keyboard, then do it before...I...zzzzz Lancer1289 04:26, April 23, 2012 (UTC)
Thanks mate. Have a good night rest! — Teugene (Talk) 04:49, April 23, 2012 (UTC)
Unlikely. I haven't been able to fall asleep before 4:00 am for the last week. Not to mention I've had a on and off headache all day and a stomach ache as well. I really need this school year to be over and I still have three more weeks... Lancer1289 04:53, April 23, 2012 (UTC)

Scorpion Edit

Hi, I noticed you reverted an edit the Scorpion page due to "salarian" being capitalized. However, that word was followed by "STG." Wouldn't this fit into the exception for unit names and/or alien governments (while not the name of the government itself, it is/was an organization within the salarian government)? Thanks TheUnknown285 18:32, April 23, 2012 (UTC)

After looking at it again, the only way it would be capitalized is if it is that way in the weapon's description. Given BioWare's tendency to make sure on things like that, odds are it is lowercase. However, if in the description it is upper, then there is little we can do about it. Even if it is followed by STG, the fact remains that salarian is never seen in uppercase apart from the beginning of a sentence. Lancer1289 18:35, April 23, 2012 (UTC)
So, are you saying, based on the Manual of Style, that it should be capitalized unless the in-game description has it lower-cased or that it shouldn't be capitalized unless the game does so? In other words, if this piece of text were not taken from in-game text, would it be "Salarian STG" or "salarian STG." Thanks again. TheUnknown285 18:46, April 23, 2012 (UTC)
The term "STG" does not include the word "salarian". STG is just STG and not "Salarian STG". Therefore, the word salarian is not capitalized. — Teugene (Talk)
I think you may be misunderstanding me. The article in question, as written now, says "salarian STG." I'm asking if "salarian" should be capitalized like we do for "Salarian Union" or "Asari Commando." TheUnknown285 18:54, April 23, 2012 (UTC)
No. If the description capitalizes it, then it should be here as all descriptions are verbatim from the game. As Teugene pointed out, while the STG is a salarian organization, the word salarian is separate from the title. Asari Commando is a unique case as normally asari wouldn't be capitalized, but if you are referring to Asari Commando (enemy), then it would be as that it the name of the enemy. Basically, if it isn't capitalized in the game, then it isn't here as it has been demonstrated multiple times that all race names are lower case. Lancer1289 18:59, April 23, 2012 (UTC)
Ah, okay. Thanks for clarifying. TheUnknown285 19:08, April 23, 2012 (UTC)

Email Notification

Lancer, please check your email and respond when you have the opportunity. -- Commdor (Talk) 01:36, April 24, 2012 (UTC)

I've sent you a second email regarding a separate matter. -- Commdor (Talk) 18:33, April 24, 2012 (UTC)
Got them both, but don't expect a reply on the first one for about a week. Lot of stuff going on. As to the first matter, I'm looking into it right now. Lancer1289 18:43, April 24, 2012 (UTC)

Missing Title #10

Just curious why did you delete my edit on the Mattock page? --Jmoonz91042 18:22, April 24, 2012 (UTC)

If you had read my edit summary, it was both confusing and because of that, it really wasn't a note. Lancer1289 18:30, April 24, 2012 (UTC)

Missing Title #11

I was just wondering if there is a miscellaneous page that contains small details that don't necessarily effect the game or something like that. If there is not could you please tell me how to create a new page. There is something from ME3 I would like to add. It is the tooth brush Traynor spoke of near the beginning of the game. I know that is not that big of a deal but I would like to add it. Any help you could give on the page would be much appreciated. Also, if there is anything else you come across that you feel I should make a page for like the aforementioned one I would be happy to make it. Thank you. --Jmoonz91042 23:07, April 24, 2012 (UTC)

Wow, eleven people cannot follow simple instructions.
As to the point, there is no reason to create a page like that, and either way a sandbox would be necessary before anything would be done on this point. Lancer1289 00:51, April 25, 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry I just thought it was a good idea. --Jmoonz91042 03:01, April 25, 2012 (UTC)

Missing Title #12

I was just wondering why you thought my recent edits were incorrect?--Jmoonz91042 17:09, April 25, 2012 (UTC)

Because it was the wrong character. There is no room for error there. Detective Anaya is the one who takes Samara into custody and is scared for her life because of it. The only way Dara is involved is she gives Shepard the location where Samara is. Nothing more or less. Lancer1289 17:56, April 25, 2012 (UTC)

oops my bad I didn't notice that I was rather tired at the time. Next time I will pay more attention.--Jmoonz91042 19:47, April 25, 2012 (UTC)

Image Deletion


Would you please remove the following image? It is a personal image I uploaded.

--The Milkman | I always deliver. 04:42, April 26, 2012 (UTC)

Done. Lancer1289 05:29, April 26, 2012 (UTC)

Missing Title #13

how was my edit in any way a spoiler

*Sigh*/ Thirteen times now that simple directions cannot be followed. I don't know why, they are in plain English. Maybe writing simple instructions in a different language would be better.
As to the point, reading the Manual of Style on Perspective states that intro paragraphs must be written from the time they are introduced. Humans, as of Mass Effect, are the newest race. To suddenly say they are not, is a massive spoiler. The raloi are not introduced until after ME2. Lancer1289 06:09, April 26, 2012 (UTC)


Hi Lancer1289,

Do you think I could maybe make a page on Urdnot Torsk, or Fred Mazzei, from the Shadow Broker's video archives? There is no particular reason, I just feel like expanding this excellent wiki. Thanks

Not really. There is next to nothing to say about them apart from the archive. We don't have a use for one/two sentence articles. WE usually leave things like this in whatever they are mentioned because of very limited information. In this case, they are best just left in the archive. Lancer1289 23:20, April 28, 2012 (UTC)
OK, thanks

Heads up on Grouping of Galaxy at War Missions

Hi, It's me, the trouble maker again. :-D I have suggested restructuring the Galaxy at War Missions list in the Missions page. The link to the thread is given here. I thought of giving you a heads up since you have contributed to most of the walkthroughs and I thought you would be interested in my suggestion. P.S.: Don't think that I am trying to restructure everything. I am just trying to fix the accessibility/usability aspect of some highly important pages. P.P.S: This time. I did start a conversation before editing. :-D --NisansaDdS 10:28, April 29, 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, bad idea. Lancer1289 18:49, April 29, 2012 (UTC)

Krogans and Turians, etc.

Heya, Lancer.

I didn't mean to ignore anything. I'm just new to this site, and have never seen an "edit summary" before.

About the line in question, it just seemed pretty vague to me. The original line stated, "Without hundreds of krogan offspring being produced at one time..." But what length of time is indicated by "one time"? A minute? A month? It's not very specific; so why specify "hundreds"? That's what was going through my head.

Aside from that, I changed "they could not hope to stand against" to "the krogans stood little chance against" - which probably seems a pretty arbitrary change to make. But, as the word "hope" had already been used in the previous sentence, it didn't need to be emphasised with repetition in this sentence. Variation of expression makes for stronger writing, in my opinion.

Hope that seems alright to you. Let me know what you think! --Truffy 11:10, April 29, 2012 (UTC)

Because we do know that krogan can have clutches that have hundreds of births in one go, so the article is accurate and anyone who knows the lore behind the krogan birthrate knows that bit of information. I cannot support any change because you are merely replacing words with different words and they all mean the same thing for your readability. Lancer1289 18:52, April 29, 2012 (UTC)

Fair enough. But a wiki isn't just for the benefit of people who already know the lore. Some people want to learn. Others may have read the whole codex in all the games, but have forgotten some details. So, it's helpful to be specific. "A single clutch," for instance, would be much more helpful than "at one time". --Truffy 07:17, April 30, 2012 (UTC)

Sirta Shop ME3

I made a change on the page of the Sirta Foundation (shop) concerant an error in the subtitle in French but I do not know if the same error exists in another language and being French, I am not against the help to improve my English.


Hey Lancer. How is you? Still funny?

Anyway, remember me? My username right now is ashleywilliamshusband. I got banned for having the username vaginasaresexy but it was only supposed to last for 2 weeks. Do you think you can help me with this? 01:31, May 1, 2012 (UTC)

Taken care of, Lancer. -- Commdor (Talk) 02:12, May 1, 2012 (UTC)

Not sure what this is about...

...but it's certainly a problem. Someone named Crackenback46 appears to have created an account solely for the purpose of posting a "blog" that is a copy-paste of Wikipedia's entry on Adolf Hitler. I believe it's already been reported, but if not I felt someone should bring it to your attention. --Zxjkl 05:32, May 1, 2012 (UTC)

Deleted and user banned for spam. Lancer1289 15:34, May 1, 2012 (UTC)

Here's something interesting

To quote Commdor "I'm not sure the language policy applies to personal user spaces aside from blog posts." So are you going to somehow make up a reason as to how I still managed to violate the language policy two weeks ago on my personal page? This is what I have been getting at. I don't want to be your enemy but you don't seem to understand the language policy yourself. The language policy states there is leeway in talk pages and on personal user space. That implies that you can swear on talk pages and personal user space. So please for the love of God admit your'e wrong for once!--BrewCrew4Life21 00:57, May 2, 2012 (UTC)

I don't think leeway means you can swear all you want. I would guess it means something more along the lines of minour expletives used infrequently. --The Milkman | I always deliver. 01:01, May 2, 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Lancer isn't wrong. Rest assured, the language policy applies to personal user spaces. I love Commdor to death (which is why I proposed he be made an admin and then personally promoted him to that position) but he is incorrect in this instance. Ask yourself this: Why would the language policy apply to blogs, but not other "personal user spaces"? Answer - it wouldn't. There is no leeway in talk pages and on personal user spaces for profane language. I've debunked this allegation more times than I care to remember. As the Bureaucrat of the wiki, and as an admin who was here when the policies in question were written, I can assure you, Lancer is correct. SpartHawg948 01:05, May 2, 2012 (UTC)
Then why does it say leeway?? If you took that out of the Community Guidelines I can guarantee that you would have fewer issues with swearing!!! Please just put something that makes it explicitly clear that there is no swearing on this wiki. Period.--BrewCrew4Life21 01:08, May 2, 2012 (UTC)
It's already in there. You have to read more than just the section entitled "Language" though, oddly enough, to have a full understanding of site policy. Scroll down a little further and you'll see a section entitled "Banning". There are several examples there of activities that can result in a ban. "Crude or offensive language" is among them. The leeway you reference refers to insulting language, not offensive language. I suppose the leeway line could go, since it seems to cause confusion amongst people who only read that one paragraph of the guidelines. SpartHawg948 01:16, May 2, 2012 (UTC)

Jack's poetry

Hi- I happened to check back in on the Jack article and noticed that you reverted my edit to the Trivia section for this reason: "Subjective and confirmation required". That the lines in Jack's poem are a reference is nearly incontrovertible; the Sandia report's version, which I linked in the edit, reads "This place is not a place of honor / No highly esteemed deed is commemorated here" and [Jack's poem's version] reads "This is not a place of honor / No esteemed dead are buried here". What, precisely, do you believe is subjective about this edit, and what constitutes confirmation if not a nearly literal quote of the source material? --EDG (t c) 03:42, May 2, 2012 (UTC)

Because first, nothing is a reference without devconfirmation. Either you get it or it cannot say "is a reference". Second, it is subjective because it could be nothing more than coincidence. Things like this in the past are extremely subjective and always need confirmation because of that. Coincidences are not trivia, and never have been. Lancer1289 04:51, May 2, 2012 (UTC)
I'm afraid that's not what "reference" or "subjective" mean in general parlance, but it's your wiki. Have fun. 13:39, May 2, 2012 (UTC)
And you are who exactly? Either way, that is what it means here, which is the only context that matters. Lancer1289 14:14, May 2, 2012 (UTC)


Describing the weapons accurately doesn't do them justice? -- Griever0311 14:19, May 2, 2012 (UTC)

No, describing them using a term that a, most people don't recognize, and b, most people don't associate with a very high rate of fire, is inaccurate. More people are familiar with a minigun than an LMG and given the rate of fire of the weapons, LMG just doesn't to it justice. Lancer1289 14:26, May 2, 2012 (UTC)
So, if you want to use that logic, then the one doesn't do the "minigun" label justice, either, when you're considering things that are spitting out 4000, 6000, or in one notable case (reputedly) over 10,000 rounds per minute. When you look at a lot of LMGs, especially the closed bolt types, you see things close to a thousand, or a little over or under, like the ones here. Nothing in Mass Effect (or hardly any other games) comes close to that, even the actual "minigun." And the "familiarity argument holds no weight. I mean, if you've ever played Call of Duty, Battlefield, any other FPS, or seen a war movie in the last 40 years, you've seen one of these neato belt-fed or magazine-fed guns that are bigger than the rest and fire for a really long time really quickly. Griever0311 14:33, May 2, 2012 (UTC)
Did I not state that I knew what a minigun was? Apparently not because I am stating it again. I full well know the difference between the two so please stop implying that I do not as I find it rather annoying. For most people however, they do not know the major differences between the two and if it is very fast firing, like the two are, then they skip past machine gun and go straight to minigun. The familiarity argument is a perfectly valid argument in this case and does hold weight because of what it is attempting to imply. Dismissing it with no reason isn't a dismissal, it is just ignoring it. Lancer1289 16:18, May 2, 2012 (UTC)

Your Attention Please

I would be obliged, if you can spare some time to contribute to the following discussions, in-light of the new developments; Talk:Aria:_Blue_Suns#Bug and Talk:Irune:_Book_of_Plenix#Prerequisite--NisansaDdS 08:30, May 3, 2012 (UTC)

Priority: Eden Prime

What is wrong with adding advice on which squadmates to bring? Similar information appears in the articles for other missions/assignments? TheUnknown285 23:36, May 3, 2012 (UTC)

Because the MoS on missions does not permit that kind of section in a format like that. Lancer1289 23:39, May 3, 2012 (UTC)
So, the issue was just formatting and not content? TheUnknown285 23:46, May 3, 2012 (UTC)
There were some issues with content as well. The problem is that it was almost stating the obvious rather than providing useful content. Lancer1289 23:52, May 3, 2012 (UTC)


Hey, I was wondering if the quote from the Mass Effect 3 section could be changed.

--The Milkman | I always deliver. 23:16, May 4, 2012 (UTC)

M-90 Indra in Multiplayer

Hey, just curious why you are removing the references of the M-90 Indra being available in Multiplayer now.

Here's associate producer from Bioware Billy Buskell confirming that it is now available in packs on twitter:!/ehlien/status/198857804273041408

His tweet was in response to this screenshot:

My brother got it twice yesterday on the Xbox 360. Shouldn't it be OK to add it to the list of available MP weapon unlocks? 04:51, May 6, 2012 (UTC)

And nothing you have presented is a valid source. Twitter isn't valid without it being confirmed. Until a valid source is presented, nothing will be added. Lancer1289 04:56, May 6, 2012 (UTC)
Well, I guess since Bioware hasn't added an image for it in the Multiplayer Manifest, and they didn't mention it in the Balance Change patch notes, then there's nothing else I have. The Multiplayer forums on BSN are littered with threads discussing the Indra, but that wouldn't be valid either. Just curious, how would one confirm the twitter statement by Mr. Buskell? 05:05, May 6, 2012 (UTC)
There are multiple ways. A confirmed twitter account naming that account as belonging to that person. A post on the BSN forms of that person, or a dev, lising that account belonging to that person. We need something official, trustworthy, and reliable to confirm it.
And I find the way you put confirm in bold is extremely rude. We have standards on the site, and you are making it sound like I'm asking you to do brain surgery. Social media is in its own class for confirmation which was established when we first let it be used. Lancer1289 05:10, May 6, 2012 (UTC)
Wasn't intended to be rude. I was honestly just asking. So for twitter to be used as a valid reference, it needs to be a Confirmed account (of a legitimate source, like a Bioware dev)? 05:13, May 6, 2012 (UTC)
I guess the reason I was asking this is because the Bioware devs don't generally have Twitter's "confirmed" flag. Would producer Mike Gamble's @gamblemike account be considered confirmed? He regularly converses with Buskell's @ehlien account, including in his most recent tweet. Would something like this help confirm that @ehlien is who he says he is?!/GambleMike/status/198212416109162496 05:18, May 6, 2012 (UTC)
(edit conflict)It needs to come from an account we have confirmed, and only from those accounts. Current confirmed accounts are Casey Hudson, Christina Norman (although she no longer works at BioWare), Mac Walters, Preston Watamaniuk, Jesse Houston, Manveer Heir, Mac and Corey Gaspur. Lancer1289 05:26, May 6, 2012 (UTC)
This bioware blog post interview with Buskell links to his twitter:
The link is in the lines: "BB: Hi, my name is Billy Buskell, I’m an Associate Producer on Mass Effect 3. I’m responsible for the Gameplay, Animation, and Character Art teams on the project." 05:26, May 6, 2012 (UTC)
There we go. I will now readd the information and make a note of another confirmed account. Thank you for making this process relatively painless. Compared to the last time this situation came up. Lancer1289 05:31, May 6, 2012 (UTC)
No problem; glad I could find something concretely acknowledging his twitter. :) For future reference, is there a page for discussing confirmed Twitter accounts? I am surprised Mike Gamble's was not one you mentioned 05:35, May 6, 2012 (UTC)
I'm similarly surprised Patrick Weekes (@patrickweekes) is not mentioned either, since you mentioned about the "last time this situation" came up... *roll eyes*. As for Michael Gamble here's the confirmation: Jessica Merizan from Bioware Twitter account is @jessicamerizan[3]. She and Corey, confirms Michael Gamble's Twitter (@gamblemike) [4][5][6]. Jessica also confirms Chris Priestly's Twitter (@bioevilchris) [7]. So there's a whole lot of Bioware confirmed Twitter accounts, if you knew where to look. — Teugene (Talk) 16:24, May 6, 2012 (UTC)
Well we can add three more to the list. Lancer1289 18:12, May 6, 2012 (UTC)

Your Undo

Not sure what "violation of site policy" you were referring to when you undid my improvements to the description of Fabrication Rights Managements on the ML-77 page; it would have been helpful for you to elaborate. Nevertheless, the real point of the edit was to clean up the grotesque grammer -- the lack of subject/verb agreement in the statement "a controversial set of measures which is employed." In English, singular subjects take singular verbs. E.g., "the boy is." And plural subjects take plural verbs. For example, "the team are." The other significant edit was to remove the pointless and needless speculation about whether FRM is a humorous reference to DRM. It obviously is. TwinSwords 22:01, May 6, 2012 (UTC)

What you did was not "clean up the grotesque grammar", which is one of the most subjective and biased statements I've seen recently, but you completely changed the meaning of the trivia. You stated that it is a reference, and until we have devconfirmation on it, nothing is a reference without it. Lancer1289 00:08, May 7, 2012 (UTC)
There's nothing "subjective or biased" about my factual claim that I fixed bad grammar -- bad grammar you then proudly restored. As for what you go on to say, does it seem possible to you that I did two things, fixed the grammar *and* removed the pointless ambiguity about whether FRM is an allusion to DRM? Because that's what actually happened. TwinSwords 02:40, May 7, 2012 (UTC)
Reread my previous comment as it is blatantly obvious that you did not read it, or glossed over several facts. Without devconfirmation, we cannot say anything is a reference. You changed the trivia to say that it is a reference without any sort of confirmation on it. You did that in complete violation of site policy. And that is a subjective and biased statement because while the grammar is unusual, it is still valid grammar. Lancer1289 13:57, May 7, 2012 (UTC)


Hi Lancer

Do you think in the Characters section, under 'Mass Effect 3' "Adversaries", I could add Harbinger, as he is the biggest enemy throughout the entire trilogy? Omega958 23:18, May 6, 2012 (UTC)

So instead of waiting for a response, you decided to do it anyway. Why? I have removed it for reasons that I stated in my edit summary. Lancer1289 00:09, May 7, 2012 (UTC)

Feros and Elysium Edits

According to Commdor, similar edits are allowable for Illium and Bekenstein regarding those planets' ME3 fates. What is wrong with similar notes for Feros and Elysium? TheUnknown285 00:28, May 7, 2012 (UTC)

I have since removed the Illium edit as that isn't trivia and better left in the News Stories article. Now, if you want to make a case for it going back in, then please do so, but things like that aren't trivia.
Bekenstein is a unique case because Allers gives specific reasons for why the colony is attacked, how it is attacked, and that is reflected in that trivia item. Lancer1289 14:00, May 7, 2012 (UTC)

The Jona Sederis Page

Just an FYI, the Jona Sederis page never got deleted even though the delete proposal passed 3-0. So in case I missed something I just thought I should let you know.--BrewCrew4Life21 00:51, May 7, 2012 (UTC)

It was deleted at the time, but re-created after the character made an appearance in ME3. -- Commdor (Talk) 00:53, May 7, 2012 (UTC)
Ok. That's kinda what I thought but I wasn't sure. Thanks.--BrewCrew4Life21 00:56, May 7, 2012 (UTC)

Quick Access to Forums.

Take a look on the Dragon Age Wiki, one of the affliate wikis of this site. I was active in the wiki as a viewer, contributor and forum poster until I stopped playing it. One of the things I liked about theirs is the display list of forums. Whatever is on top of the list means it is a hot topic (it is often edited by users to write down what they want to say). The forums there are not limited to just gameplay help, but lore as well, along with the posters' opinions.

I know that the Mass Effect Wiki has forums that are not so different and can be accessed, too; you may think of me as lazy, thinking that it is just a few clicks of the mouse, but this slight touch may encourage more users to become active.

Please add this feature. Thank you.

Wikia sig NicKeL BreaD Talk 08:03, May 7, 2012 (UTC)

I'm not even sure what you are asking here and I'm quite puzzled what is going on. Every wiki is different and anything like this would require a community vote, one I doubt will pass. If you could please elaborate on what you are talking about, then it would be appreciated. Lancer1289 14:01, May 7, 2012 (UTC)

Multiplayer Balance Changes

Hi I am asking here fist as I don't no if there is any point in adding it to the wiki but there have been some Balance Changes on Multiplayer here is a link to the BioWare page [8] it lists all the Changes to each enemy, weapon & skill and when they were implemented. Cpt Kent James 12:13, May 10, 2012 (UTC)

The only problem I see is how to integerate the information. Since it is the devs posting, I cannot remotely see a problem with it, but it is just getting the information into the article(s), and where to put it is the problem. Lancer1289 15:05, May 10, 2012 (UTC)
Will just adding it in to the bottom of the Description on each page be ok but have it say Multiplayer Changes to this ???? go then a link to the bioware site be ok. If not I will live it to some1 other than me to add it to this wiki. Cpt Kent James 15:01, May 11, 2012 (UTC)
I really don't think that would work as it could get cumbersome over time. Perhaps this would be another subpage for the Multiplayer article as that is the only thing this affects, but that really would need more input. Lancer1289 18:53, May 11, 2012 (UTC)

Weapon Notes subsections

Hi Lancer, I know that I am an incredibly inexperienced contributor to this wiki, but I have had quite a bit of time (3 Years) on UESP as a contributor, so if you could here me out it would be great. I am trying to propose the addition of a new section to the page of every weapon that appears in ME3 Multiplayer entitled 'Multiplayer Tips/Guide'. This would be for the benefit of people who didn't acquire the weapon in SP and therefore are highly uninformed as to how to use it effectively and would like help. I think that at the moment, everyone (including myself) has simply been placing any tips on how to use a certain weapon in MP in the 'Player Tips' section, which is causing these to rapidly expand and become congested. In an effort to streamline the search for advice, I proposes that this section is split into SP and MP sections, and when I posted this in the blog GroverA125 encouraged me to contact an admin such as yourself for authorisation/advice, as I am a) unsure of how to set up a Forum:Projects page that works and b) would like some help. I hope that this isn't a huge waste of your time, --SanjayBeast 17:53, May 11, 2012 (UTC)

If you're talking about sorting the Player Notes in weapon articles into mode-specific sections, we could probably do that now. There's little governing what goes into Player Notes sections, so there's generally nothing standing in the way of changing how they're organized. In fact, the PN sections could stand some cleaning up. See M-3 Predator for how I split the PN section there; I can take care of the rest shortly. -- Commdor (Talk) 18:12, May 11, 2012 (UTC)
Cheers - thats almost exactly what I intended. Can I go around and Categorise to my hearts content in the same way? In addition, for some articles should the notes that apply for both go in both or just to whichever is most applicable?

EDIT: I will presume no until told otherwise, don't worry. --SanjayBeast 18:57, May 11, 2012 (UTC) Could I also include the possibility of adding in the weapons rarity to its Acquisition:Multiplayer section (i.e instead of being 'randomly awarded by purchasing an item pack' it could read 'randomly rewarded by purchasing an item pack (Ultra-Rare N7) etc

Images used on my sandbox


I'm not sure quite what's going on here, but the 'upload new version' options for these pictures I've uploaded don't seem to work. I'm also not going to revert any more in an attempt to set it right, because that doesn't seem to be helping:

If it's a normal thing that takes a bit of time to update itself, then I will be patient. If there is no solution, would it be possible to have them deleted and I will start afresh?

Sorry for the trouble. Phylarion 19:19, May 11, 2012 (UTC)

Never mind. it seems to have fixed itself! Phylarion 20:36, May 11, 2012 (UTC)
Apologies for the delayed response. I'm spending the day vegging as my finals week, and a chaotic semester is finally over! Anyway, back on topic.
Sometimes the Wikia image software can take up to a few days to regester a change to an image. I am unsure why this happens, but it is annoying at times. Lancer1289 21:01, May 11, 2012 (UTC)

Grats on 30k

Congrats on 30k edits :). Also, you a PC gamer? Or do you have a console? JouninOfDespair 20:24, May 11, 2012 (UTC)

PC is strategy, simulation, and limited shooter and RPG. Lancer1289 21:01, May 11, 2012 (UTC)

Minor Troubles

I'm home for Mother's Day weekend, been having connection troubles most of the day. The home wireless network gets knocked out if too many people are on at once. I have to shut my computer down now (can't have both it and Minecraft XBLA connected because my brother wants to use his computer now), but I should be back in a few hours to finish sorting the Player Notes sections on weapon articles. -- Commdor (Talk) 23:08, May 11, 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Ok. I'll try not to fall asleep. Hmm, how to keep myself awake? Wait, now where did I leave the Stargate DVD... Lancer1289 23:13, May 11, 2012 (UTC)

Can i help? or would you prefer only one opinion on what is SP and MP ? --SanjayBeast 12:02, May 12, 2012 (UTC)

Why are you asking me? I'm not the one doing this. Lancer1289 15:19, May 12, 2012 (UTC)

Missing Title #14

I am curious as to why you think that Arrival and Overlord are assignments? Assignments do not show up on the galaxy map, missions do. Both of these are downloadable MISSIONS, not assignments. Thus people get confused when they go to the missions page and do not find them. Also, the Firewalker pack is also a series of Missions, not assignments. This is no different than the Shadow Broker "Mission" which is downloadable. And assignment is something along the lines of finding the forged ID's and delivering them to the girl at the Citadel.

And now it is up to fourteen people that cannot follow simple, basic instructions.
As to the point, where does the journal put those? In the Assignments Category, not the Mission Category. We define missions and assignments per the ingame journal. If you have a problem with that, then take it up with BioWare. And I would highly suggest taking another look at the journal because it is obvious that you either didn't, or don't remember correctly. Lancer1289 23:16, May 11, 2012 (UTC)

CG Edits

Can a non admin make edits to the CG page to correct the unlikely mis-information or spelling etc...--BrewCrew4Life21 23:55, May 11, 2012 (UTC)

No. Lancer1289 00:15, May 12, 2012 (UTC)
I only ask because I didn't see anything about editing the CG page on the CG page. And user Teugene was made an admin but his name hasn't been added to the list of active admins on the CG page.--BrewCrew4Life21 01:20, May 13, 2012 (UTC)
That has since been corrected. Lancer1289 06:23, May 13, 2012 (UTC)

Multiplayer Class Pages

I think they're just about done.


I've (hopefully) removed all references to my own Sandbox and if you approve, they can be directly transferred into proper pages. Phylarion 13:22, May 12, 2012 (UTC)

You don't need just one admin's approval, you'll need to put it up to a vote in the projects forum. There's already a thread Forum:MP Class pages started (that you have posted in before). Trandra 14:46, May 12, 2012 (UTC)
That would be accurate. This is not something that one admin can approve. We need a full community vote on this one. Lancer1289 15:18, May 12, 2012 (UTC)

Editing templates with unapproved material?

Lancer, is there any protocol for the following? Phylarion did a lot of changes to the Template:PowerDetails. Many were helpful (added links to ME3 powers), but he also added some content that hasn't been voted on. I removed that, but I wanted an admin's opinion. (I put a new section on Phylarion's talk page about it.) Trandra 15:27, May 12, 2012 (UTC)

I also left a message about it. While some of the changes can be tolerated, as they needed to get done, in the future, he cannot keep doing things like that. Large scale changes need to be approved, no matter what type of page they are on. However, that said, some and I do seriouly stress the some, need to be done, but again, this behavior cannot continue. Any large scale change needs to be approved. Lancer1289 15:31, May 12, 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. I noticed you'd left your comment on the situation before I finished leaving this one "informing" you about it. :) Trandra 15:36, May 12, 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, I saw your comment before I started mine. Either way, this just cannot continue. Lancer1289 15:40, May 12, 2012 (UTC)

Updating and styling the MoS

I've started working on some changes to the Manual of Style page that could make it easier to navigate (still in progress), easier to read and understand, and make it a bit clearer. Not much as been done but I'll appreciate input before making major changes.

  1. I moved the list of the MoS subpages to hard-coded infobox and separate it based on topic they address. I also added links to all relevant sections of our guidelines and policies to make navigation a bit clearer. The same infobox could be implanted in all MoS pages to make navigation between the pages easier.
  2. I'm believe splitting the content on this page into another subpage titles "Important" or anything along this line, for all section that relate to issues that repeat themselves on a regular basis (like race name capitalization, speculations, and spelling fixes) could be contain direct editors to a shorter, but important information and might help avoid those issues (maybe even adding something about what should or should not be discussed on talk pages).
    • Alternatively, all the section on "How-to X" like uploading files, inserting them into articles, how to redirect a page, and how to use categories, could be moved to a seperate page to avoid cluttering the main page with redundancies - it doesn't really have anything to do with style, but relates editing the wiki in general.
  3. The MoS does not mention anything about the Projects and Policy forums, which I believe is important and mentioning it could potentially direct editors to the right place.

It's more questions then a working example, but personally it took me months until I read the entire MoS. It's not really an easy read and some improvements could be made to it. If and when this goes to the Projects forum, I would like for the sandbox page to be complete for accurate voting (if you and rest of the admins believe in the changes I propose).

Thanks for your time. --silverstrike 18:08, May 12, 2012 (UTC)

I am really not in favor of this. Not to mention considering the page, this wouldn't go into the projects forum as that could and probably would, cause more problems than it would solve. This is something admins would probably have to agree on, but currently I cannot see what is the point of changing it and making it less user friendly. Lancer1289 22:35, May 12, 2012 (UTC)
Are you against all of the changes/suggestions?
I continued with some more changes and created a pseudo proposal for the admins. I would still appreciate comments about the changes I made, if any of them is relevant, and whether you think a change in a different direction could be more helpful. --silverstrike 11:20, May 13, 2012 (UTC)


Hey Lancer, As the seven day proposal waiting period has passed on the proposal and that most of the votes were in favor of updating the Manual of Style pages, I thought about updating the MoS main page with the sandbox example discussed.

After our discussion on my talk page about me taking unilateral actions without discussion and approval (again, sorry for the mess caused), I wanted to get your input before continuing with the change.

I currently don't see any change that alter the current established guideline, apart from changes or additions that are just collation the the information from several different pages.

There is however an addition to the main page regarding fan-made content, that although was not present in previous editions of the guideline, is the current de facto rule. This can be removed. --silverstrike 16:18, May 23, 2012 (UTC)

I see comments, yet I do not see a vote. As stated previoulsy, you cannot take comments like "I like it" as a yes vote. That said, there is feedback that I have to give because there are several issues that have to be addressed. You must open a voting section and open it for admins only before anything can be done. Lancer1289 18:09, May 23, 2012 (UTC)


Sorry for adding the categories on Zorya, my computer wasn't showing any of the categories. Thanks for reverting my edits Lancer.Typhoonstorm95 20:34, May 13, 2012 (UTC)


Hey Lance, about that auto-refresh option in the Recent Changes, I had not seen it since the admin tab bar appears. Is that supposed to be normal or the script does not take into account of the admin bar?  teugeneTalkContr 08:22, May 15, 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, you can ignore this message. I know what's the cause of the problem.  teugeneTalkContr 11:22, May 15, 2012 (UTC)
Apologies for not getting back sooner. I spend yesterday just enjoying myself as I needed a day off and I spent the day watching a large portion of Season Three of Stargate SG-1. Lancer1289 17:40, May 16, 2012 (UTC)

Missing Title #15

Hey Lancer!

We over at CleverNoob (the creators of the Indoctrination Theory Documentary; recognized by Bioware staff, even broadcasted on a radio station to all of Southern Toronto) were just wondering if we could post up our Insanity Mode Walkthrough videos on the respective level pages?

We noticed there are currently no video walkthroughs present for the game on this Wikia, so we thought ours would be of great contribution to the wikia.

However, before we go adding videos to the Wikia, we wanted to know if this would be alright with you.

Now up to fifteen people. Sigh.
As to the point, we do not permit videos of any kind on this site. This is elaborated on in the Community Guidelines FAQ. Users are free to embed videos into their user page, but any videos uploaded to the site will be deleted on sight. No exceptions. This has been site policy for quite some time now. Lancer1289 05:50, May 19, 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the response Lancer! And while this may just be one person writing this, it is on behalf of all of our staff, so, I guess you could say you're up to 30 people now. ;-)

I do find that slightly odd, though. Why wouldn't videos be allowed when they contribute directly to the Wikia? And actually, if you read the link you gave me, it says "MEWiki only accepts videos in very rare cases", rather than "no exceptions". I honestly believe this should be one of those exceptions. Many people have a hard time with Insanity mode, and sometimes a written guide just doesn't cut it in those cases.

Furthermore, Bioware is already aware of our videos, because we have spoken directly with Bioware staff who have complimented us on our work, and have never once brought up anything relevant to copyright claims.

Even further, these would be a very small numbers of videos explicitly on each "level's" page (one for each level's page), and nothing more.

I would understand if people are posting stuff purely as advertisement, or irrelevant to the page, but if it directly relates to the page at-hand, doesn't obstruct anything on the page, doesn't take-away from anything, is professionally done, and is actually beneficial to the readers; then why not?

I'm more curious than anything else, as our videos have been allowed multiple times on other Wikia pages and welcomed with open arms. - Julian (CEO of CleverNoob), and the rest of our staff.

Lancer, I hope it's okay that I reply here:
Julian, the reason for the style guideline restricting the use of videos is not only to avoid copyrights infrigement. The Mass Effect games series is influenced heavily on player choices, appearance, and gender. Any material that depicts Shepard is not allowed, apart from the Commander Shepard article where it is absolutely necessary. Even there, it is heavily moderated. Currently, the only exception is official trailers released by BioWare.
Another issue is quality. Most of the existing videos are in a very poor quality or edited by less then experienced players which harm the quality of the wiki if it is embedded into articles.
It may be possible to add outside link to your site where applicable, but that's another proposal that needs to pass the admins approval and if accepted, the rest of MEWiki community also need a voting to approve it, by posting the proposal on the Policy Forum. --silverstrike 07:09, May 19, 2012 (UTC)

Hey Silver,

Thanks for responding! I see, I suppose that makes sense in regard to keeping the creativity of Shepard's image in-tact. However, I feel that somebody looking at a walkthrough video (or even the walkthrough page itself) in the first place is knowingly exposing themselves to the opinion of another person in regard to Shepard. So while I feel that this makes perfect sense on a plot synopsis page or character page, I don't feel it is quite as relevant for the individual level pages; which is where players go to get help with beating the game (not to follow the creative integrity of Shepard).

Perhaps instead of the videos themselves, a link to the videos could be provided? (Or is that what you meant in your last statement?)

As for our quality, each one of our videos is professionally rendered in Sony Vegas Pro with true 1080p quality, a professional narrator with experience in the gaming industry, and edited by yet another professional. Although, I can understand that this is not the case for most people who attempt to post videos up; which is why we're trying to get an exception to the rule.

I would gladly start the petition, but I'm a little unfamiliar with the Wikia forums and would not exactly know how to adequately begin a poll on official grounds. Also, I just want to interject that our goal isn't to advertise the website whatsoever, only to provide the videos. Our love for the Mass Effect series has spanned over the last 5 years, just as I'm sure it has for you and the rest of the Wikia readers. Our only aim is to provide help to gamers out there, a principle we've founded and operate the company on.

Also, I want to add in that I hope I haven't come off at all as rude in any way. From one professional to another: I've only meant to be inquisitive (Just in case, you never know who takes offense on the internet!). =] We completely understand and respect the site rules and their reasons for being implemented; We just feel it would be in the best interest for both the level of professional detail on this Wikia, as well as for the viewers of this Wikia, to add this exception to the rule.

Thanks again, looking forward to your final thoughts on the matter, 07:26, May 19, 2012 (UTC) - Julian

Assuming that there are no copyright issues, which does appear to be the case, the big issue would be whether or not the community would approve of it, as Silverstrike stated. Personally, I'd be opposed to the inclusion of the videos in the articles, both for aesthetic and for practical reasons. We'd have to rework our MoS to allow it, and I just don't think they'd look good in the articles. I would not, however, be opposed to creating a forum showcasing the videos. We could probably work something out that would satisfy, if not necessarily please, all parties (the definition of compromise being a situation where no one goes away happy, after all! :P), whereby a forum is created for the videos and we provide links to the relevant portions of the forum in the level articles.
The beauty of this is that it negates the need for a vote. Should this option prove acceptable to you fine folks, I'll gladly give it my full endorsement. If not, then yeah, we can go the community vote route. Hope this helps. If not, well... sorry. It is what it is. :P SpartHawg948 07:52, May 19, 2012 (UTC)

Hey Spart!

That is very generous of you, thank you! The entire walkthrough series is still a work-in-progress, so we had initially come in with the intent to put the videos up that we have now, and then the rest as we progress through the editing phase (which is going very quickly), so is there any way that we would be able to edit this forum section ourselves each time we have a new level covered? (Again, incredible beginner when it comes to Wikia forums)

I'm not sure how many members would benefit from this, but hey, even if it's only a handful, then we're still doing what we set out to do. =]. And haha, that's definitely the definition of a compromise, that's for sure.

I'd also like to briefly interject the fact that there would be no copyright infringement whatsoever by having these videos up. The creative commons copyright clause states that any video of anything media-related can be used fairly for anything educationally-based and non-commercial. A walkthrough fits that bill. =] "Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use." So hopefully that can assuage your minds about the whole copyright side of it. Again, Bioware themselves haven't had any problems as of yet.

Lastly, we are also the official walkthrough team for the Starcraft II series Wikia page, among others. I doubt that means anything here, but figured it would be worth mentioning perhaps.

We obviously would like to pursue any possible actions that could lead to the walkthrough being posted in each respective levels' page.

If after all that, you guys would still like to stick with the forum-topic-only route, that is fine. I just wanted to make sure you were all 100% completely informed first.

Just let me know the details and I'll gladly participate in the idea, or do whatever your suggestions are.

Thanks again! 16:34, May 19, 2012 (UTC) - Julian and the rest of the team.

In the future, can you please use only one edit to leave a message? I don't see why it takes seven edits to leave one message.
As to the point, the forum may work, but I still oppose uploading videos as it will create problems. Lancer1289 19:10, May 19, 2012 (UTC)

My apologies Lancer. Sometimes edits are required in order to make a comprehensive thought. =]. Otherwise they wouldn't have been invented. Also, still waiting on Spart's decision. 19:48, May 19, 2012 (UTC) - Julian.

(edit conflict) I would beg to differ. No examples of the aforementioned problems have been presented. And I certainly can't see any. As demonstrated previously, videos are permitted from time to time. The policy isn't a no-exceptions policy. In this case, I see no real reason to not allow the videos. All I've seen thus far is citation of a policy that doesn't forbid anything.
And yeah, CleverNoob, you would be able to keep editing as new videos are made available. It wouldn't be a one-time-only thing. As for the rest, you're totally free to pursue putting the videos in articles, but this would be subject to the till of the community, and while I can't speak for others, I personally would oppose it. That's why I proposed a forum post. SpartHawg948 19:53, May 19, 2012 (UTC)
I thought the problem I think would have been easy to see since we've had a few instances in the past with it with using videos as references. If we allow videos then people will start posing videos removing videos, and replacing videos with their own if they think it is "better". It will serve as a personal ad space for their YouTube channel or whatever. Videos just need to stay off for that reason. I would highly oppose such a policy unless it is extremely regulated and subject to a video-by-video basis. Lancer1289 20:41, May 19, 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, but it wasn't easy to see... After all, the policy which currently exists is a video-by-video policy. That's why this discussion is taking place, is it not? Any videos uploaded would still be subject to all the rules. They can be nominated for deletion and voted on accordingly. Ditto for the forums they're posted in. And any videos placed in articles could be nixed on sight. For that matter, no videos even need to be uploaded. Since this seems (for reasons I can't fathom) to be a contentious issue, we can simply (assuming CleverNoob is amenable) have the videos embedded in the forum page rather than uploaded. This would be 100% consistent with site policy as it currently stands. SpartHawg948 08:16, May 20, 2012 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you mean by a contentious issue? I'm merely pointing out problems with what is being proposed. If it comes to a vote, I have no objections, I will merely restate them. I just want to point out problems not only for my own benefit, as I could forget them, but for everyone's benefit to presne thte potental issues. Lancer1289 19:20, May 20, 2012 (UTC)

Revert of Edit on M-90 Indra

Hi Lancer, I was just wondering at what angle you approached my recent edits to the M-90 Indra page. I was simply updating some of the information that I originally added to the page, and was changing some of the other for continuity in the article. For example, the phrase 'sniper rifle' is used throughout the article to refer to the Indra; yet you reverted my edit from 'sniper' to 'sniper rifle'. I am relatively inexperienced on this wiki, however on most other wikis that i edit on (such as UESP) the standard them of any revert is to remove misinformation, superfluous info and to preserve continuity. In addition, the phrase 'anywhere from seven to ten shots while cloaked' is misleading; I understand that the number of shots fired is dependant on which rank evolution you chose in tactical cloak to change the duration, but this could imply to new users that the ROF of the gun is different for each player. For example, I know that if playing as a Geth Infiltrator the ROF bonus that you get boosts the number of shots that you can get out while under max duration cloak up to 12 - should we also include this? Finally, I fail to understand why clarifying that not only the widow but also other single shot sniper rifles suffer from the 'excess damage to shields doesn't carry over' problem - surely, without this, we imply that it is specific (or at least appears to imply) to the widow? I would appreciate clarification on all these points, as I can then consider the edits I do in future to Player tips a bit more carefully. regards,--SanjayBeast 08:28, May 21, 2012 (UTC)

I have no idea why this person thinks it is appropriate to put this under this topic, so I will delete it unless he wants to move it. --SanjayBeast 15:26, May 21, 2012 (UTC)

First, had you removed it, it would have been in violation of site policy as this isn't your talk page, it is mine.
As to the point, an edit can be undone for any reason. What happens on one wiki does not mean that it applies to all. We undo for any number of reasons. If we just undid for removing misinformation, then the site would be sloppy as can be. You still removed valid information because knowing a min number is a good thing. If you want to change ten to twelve, then by all means do so. Everyone who plays video games, or is even vaguely familar with weapons in games knows that sniper = sniper rifle. We do not need to spell it out. As to the "excess damage" comment, I have no idea where that is coming from since you didn't even change that. Lancer1289 15:46, May 21, 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I understand now how the revert policy is here. However, whilst I concur that all FPS and RPG players should know that sniper = sniper rifle, I would say that given our (or at least some of the wiki guidelines) policies about consistency, it seems strange to revert the edit that continues the writing style of the article and the wiki in general, which is that we try to spell things out clearly for all people to see plain. Finally, you are mistaken (or I do not understand your last sentence, since I did change that) - I created the note about single shot sniper rifles and the benefits the indra has over them, and so I see no reason why not to clarify on that, by making sure that people realise the problem applies to all single shot sniper rifles. In truth, would really like clarification but more importantly guidance on what to do instead; i would prefer not to have a conversation like this every time I edit a section to my liking that disagrees with yours. regards SanjayBeast 18:40, May 21, 2012 (UTC) I hate to rude and pushy, but I'm hesitant to contribute to any more articles on this wiki until this is resolved as I don't want to cause more edit undo arguments. I am aware that you have a life outside of this wiki, but could you have a look at this? Hate to be impatient,--SanjayBeast 07:53, May 25, 2012 (UTC)

And what was I supposed to respond to? There was nothing in your last comment that looked like it need a response nor did one seem called for. So what am I supposed to be looking at? Lancer1289 16:05, May 25, 2012 (UTC)

Apologies, I should have made my questions more clear. I stated that whilst i agree to some of your points (such as sniper=sniper rifle being common knowledge), i also found fault with some of your other reverts, such as not allowing 'and other single shot rifles' to be added into the section about how it out performs some sniper rifles in doing damage to shielded enemies. However the section at the end of my comment should have been fairly clear - ' [i] would really like clarification but more importantly guidance on what to do instead; i would prefer not to have a conversation like this every time I edit a section to my liking that disagrees with yours.' cannot really be interpreted two ways. In addition, if you have no comments about my counter-arguements against your reverts, does that mean I am free to re-do them. I hope this clears things up, SanjayBeast 08:39, May 27, 2012 (UTC) Once again, I feel that I am forced to ask if you have seen this/have anything to say to it? If not, I will go ahead and re do the edits since I have proposed counter-arguemnts and given you time to respond to them. Apologies if you have been busy, I am well aware that finals are happening at the moment around the world, and that is a very valid excuse to not respond to minor queries. SanjayBeast 15:13, May 30, 2012 (UTC)

The way you keep starting your messages is starting to look like you think I'm deliberatly ignoring and avoiding you. That is not the case. There are many things going on that keep me busy. That said, I am not sure what you are asking for that matter as the only thing I see is a potental edit war. Lancer1289 19:22, May 30, 2012 (UTC)

Apologies for my (now that I look at it) aggressive tone, I did not intend to offend. However, I still cannot seem to to get my point across. I would not like to start an edit, but would simply like to clarify how the indra performs vs other sniper rifles ( in the article itself) , and to get an idea from you as to how to edit and add to non-canon sections such as Player Notes, that are subject to interpretation and opinion. I hope you can understand the confusion from my end, and can realise that I didn't put this on the Watercooler as I wanted you, not another editor, to finish this. Thanks, SanjayBeast 20:14, May 30, 2012 (UTC)

There is no advice on how to edit those sections apart from the fact they need be relevant. Your edit only changed the wording of certain things and removed information. Changes like that are not good ideas. Things are undone for any reason and unless you want to have a conversation every time it happens, then you have to take it sometimes that it was undone. I've had a number of edits undone and not contested them.
Rereading your comments, especially the first one, they tend to come off with a bit of arrogance in the fact that you can't seem to accept that one of your edits was undone. You have to be willing to accept the fact they can be undone for any reason, or no reason. The additions made will be edited, removed, altered, or any number of things, and if you can't accept that, then you will have problems. Again, I've had a number of things edited, undone, or flat out removed, sometimes with no reason, and I accept that. Only on serious matters do I actually contest it. If you are going to do that for every edit that you make, then you can see where it is going. Lancer1289 21:04, May 30, 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback - it is useful to get a different perspective on my actions. I will happily confess to being mildly arrogant on wikis and yes, I do have a problem with admitting that I have done something wrong; I'm a perfectionist at heart and to admit that I made a mistake is counterintuitive to me (but I am more than happy too when the reasons behind what I did wrong have been explained to me). This has come from the fact that I have now been an editor/senior editor on 4 wikis for the last 5 years, so it is good of you to point that out to me. I will tone it down. However, I would postulate that you have, in retrospect, perhaps been a bit too defensive on this point, but that is perfectly legit for an admin with lots on his plate. Best wishes, and hope for no discussions like this in the future, SanjayBeast 21:12, May 30, 2012 (UTC)

Missing Title # 16

Okay this might seem like an random question but on your Profile at the current projects part there is a picture of something that looks like an command bridge on an spaceship and in the background there is an planet wich looks like Saturn. So the question is were is that from?

And also, sometimes when i write an blogpost and i publish it it does not appear on the recent blogpost page for some reason, why's that?

And now sixteen people cannot follow simple, plain English instructions. This is exactly why I ask people at the top of my talk page to leave me a new message and not edit the whole page. Considering this keeps happening, apparently no one can comprehend this, let alone follow it. Lancer1289 15:46, May 21, 2012 (UTC)

Combat (ME3) page screenshots

Working on a few .gifs or .pngs to illustrate the various things you can do.

However, I haven't found a way to remove the HUD. Is it okay if they're left in, or would you prefer them removed?

Phylarion 16:04, May 21, 2012 (UTC)

That completely depends on what you are using them for. There are a few instances where the HUD is ok, but for the most part no. Lancer1289 16:46, May 21, 2012 (UTC)
It's going to be captures of a multiplayer character performing the various moves around cover eg. the button-hook, vault, sliding, grabs etc. No Shepard. Phylarion 17:24, May 21, 2012 (UTC)


So I'm posting here because I've patiently waited for an explanation and have not received any. Check my talk page. I figure this way I'll either get a reprimand or an answer. Hefe 16:00, May 22, 2012 (UTC)

Editing of a blog post

The following edit on a blog was made by Soldierscuzzy, who isn't the blog's owner: Link to differences page. I can't undo it, but I thought an admin would want to know. Trandra 20:53, May 23, 2012 (UTC)

It is fixed. I really wish staff members would read policies before doing anything. However, that is call I can do. Lancer1289 00:06, May 24, 2012 (UTC)

UNC: Geth Incursions incorrect

On UNC: Geth Incursions - it says under Casbin - that "You can't drive directly over the mountains to the base, so you will have to move north then swing around them to get to the outpost."

This is incorrect. I have yet to NOT drive right over the mountain. If you start around Samarium deposit (mineral #3 on the Casbin article map) and head towards the Uranium deposit (mineral #2 on the Casbin article map) you can in fact drive over the mountain directly to the outpost.

Kzintiwife 00:17, May 24, 2012 (UTC) Kzintiwife

What are you even talking about and why is this even here? Lancer1289 00:19, May 24, 2012 (UTC)

I added this information to the Geth Incursions page for ME1 - and you deleted it. So I thought I would let you know this way instead. Kzintiwife 00:23, May 24, 2012 (UTC) Kzintiwife

Ok you've added nothing to that article, and you've only made two edits here. I cannot even remotely find what you are talking about since I cannot even find what you are talking about. You aren't making any sense. Lancer1289 00:25, May 24, 2012 (UTC)

About 30 min ago or so, I did not have an account. I realize now I should have. I was the one who added information to the Geth incursion page. You edited it, removing the part I had added about the sniping and directions to get over the mountain. So i set up my new account and posted to you about the edit. I'm sorry if this is not correct as this was my very first attempt at any wiki update. The information on the page is wrong. Kzintiwife 00:30, May 24, 2012 (UTC) kzintiwife

So that is what you were talking about. What you added made little to no sense what so ever. If it doesn't make sense, then it doesn't have a place in the article. Not to mention things in () rarely stay in to begin with. Lancer1289 00:37, May 24, 2012 (UTC)

Lotta stuff on the page

Hi Lance, Just popping by, see how the wikia is holding up, and must say theres a LOT of stuff on your page that I cant sift through all of it, all the new talks of real life, edits on the wikia, and other such things. Maybe needs an archive at some point. Gonna do a little Mass Effect 3 then pop on my pooter (computer) again, anyway, chillax, and have fun :) JouninOfDespair 17:00, May 24, 2012 (UTC)

Explain wording please

You took out my additions to the Entertainment#Video Games saying they were "Redundant." You're an ADMIN so I can't really challenge you on that but can you explain why you felt the need to delete all of my changes? And how are they "redundant," or did you mean unnecessary? - Alpha1ance 06:58, May 25, 2012 (UTC)

It was completely redundant because you just copy pasted information from Legion's dossier. We don't need redundancy like that. If it is mentioned there, then there is no need to repeat it. Lancer1289 16:06, May 25, 2012 (UTC)
Isn't that the point of a Wiki though? Bringing information from throughout the games and books and putting them together? The way I saw it was that we had more information on them so why not put it all together instead of just putting the title?Alpha1ance 17:03, May 25, 2012 (UTC)
The point is to yes bring information, but not to be redundant, which is exactly what that was. We do not need to replicate information that is already present in one article. Lancer1289 21:20, May 25, 2012 (UTC)
What was said above, much like why we don't copy categories onto pages on which such categories already exist. Wikia does have an interconnected nature, but it becomes redundant once the same information/pictures/other data is added verbatim from one article to the other related pages. Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem 21:54, May 25, 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for the explanations. That was all I wanted.Alpha1ance 03:05, May 26, 2012 (UTC)

Missing Title #17

Not exactly the same problem, but the same user so why not. So why are you taking out all my edits to the War Assets? I know I came to the wiki to try to find out what the maximum war assets from each group could be and when I couldn't find them I had to go and figure it out myself. I thought I would help future readers find this information a whole lot faster and it's definitely not taking up too much space either, so why take them out?Alpha1ance 17:12, May 25, 2012 (UTC)

Because that information doesn't belong there, plain and simple. Walkthrough information like that has no place in that article. And follow directions in the future. Lancer1289 21:20, May 25, 2012 (UTC)

My edits

It seems my edits are being undone by you, I would like a reason to this as I am fixing up some of the grammar on the pages regarding the ME3 Rebellion DLC pack. ImTILDE 21:12, May 26, 2012 (UTC)

Becuase you are making edits counter to canon and site policies. Lancer1289 21:15, May 26, 2012 (UTC)

Capitalising race names in those circumstances is not counter to site policy, as classes are always capitalised. Additionally, looking at other multiplayer powers, like Rage (power) and Blade Armor, the races are capitalised there. 22:01, May 26, 2012 (UTC)

And you are? And you are incorrect. Lancer1289 22:05, May 26, 2012 (UTC)
I'm just trying to contribute. This wiki is free, right? And I believe I am correct, looking at the pages quoted. 22:14, May 26, 2012 (UTC)
But you are completely incorrect. Race names should never be capitalized unless they are at the start of a sentence, or it is Collector, Reaper, or Prothean. Lancer1289 22:29, May 26, 2012 (UTC)

So now you seem to be taking out your anger by undoing all my edits, despite them being completely relevant. Enemy dodges are completely relevant information which should be instantly available to readers as they examine the page. This seems a very unfriendly wiki and I would not expect an admin to behave in such a way. Please redo my edits; there is no need to erase valid info. 22:38, May 26, 2012 (UTC)

I'd also like to point out that though the rules on grammar regarding the colon are dubious, some consider what follows the colon as the start of a sentence.
(edit conflict)And your limited understanding is showing. I do not undo out of anger, despite what you may beleive. None of that information is relevant becuase EVERYONE has some kind of combat roll. Therefore it isn't an ability and is therefore irrelevant. Only relevant information belonges in articles, and none of that was relevant. Lancer1289 22:43, May 26, 2012 (UTC)

Well, I can deduce that you are a very rude person trying to drive people away from this wiki. I will not bother you with my "limited understanding" much longer (at least I can spell), as I can see you are the kind of person who will not listen to others or admit that they may be mistaken even somewhat. You even erased my advice on how to avoid enemies dodging your powers, which is 100% useful. I cannot believe what an unwelcoming wiki this is. I will certainly never contribute here again, if it causes you so much bother. 22:55, May 26, 2012 (UTC)

That is highly debatable to say the least. You have made less than twenty edits here, so you barely know how this wiki works, let alone what is relevant and what is not. That takes time to know, and making twenty edits is nowhere near close to that number. In addition, if you are calling me rude, then you need to reexamine some of your comments as they are rude as well. Moreover, I know this might be a shock, but I am willing to listen to others. However, when someone starts insulting me, putting words into my mouth, and picking things apart, then that person has to realize that is not the way to get someone to take constructive criticism. And your attitude is not helping that fact. Lancer1289 23:05, May 26, 2012 (UTC)
My apologies if I seem rude to you, but you certainly are acting very hostile towards me, considering I am merely an unseen entity placing words on a wiki. It's not as if I'm impersonating you in order to mass-vandalise numerous pages. That's right, my understanding is greater than you believe; IP addresses change, so how can you be sure I have not been editing this wiki previously. Furthermore, how do you know I haven't examined this wiki previously without editing and gained knowledge of how it works in that manner? My knowledge is not limited; I can tell you that. 23:11, May 26, 2012 (UTC)
And for that, I have only your word. For all I know, and this is more often than not the case, someone comes along one day, makes a series of edits, gets them undone by someone, and then complains. We do know that many people visit the wiki daily, but when it comes to making edits, we really only have people's words, or for registered users their edit count, and we've learned through experience, that people tend to lie about things like this. Again, it isn't always the case, but it is more often than not clear if they have experience, or if they had looked around. Lancer1289 23:15, May 26, 2012 (UTC)

And clearly I have been around here for a while as I am aware someone once tried to impersonate you to vandalise myriad pages. 23:20, May 26, 2012 (UTC)

Anyway, how about we turn back to the original topic of this discussion rather than being distracted by bickering, the capitalisation of the race names on these new power articles. As you will see on EACH AND EVERY power article except Tactical Cloak (I just checked each and every one, tediously), under "Availability", the race names are capitalised, though the layout is not always the same. By this logic, these new power articles should also have capitalisation to maintain consistancy. Come on; I cannot see the argument here. 13:36, May 27, 2012 (UTC)

Vandal (I've undone his edit, but you may wish to check it out)

Hi Lancer, just popping by to show you the IP of a vandal who put into the "Javik" page a completely untrue, irrelevant, and crass "Romance" section. Just compare the recent edit, with his edit, people like this are a real pain in the butt. Anyway, heres the IP:

Cheers JouninOfDespair 16:08, May 27, 2012 (UTC)

Nvm, Commdor has already blocked him, sorry for the inconvienience JouninOfDespair 20:40, May 27, 2012 (UTC)


On the press statement for Rebellion they spelled "materiel" incorrectly in the Krysae description, but in the actual game it's spelled correctly. That's why I'm changing it. Mr. Mittens 19:30, May 30, 2012 (UTC)

Yet again, you clearly don't understand why it is there, or we wouldn't be having this conversation. There is a reason it is in the Widow article, and since it is obvious that you didn't even look at it, or do any research on it, I will state why. Simply put, that is not how you spell the word. If the description was ture, it would spelled "anti-materiel" rifle, not antimateriel. So stop removing the sic tag. Lancer1289 19:41, May 30, 2012 (UTC)

Don't act like I didn't do any research on it. You don't know that to be "ture". I was under the impression that you were referring to them spelling it "material", not the lack of a hyphen. I'm not sure that a missing hyphen is worthy of a sic tag, but I'll let it stay. Mr. Mittens 19:51, May 30, 2012 (UTC)

Yet as I stated that if you had done research, then you would have seen that in every spelling of the word that is legit, as in military terms, you would have seen that the word is hyphenated. If it is not, then it is spelled incorrectly. So I had every right to assume, and it appears that I assumed correctly. Lancer1289 19:57, May 30, 2012 (UTC)
I had done research, and had misunderstood why you had the sic tag. I believed it was due to a spelling error instead of punctuation. Regardless, the matter is resolved. Mr. Mittens 20:04, May 30, 2012 (UTC)
Lancer, I don't mean to butt in and drag this out, but I'm genuinely interested in something here. Like most of the people who've edited that error (or at least, what seems to have been the case), I thought it was a spelling error. Hyphenation didn't even occur to me (although having it brought up was a bit of a "Well, duh!" moment). I didn't remove the tag, I changed the spelling to match the incorrect of the press release (I admit, not necessarily the same as the in-game info, and there's that wonderful saying about "assume" that comes to mind here...). Anywho, based on you mentioning the removal of the tags, I'm curious: Were you just reflexively undoing any edit to the description, without checking to see what the exact edit was in order to better explain it? I know that probably sounds a bit blunt, maybe even offensive, but I'm curious nonetheless.
Also, while I'm here, I'd like to apologize for calling you out on misusing it. Like I said, I thought the issue was entirely a spelling one. I judged too quickly and thought you were using the [SIC] tag to denote a place where in-game spelling had been corrected rather than an in-game typo (I see that one quite a bit). My mistake. --The Gunsmith 00:27, May 31, 2012 (UTC)
Actually no I wasn't. I was carefully looking at each edit, and probably got my edit summaries mixed up, which I've done on more than a few occasions. I just need to find a few examples although one was rather recent. I call that a brain fart moment as I usually get caught up in what happened in the past, and get jumbled in my mind that a different edit was made. I don't consider that question rude, as I've done it on a few occasions in the past, and caught myself on those occasions, mostly, which that usual "duh" moment. Lancer1289 01:20, May 31, 2012 (UTC)

Wiki-Related Question: Private Messaging

Lancer, quick question regarding the wiki itself. I know a lot of wikis have a private message function if you want to talk to someone without it being on the talk page for all the world to see. That said, I can't find one here, and I honestly can't even remember if the wikis I'm thinking of are even Wikia-based, so I don't know if I've got that option.

I'll shoot straight with ya: the message is intended for you. Nothing bad or anything, strictly Internet business, just a conversation from one editor to another that, quite frankly, I feel should STAY between one editor to another. If you're open to talk, I'd appreciate knowing if I can do it privately. If that's really not an option, I can take it to my talk page (who's gonna read a guy with 60 edits?), although even then, that just seems too public. Admittedly, though, that's a thought for tomorrow; it's late here and I gotta get up early for work. Anyways, I'll just appreciate knowing if the wiki has that function. Thanks. --The Gunsmith 03:05, May 31, 2012 (UTC)

The thing is there really is no way to send a private message, or at least none that I've discovered. For this purpose, we generally use email, but Wikia is having trouble keeping my email confirmed. I need to send another email about that, for the fourth time now. However, using Wikia's email function, I have found that you have a confirmed email address with Wikia, and I can send a quick email to you through that email. Then all you need to do is respond.
I can see that you want to keep this private, and I respect that which is why I propose this. If this is acceptable to you, then please respond saying you are fine with it as I don't want to send you an email without your permission. Lancer1289 03:20, May 31, 2012 (UTC)

Reegar Carbine and Cerberus Harrier titles

I saw on the Talk page for the Krysae Sniper Rifle, you stated the following: We use the game for the final description since it is more current. Lancer1289 00:06, May 31, 2012 (UTC)

If that is the case, may I ask why you oppose the move to the titles of Reegar Carbine and Cerberus Harrier for their respective pages when those are the names of the weapons in game and in the manifest? (as opposed to the current titles "Reegar Carbine Shotgun" and "Harrier Assault Rifle", both of which were taken from a press release before the DLC came out) 06:08, May 31, 2012 (UTC)JeanRalphio

I am not required to explain my vote to you or anyone else. I also find it highly rude that anyone would even ask, as one person keeps doing. Lancer1289 06:12, May 31, 2012 (UTC)
I am sorry that you found my question to be rude, but I was simply curious as you've been one to keep pages proper and accurate to the source for the few years I have been reading this wiki. 06:27, May 31, 2012 (UTC)JeanRalphio
See my previous comment about how I feel about this question. I will not ask anyone else for why. Lancer1289 06:32, May 31, 2012 (UTC)
Indeed, you've made yourself quite clear. 06:38, May 31, 2012 (UTC)JeanRalphio

Inconsistency in MoS

SanjayBeast just brought up a good point on my talk page--the MoS in general says that race names should not be capitalized, but Mass Effect Wiki:Manual of Style/Powers#Availability 2 shows the word "human" capitalized. Trandra 19:13, May 31, 2012 (UTC)

In the latter case, "Human Vanguard" and "Human Adept" and so on are titles and thus proper nouns, which are capitalized. By themselves, "human" and "asari" and etc. are common nouns and kept lowercase. -- Commdor (Talk) 19:18, May 31, 2012 (UTC)
Oh dear Trandra, we were both mistaken. Do you know which one we have to undo, cos i've been undoing a fair few over the last few days....oops. SanjayBeast 19:22, May 31, 2012 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Should it be clarified in the race name capitalization section of the MoS that "Human Vanguard" or "Vorcha Sentinel" is a proper noun for a class, then? There have been multiple undos, especially on the Rebellion Pack powers, (and I've spent some time going through the powers pages in alphabetical order) changing this, even though I felt it was wrong in some way to make it lowercase. Trandra 19:26, May 31, 2012 (UTC)
Actually it is alreayd covered in the Capitalization section, but that could be further clarified. Commdor is correct on this one as I had forgotten about that. Lancer1289 19:35, May 31, 2012 (UTC)
I've added an example to the MoS page for mp character classes. Feel free to improve it if need be, Lancer. Now I'm off to get a late lunch. -- Commdor (Talk) 19:37, May 31, 2012 (UTC)
I'll take a look at it when I'm done proofing. Lancer1289 19:38, May 31, 2012 (UTC)

Missing Title #18

Hi Lancer, Is there some way to change the 'auto pop up' link text for the atlas? At the moment, when you tip '[[atlas' as i did, it comes up with Atlas Infantry Fighting Exoskeleton. I was wondering if there is a way to remove this, as it is now just a redirect to the Atlas page, which only comes up if you type '[[atla' etc. If there isn't, don't worry as i just have to remember in the future - it would just make it easier on new editors. Thanks, SanjayBeast (talk) 15:42, June 1, 2012 (UTC)

No there isn't. Talk to Wikia about that since we have zero control over that. Lancer1289 15:53, June 1, 2012 (UTC)

Rachni Infested Mine

Re and the crates in the mine, I bow to your superior knowledge, and I guess you've just checked (on PC?) so you'll know, but where the heck is the third? I find one on the right hand corner, one in the left near the big cylinders, and that's it. I've been round that room 6 or 7 times in a methodical way, hard to believe I'm missing anything. I know it's not your job to tell me this, but I wonder whether you're playing on the XBox and it's different, or something, so would love to double check.

UPDATE: Either we're playing different versions, or something changes depending on when in the story you play these assignments, as I'm at Listening Post Theta, past the main room, in the room to the left. Your description says 'A wetware kit, three crates, 2 storage lockers, a technician kit, and a malfunctioning object'. My room has 2 storage lockers, a technician kit and a malfunctioning object. No wetware kit, no 3 crates. So something is different. And it's an empty room, not like I can miss something. I'm not a moron.

I'm on PC 1.02, and I'm at level 50, playing Soldier, Earthborn, with a load of Paragon points and only a few renegade. I've got 9,999,999 credits. I've got Liara and Tali with me. Kaidan is dead. I've upgraded all my talents to full except First Aid, Shotguns (empty), Pistols (2 points got) and Sniper Rifles (5 points got). I'm actually due to go to Ilos having escaped Capital but am finishing other missions first.

I've done all the assignments except

UNC: Locate Signs of Battle (1 more League Medallion to go) A Person of Interest -> UNC: Hostile Takeover UNC: Depot Sigma-23 UNC: Hostile Takeover UNC: Listening Post Theta -> UNC: Depot Sigma-23 UNC: Listening Post Theta UNC: The Negotiation

I've done all the missions except Race Against Time: Sovereign - I'm on Go to Ilos for this - and what follows.

All my people are carrying HMW 7 weapons of each type, with loads of upgrades and very good armour. I've got 10 medis, 10 grenades, 89 omnigels.

Bottom line - it's different. Don't know why, but it is. So my edit of 2 crates was correct for me, and the contents of this room in Listening Post Theta is less. Would you like a video or screen capture?

One point: I've been to Listening Post Alpha and did that Assignment. They told me about the other listening post but interestingly the assignment never got listed in my journal. Still, I came to Theta anyway, and now that I've done Theta, it's listed in my journal as done. Interestingly, I had the cut scene leading to Depot Sigma-23 but it's not in my journal. Oh well, I'll go there anyway.

Would be curious to know (a) if you checked the contents of the mine before removing my edit, and (b) what version you are playing on. It would be interesting to get to the bottom of this change, and significant not only for your wiki, but for the understanding of the game in general.

And what was the point of bombarding me with all of this completely useless and completely irrelevant information? Crates are static and do not change, nor do their number. I did not need to check because I demonstrated this mission, along with the rest of the sequence, and parts of Feros for some friends yesterday on Xbox and found three, and I did this mission this morning on PC, along with Feros, and the morality assignments, and again found three. So I have no idea why you added so much useless information that serves no purpose. Lancer1289 19:41, June 1, 2012 (UTC)
Because I am looking at the room and your wiki is flat out wrong. So either you are mad, or stupid, or I am mad, or stupid, or THERE IS A DIFFERENCE.
Given that your wiki is based on the idea of being correct, would you not like to know if it is wrong? Would you not like to know if the number of items changes? And if it changes, would you perhaps like to know why?

You say 'Crates are static and do not change, nor do their number', and I say you are wrong, AND I CAN PROVE IT. Video? Pictures? Save Game? What's your poison?

If so, it MIGHT be interesting to try to figure out WHY there is a change. Hence all the 'useless and completely irrelevant information' above. It's not useless if you want to work out why the change. And in the spirit of wikis, I'd be happy to try to work with you to figure that out.
Or you can just keep telling yourself you are superior to me, I'm an idiot, and your wiki is right under all circumstances, and be wrong on all three counts.
Like so many others you have fallen into the rut of "I am right and no one else can say differently". Did it every occur to you that you are wrong? From your comments I am guessing not. You want to disregard the gameplay experiences of a number of people who have edited the article and did not change that. Lancer1289 20:39, June 1, 2012 (UTC)
Lancer, other person - I have just re-done this (out of curiosity, having seen this post war.) You'll not be surprised to hear that i had 3 crates but no wetware (i checked everywhere, i swear). How about we agree to say in the article that 'the details in the room seem to change for some players, dependant on variables as test unknown' and then, if you really want, you can go off and (with lots of proof) report back what you found. If thats not a compromise to resolve what is, in essence, a very minor change to a walkthrough that does not change the game by a large amount, i don't see how either of you think you have the moral upper ground. SanjayBeast (talk) 20:44, June 1, 2012 (UTC)
And now we do nothing because you just confirmed what the article says. It never makes a mention of a wetware kit until later, which isn't the point of this argument. Before jumping in, make sure you know what you are talking about. Lancer1289 20:51, June 1, 2012 (UTC)
Right back at you: you have fallen into the rut of "I am right and no one else can say differently". Did it every occur to you that you are wrong? From your comments I am guessing not.
I believe I allowed for a few possibilities besides my being right, specifically 'you are mad, or stupid, or I am mad, or stupid, or THERE IS A DIFFERENCE'.
I am offering whatever proof you require that FOR MY SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES the map is different. What are you offering? That no one else has encountered that? So what? There is no absolute threshold at which lack of evidence becomes proof of absence - in other words, just because no one else has had this, or mentioned this, doesn't mean it isn't so. Before men traveled around the globe, was the world provably flat, inconceivably spherical? Does everybody playing the game read your wiki and edit it, and would you let them if they did????
After all, while you may not be familiar with basic computer procedures, I am. If there is a bug, or a situation that is different from what is expected, then you attempt to replicate it, and if you can, then you look at what is different in the set up (hence all that 'useless' information above) and try to work out which of those is causing the difference.
I am attempting to help you make your wiki more accurate, and in doing so I am choosing to believe that you might be open to that, despite evidence to the contrary. I will gladly provide whatever proof or tests you require.
So do it. Or don't. Your loss.
Oh, and it's off topic, but I can't find an article anywhere on your wiki about Armor Damage Protection - perhaps an article on Damage Protect, Shields, etc would be useful.

Mr. Anonymous User, first, we have many pages related to armor, health, shields, and the like. Perhaps you should try [Combat] or [Armor]. I would also like to ask that you calm down. Two users have confirmed that the crate info is correct in this very thread, and the wetware kit is not mentioned until later in the article. If, however, you had turned out to be correct, this would have indeed been an issue that would have required resolution, so I would like to thank you for your efforts. I wish you luck in the discovery of your third crate, and I hope to see future productive edits from you in the future. Arbington 21:17, June 1, 2012 (UTC)

Apologies, Arbington, but I accidentally did this assignment (, not the one mentioned in the argument, and did not find (after 15mins of searching) the wetware kit mentioned in the walkthrough for it - the other details were, however, correct. Also, I am very sorry to you too Lancer - I really screwed that one up!

SanjayBeast (talk) 21:21, June 1, 2012 (UTC)

(Edit conflict)I was pointing out a fact, but you were just plain rude and obnoxious. I am willing to admit when I am wrong, and have done on numerous occasions. However, I am offering the proof that I originally wrote the walkthrough, and the number of people who have edited it since then that haven't changed it. Again, you want to disregard my gameplay experience and go solely with your own, and unfortunately since you are the one trying to change the article, it is 1-1, and in that situation, nothing is done.
And I full well know what a bug is so cease insulting my intelligence. I know that it can change, but what I do know is that the number does not. The only way to replicate that is to start a whole new game, and that will take days if not weeks to replicate. I know what I saw at least three times now. Again, you want to completely disregard me and take your word and only your word. Now how does that solve anything? It does not. Lancer1289 21:26, June 1, 2012 (UTC)
Once again, I have to say that my confirmation no longer counts, as it was on the following mission that i failed to find a wetware kit. sorry....SanjayBeast (talk) 21:29, June 1, 2012 (UTC)
That's quite alright, Sanjay, you need not apologize. Everybody makes mistakes. Arbington 21:34, June 1, 2012 (UTC)

WOW, all I'm trying to say is that in some circumstances, in at least 2 places (one also verified by SanjayBeast above), the collectable contents of the room change.

And I keep saying over and over, I will gladly provide a save game, or pictures, or video, to substantiate it. And if you are unwilling to do that, I'll gladly send it to anyone who requests it. Anyone at all.

It will NOT require days or weeks to replicate, it will require putting in my save game. Job done. And I'd be happy to facilitate that. Or watch the video I can provide. Whatever.

So no, I don't want to 'completely disregard [you] and take [my] word and only [my] word', that's your approach, I want to offer you or anyone else the chance to check what I am saying. If it turns out on other machines and other installs that it's not different, then great, mystery solved. I'd be happy to check, are you?

Contrast that with your exact words, 'I did not need to check because I demonstrated this mission, along with the rest of the sequence, and parts of Feros for some friends yesterday on Xbox and found three, and I did this mission this morning on PC, along with Feros, and the morality assignments, and again found three.'

No checking done. No written willingness to consider any form of proof contrary to your statement.

You offer the proof that you 'originally wrote the walkthrough' and no one has changed it since. You wrote it and no one disagreed so it must be right? Say what?

So who is it who has 'fallen into the rut of "I am right and no one else can say differently"'?

You say no one has disagreed with your walkthrough, but by my count there are two people right here (as SanjayBeast says that he was mistaken in not saying he was doing Theta but as far as I can see, he's saying that in Theta there was a difference between what he saw and what the walkthrough says - is that right SanjayBeast? - which fits with what I said). And by the way, thanks, SanjayBeast, for taking the time to actually test it.

I am saying in my case it is different from your walkthrough, and that may be true for other people even if it is not for you. You are saying it is just not so, I am flat out wrong. Translation: I am saying I am right AND so are you; you are saying I am not seeing what I am seeing.

That's why I keep offering proof, and why your responses are irritating me, because you are accusing me of - what? Madness? Utter stupidity? Inability to see? Being on the wrong planet? Mistaking crates for empty air in an empty box-shaped room? Whereas all I'm saying is there's something you don't know about the game, some set of conditions that changes things. Is that so crazy? It happens elsewhere, with Prerequisites for whole planets, and missions, and messages, why not here?

On the subject of being rude and obnoxious, I started by posting a polite comment with information that could be considered helpful, or apparently 'useless' (your word). You respond with saying I was 'bombarding [you] with all of this completely useless and completely irrelevant information?' and saying you had no need to check. I offered proof, and I admit I was a little vexed there, but I see no insult - for example, I said that you were not superior to me, and I was not an idiot, not the other way around. Indeed I offered, aside from proof, to work with you to find out what caused the difference. You accuse me of unwillingness to consider I am wrong, citing 'gameplay experiences of a number of people who have edited the article and did not change that'.

SanjayBeast chips in saying he's also seen a difference, neglecting only to mention that he's talking about Theta (which I discussed) not Alpha (which I discussed). His point is a continuation and a support of part of mine. You, having probably not read my whole post at the start, miss that, and are the epitome of politeness in telling him 'Before jumping in, make sure you know what you are talking about'. He did, you didn't.

I once again offer proof, and instead of taking me up on that, where I say 'you may not be familiar with basic computer procedures' you take offence that you 'full well know what a bug is so cease insulting my intelligence'.

To clarify, I did not say you didn't know what a bug is, I said you may not be familiar with generally accepted procedures on what to do and how to replicate and deal with them. Feel free to check my words above.

You say you know what a bug is, but you don't say whether you know the standard method. I had to assume you don't given that you did not recognize the information I provided originally as the sort of information one might require to reproduce the bug. Sorry if you felt I insulted your intelligence, but bear in mind that what you took offence at was not what I said.

Sorry, Lancer and Arbington, maybe I am a little riled and that shows in my tone, but I don't see that anything I've said or done has been either (a) wrong, (b) unreasonable - especially in repeatedly offering proof, and suggesting that the game map might change under certain obscure circumstances - or (c) significantly offensive. I offered helpfulness and get offhand rudeness and 'I don't need to check'. I offer proof and to work with you and get 'Other people haven't had that, you don't want to accept you are wrong' without any other discussion. I again offer proof and you take offense at something I didn't say, saying I am only listening to myself.

So, I'll say it again.


So thanks for throwing everything that I did out the window, and outright saying that we can only take your evidence. And apparently you need to read a lot more carefully because SanjayBeast said that he played a different assignment, not the one in dispute, so that proves nothing.
Pictures are not widely accepted because they can be faked and while video is a bit stronger, it still is open to interpretation. Doing what you did will require time to match your exacting conditions because you will not be satisifed until your exact conditions are met and replicated. So yes that will take time. You reconfirming your results does nothing to further your case, it only restates that you already provided. Think logically next time, because what you think takes zero time, will in fact take a lot of time. Just look what you want again and then tell me that to replicate that will not take days or weeks depending on someone schedule.
I said what I did because that is the truth. I did play that assignment yesterday on Xbox, and today on PC and said that I found three crates. Yet you completely ignore that, for whatever reason, say that it is invalid, and then say that only your evidence is valid, despite the fact that it is only your word as well. So where is the logic in that statement because I am seeing a very distinct lack of it? That makes no sense whatsoever and the fact you can't see that is extremely troubling.
If there is one thing I hate beyond anything else is when people put words in my mouth, or someone twisting my words to say the exact opposite of what I did. And that is EXACTLY what you just did. I stated that I checked it, but the fact I did not check it right then at that moment is the thing that is bothering you and I have zero idea why. I know what I saw, I know what I did, so I in fact DID check before making the edit because of what I experienced just a few hours beforehand. This is no different than studying before a test, or looking up the answer to a question for homework, yet you refuse to accept it. I did say that I am willing to admit that I am wrong, but when you throw attitude, unwillingness to cooperate, and everything else you have been doing into the mix, then my patience wears very thin. You keep saying that I am unwilling to compromise, yet you are the one having the problem because you refuse to consider that anyone apart from you is right, that someone mistaking the assignment is in fact evidence to support you, which it most certainly is not, and your overall attitude to everything that I have said is for all intensive purposes, "I am right, you are wrong, and you cannot accept that." That is not the case by a long shot. You are perfectly willing to dismiss my gameplay experience, take evidence from A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ASSIGNMENT as evidence to back you up, and continue with the attitude for no reason.
Read SanjayBeast's comments again because you clearly missed/overlooked/completely ignored, and I firmly believe the last one is the right one, one very important fact. Quote "Apologies, Arbington, but I accidentally did this assignment (, not the one mentioned in the argument". We are taking about Listening Post Alpha, not Theta, so thanks for putting more words in other people's mouths and taking evidence from a completely different assignment as evidence to support your claims. Wow, I have no words to describe that.
I am again saying that you are not wrong, but you keep saying that I am. You again willing want to dismiss my gameplay evidence and only accept yours as fact. Reread your comments and if you still say that is not what you want, then you need to step away because you are the one unwilling to consider anything but your own viewpoint here. I again state that I am willing to admit when I am wrong, something you seem to be unable or unwilling to do, but we are both saying different things, and that means that nothing in the article is changed. The only thing you keep wanting is for me to give in so you can have your way and put your experience into the article, while throwing my out as irrelevant and not fact. That is not how the world works.
Wow, who was the first to state with the attitude here because I stated that I have no idea why you were bombarding me with facts that serve no purpose and you took that as an insult. You never once stated that you were willing to work to reach a compromise, and the only time you did, when replication was offered, and I told you the reality of how long it would take to match your exact conditions, you threw it back in my face saying that you can reconfirm it yourself, using your data, again ignoring other people and what they might experience and the bottom line is that if it did not happen to you, then you were never going to accept that. In fact you outright insulted me. Quote "So either you are mad, or stupid, or I am mad, or stupid, or THERE IS A DIFFERENCE." The only thing you will believe is you repeating your same results and literally bombarding me until I accept it. Again, sorry to break your bubble, but that is not how the world works. I stated, quite clearly I might add what I experienced, on two separate versions of the same game, and you dismissed that as basically irrelevant.
Again, you really need to reread SanjayBeast's comment because be outright stated that he played the wrong assignment, yet you are willing to accept data from a completely different assignment as evidence to support you. Again where is the logic in that statement? He stated that he played Theta, yet we are talking about Alpha. He did not see which assignment was being discussed, I did, and now you seem to have lost that perspective as well. You cannot take data from Theta and say "oh now that applies to Alpha as well" because they are two COMPLETELY SEPARATE ASSIGNMENTS. You are the one who needs to reread comments not mine because he again stated that he played the wrong assignment to get the data he provided, yet again, you seem perfectly willing to accept that data, FROM THE WRONG ASSIGNMENT, as support for you when that is so beyond logic that it is not even funny.
You offer proof, yet the only thing you are willing to accept is your proof and not anyone else’s. You are extremely unwilling to accept my proof, verified when I originally expanded the article, and when I played TWO SEPARATE COPIES OF THE GAME just in the last 24 hours. You are no longer making any kind of sense. You are willing to ignore my proof and only accept yours, you cannot admit that you might be wrong, you are willing to accept data from another completely separate assignment as support for another completely separate assignment, and you keep pushing your attitude. So far, the only thing you have done is try and get around how things work here, how they have works, and you want your way, no matter what you have to do to get it. Lancer1289 00:18, June 2, 2012 (UTC)

Sigh. I honestly can't tell if you are deliberately not hearing what I'm saying or are just missing the point, but unlike you I am not going to assume deliberate or malicious intent on that, so here goes:
1) My evidence, your evidence.
You say 'I did play that assignment yesterday on Xbox, and today on PC and said that I found three crates. Yet you completely ignore that, for whatever reason, say that it is invalid, and then say that only your evidence is valid, despite the fact that it is only your word as well'
No. I accept that when you play it all these times you have seen 3 crates.
Can you accept that when I played it this time, I did not?
Can you accept that the number of crates changed this time?
Can you accept that the number of crates can change for some reason?

[if the answer to any of those three questions is 'No', why? or how?]
From my first post: 'Either we're playing different versions, or something changes depending on when in the story you play these assignments [...] Bottom line - it's different. Don't know why, but it is.'
From my second post: 'So either you are mad, or stupid, or I am mad, or stupid, or THERE IS A DIFFERENCE. [..] Would you not like to know if the number of items changes? And if it changes, would you perhaps like to know why? [..] You say 'Crates are static and do not change, nor do their number', and I say you are wrong, AND I CAN PROVE IT. [...] it MIGHT be interesting to try to figure out WHY there is a change.'
From my third post: 'I am offering whatever proof you require that FOR MY SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES the map is different.'
From my last post: 'all I'm trying to say is that in some circumstances, in at least 2 places[...], the collectable contents of the room change. [...] If it turns out on other machines and other installs that it's not different, then great, mystery solved. [...] I am saying in my case it is different from your walkthrough, and that may be true for other people even if it is not for you. [...] all I'm saying is there's something you don't know about the game, some set of conditions that changes things. Is that so crazy? It happens elsewhere, with Prerequisites for whole planets, and missions, and messages, why not here?'

So, when you say: 'I did play that assignment yesterday on Xbox, and today on PC and said that I found three crates. Yet you completely ignore that, for whatever reason, say that it is invalid' - NOT TRUE - 'and then say that only your evidence is valid' - NOT TRUE. When you say 'You never once stated that you were willing to work to reach a compromise' - NOT TRUE
It is quite possible for you to be right about what you saw, AND me to be right about what I saw. What that would mean is that you are wrong about 'Crates are static and do not change, nor do their number'. AND THAT IS MY POINT.

Given that, the proof I offer is a simple one, that in one case (or perhaps two, if SanjayBeast is also counted), crates have changed, as have their number. Just that. If my proof demonstrates that it can happen once, then it can happen more than once. It doesn't disprove your seeing more crates in your runthrough, it just disproves that crates NEVER change. Basic logic.

So when you say 'the fact I did not check it right then at that moment is the thing that is bothering you', not at all. The fact that you feel past experiences is sufficient to NOT CHECK IT AGAIN AT ALL under different circumstances and setup, THAT bothers me, since it's such a fundamental principle (crates do not change), affecting a large chunk of the wiki, and so easy to check. And in case you wonder, I get your refusal to check it again from the fact that every single one of your replies in no way expresses willingness to test, or look at evidence, or consider possibilities, or even discuss it. As you put it to SanjayBeast on a related point, 'now we do nothing'.
I hope that defuses whatever 'twisting my words to say the exact opposite of what I did' you feel I did.

2) SanjayBeast.
From my very first post: 'Either we're playing different versions, or something changes depending on when in the story you play these assignments, as I'm at Listening Post Theta, past the main room, in the room to the left. Your description says 'A wetware kit, three crates, 2 storage lockers, a technician kit, and a malfunctioning object'. My room has 2 storage lockers, a technician kit and a malfunctioning object. No wetware kit, no 3 crates. So something is different. And it's an empty room, not like I can miss something.'
So sorry, we ARE talking about Theta, as well as Alpha, right from the start. RTFP
SanjayBeast's post supported - using an example that was in my original post - my central point. Maybe he didn't mean to, maybe he did, but he did.

3) Time to test.
You say 'Doing what you did will require time to match your exacting conditions because you will not be satisifed until your exact conditions are met and replicated. So yes that will take time.'
NO. Leaving aside the words being put in my mouth about 'exact conditions', all it'll take a save game, something I've offered over and over and over and over again. You talk about pictures and video and keep ignoring this. Why?
I figure, excluding downloading the email with the file and extracting it from the zip, it would take about 3 minutes. Copy the files to the correct directory, look around the room, crates are or aren't there, job done.
So, to answer your question, I've looked at what I want again and I'm telling you that to replicate that will not take days or weeks. It'll take minutes.

4) Regarding my 'outright insulting' you by saying '"So either you are mad, or stupid, or I am mad, or stupid, or THERE IS A DIFFERENCE."', I would draw your attention to and; whichever you understand by the word 'or' (given 'either', I would say the latter), clearly it is no more nor less insulting to you than it is to me. If you can be offended by those words then surely I should be offended by my own words too, since I say the exact same thing about you as I do about myself? However I would argue that I was simply saying one of those options is the case (you mad, you stupid, me mad, me stupid, there is a difference), and given the hours and thousands of words trying to make the point that there is a difference between the number of crates in your game and mine, clearly that was the option I believed was the case, not any of the others.

5) What do I want?
I started by wanting to help your wiki be more accurate. Then I was interested in the fact that the number of items in a given area is not constant in all circumstances, and keen to work out what changed it, perhaps with your help. That changed over this conversation. At this point, I've given up on pretty much all of it, and I just want you to accept that what you wrote, 'Crates are static and do not change, nor do their number', is wrong, flat out wrong, and that depending on game conditions they do change, at least their number.
I don't really see how - if and when you accept that fact - you can write that into your walkthrough, since you can hardly put on some or all mission pages 'the number of crates and other containers may vary depending on the order you do missions in and other unknown factors' (well, you could, but it would suck), but even leaving that aside, your dogmatic insistence that everything is static and the wiki as stands is always right is ill suited to one of the major contributors of a wiki - the core concept of which is that information is fluid, that the 'received knowledge'is not always correct, and that the crowd, either as single people or large groups, can often produce more correct information than a single 'expert'. Your insistence - in this conversation and others above - that the wiki should be cast in stone, and that one man's voice is outweighed by the others not saying anything runs directly counter to that.
I highly doubt I can change your mind, but I am kind of hoping beyond hope that if you can see that you have, throughout this conversation, been reading pretty much every single thing I wrote in the worst possible light from the very start, and that you have somehow misunderstood my central point, maybe, just maybe, you will go back to the beginning, consider my actual point, and agree.
Probably not, but I live in hope.
As for your willingness to apologize if you are wrong. If you've read the above, and perhaps checked back to early posts, particularly regarding SanjayBeast and the 'Theta' argument and regarding the basic premise of my posts, and the stuff about about my not being logical, then I will be interested to see your reply. All the other verbiage wrapped around those things, and indeed most of the rest of your reply, I read but will forbear from commenting on or responding to, particularly as so much of it is wrapped around misunderstandings, it wouldn't be fair.
What I would like to see is you actually willing to admit that I am right. I do believe that you did get two crates, but you are unwilling to admit that I got three crates. That is the entire problem here.
It would not and does not matter who the information comes from, if a situation like this comes up, the same thing happens. If one person says one thing, and another says another thing, then nothing is done because there is a dispute. What do you not get about this? You cannot bet on future people coming along and saying that they will get the same result. All that matters is here and now. Again, you say one thing, I say another. Under that situation, every time this has come up, nothing is done because of the dispute.
And since you keep insisting, I went back on my PC, and low and behold. I found a save that was near this assignment so after about an hour of trying, I finally got to this assignment. What did I find, three crates. I looked through all of my Xbox saves, and none were close apart from the save I used yesterday. Since I know that is not acceptable. My nearest save is about 3 hours from it.
You keep wanting to take SanjayBeast's evidence as fact, and you cannot because as I have said over and over, he played a different assignment. You cannot, nor can I, take that as fact because it relates to something completely different. Until you realize this, then there is little I can do.
Now your comment of "A wetware kit, three crates, 2 storage lockers, a technician kit, and a malfunctioning object" makes me lose all hope for you because I highly recommend looking at the article again for UNC: Listening Post Alpha. The word "wetware" is not even in the article! The word "wetware" yes is present in UNC: Listening Post Theta, but that word is not even in Alpha, which is what this entire thing is about! You are now arguing over a word that is not, and was not ever in the article. So I have now completely lost track of what you are trying to argue here. Lancer1289 03:54, June 2, 2012 (UTC)

Man, I can't remember another time I've wanted to break a site guide so much and swear.

I beg you, please read this last bit all the way through because I genuinely believe you are missing things that is leading us to argue about two different things, and I don't know how much more I can go around on this with you.


7 lines in to my last post I said: No. I accept that when you play it all these times you have seen 3 crates.

From my very first post I said: Either we're playing different versions, or something changes depending on when in the story you play these assignments [...] Bottom line - it's different. Don't know why, but it is.

I'm not going to quote all the other times that I said I accept that what you see and what I see are different, as you clearly don't read the things.


Why are you still hammering away at me like I didn't, right from the start?

For the save game, again, you are not reading what I've said RIGHT FROM THE START.

I offered to send MY save game to you or anyone else to see if what happens. Will you see 3 crates or only 2?

I've never asked you to find your old save games. Never. It's a waste of time because, guess what, I'VE SAID YOU SEE 3 CRATES RIGHT FROM THE START.

But testing mine would be relevant, as you'll see if you read on.

RE SanjayBeast, again, you have NOT read what I wrote, RIGHT FROM THE START.

From my very first post, requoted in my last: 'Either we're playing different versions, or something changes depending on when in the story you play these assignments, as I'm at Listening Post Theta, past the main room, in the room to the left. Your description says 'A wetware kit, three crates, 2 storage lockers, a technician kit, and a malfunctioning object'. My room has 2 storage lockers, a technician kit and a malfunctioning object. No wetware kit, no 3 crates. So something is different. And it's an empty room, not like I can miss something.'

So sorry, we ARE talking about Theta, as well as Alpha, right from the start.


And if you keep reading, you will see it is relevant.

If you have actually read what I wrote above, what's it all about?

Simple, again from previous posts and my last post, you wrote (it was the second sentence in the first thing you ever said to me):

Crates are static and do not change, nor do their number

Since you have said above that you believe I had two crates, and you know (and I agree) you had three crates, surely you must accept that:


And THAT is worth writing somewhere in your Wiki.

That is why my savegame, not yours, is worth trying on your computer, to see if it still changes (and to demonstrate that fact to you, the wiki editor).

That is why SanjayBeast's comments on Theta are relevant, they demonstrate changes somewhere other than on my computer, somewhere other than this level.

I would have been interested in researching further with you or others to find out what the specific cause of changes was, and whether it happens in other parts of the story, but frankly at this point I'm about ready to shoot myself. So, let's not.

I hope this clears this up once and for all, and we can both agree that I have two crates, you have three, as I have said from the start and throughout. It's the WHY that I care about.

Sending your save game to someone will not confirm or deny anything as it will still be your file, affected by your situation and whatever your system did. Until someone comes along and confirms what you say, then nothing can be done. Lancer1289 05:06, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
Surprise surprise, I disagree with your comment about the save game, it would demonstrate that it's not just a problem with my install (though SanjayBeast's comments would suggest it isn't) and once that is established, since I have a number of save files covering recent and old history, in parallel with me doing the same you could go backwards and see when things changed, simply by jumping there and going into the Theta base (3-5 minutes each time, maybe), and so establish what changed it. Anyway...
That's it?
I demonstrate that, right from the start, I've been saying the things that you have been accusing me of not accepting, when all along - based on your misunderstanding and your misreading or not reading my posts, you've been saying that I'm the problem, that I need to say you are right, that I am 'willing to ignore [your] proof and only accept [mine], [I] cannot admit that [I] might be wrong', that I 'need to read more carefully' (ironic), am 'lacking in logic', 'putting more words in other people's mouths', 'losing perspective', not 'making any kind of sense', 'beyond logic', and so on, and that's all you've got to say???
So much for your being 'willing to admit when [you are] wrong'. Heck, you can't even bring yourself to admit the logical conclusion of what you and I were both saying - that Crates can and do vary.
I'm done with you. Not with this argument, but with you. If you can't even have the grace to acknowledge any of the above, you aren't worth another minute of my time. I agree with other people further up about your attitude, a point I would expand on if it would not break site rules.
I only hope you don't penalize my Mako posting out of spite, and instead do actually test it, as it works and is useful.
You ended one of your posts with 'you want your way, no matter what you have to do to get it'. Also ironic. Congratulations, Mr. Admin, you've got an empty field to be yourself in and get your way. Call it a victory if it makes you happy, but it's a pretty poor excuse for one from where I'm standing.

Armor - Damage Protection

I realize that by the stated rules my previous point should have been under a new heading, so here that is.

Arbington, Thanks for your reply on this. While there is indeed many pages related to armor, health, combat, shields, and the like, as far as I can tell, there is not one related to Damage Protection (one of three statistics for Armor) and what it means. In the armor page there is a link for Shields ( but nowhere that I can find is there anything that explains what Damage Protection is, or does. Maybe I missed it. It just seems like that might be a helpful thing, especially in the context of pages and pages of statistics for armor related to it.

So just a suggestion, addressed to Lancer and anyone else who would like to take it up.

If you created an account and set it up, I would be more than willing to help write some of the text/explanation. However, this wiki does not appreciate data taken from the game data itself, as this is not easily verifiable and can be changed. On the other hand, make a proposal and I am sure we will all listen.

SanjayBeast (talk) 23:05, June 1, 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I came to this realization (of the lack of a page) while looking for an explanation of what the heck it really was. I saw on another site that it is a percentage, such that damage done = damage that gets past shields * damage protection % (with all modifiers etc. taken into account) but I don't know whether that's based on fact or speculation. I speculate that it relates to protection from whatever gets through or past shields but I'm not even sure of that. So I'm not really the guy to write that page.
Here is a fantastic thread all about the game mechanics, explained very simply (its what i have read to understand this a lot more) :

However, this is definitely not source worthy material, but i thought you might like it. On the other hand, if you explore social.bioware and find a post by a dev. about it, then that could be considered. SanjayBeast (talk) 23:28, June 1, 2012 (UTC)

Only something from a dev stating the exact formula will be accepted. Anything else will be dismissed as speculation and removed from articles. Lancer1289 00:24, June 2, 2012 (UTC)

Splitting Tactics

Hi Lancer, Just wondering if we could do a similar thing to the Tactics pages of enemies as we did for the Player Notes section for weapons; the splitting of the tactics into those relevant to SP and those only relevant to MP. Just a thought, as some of them are becoming very cluttered. Regards, SanjayBeast (talk) 23:20, June 1, 2012 (UTC)

While some appear to be split, there is a lot more crossover between the two on this case, than with the weapons as the weapons have different stats entirely. Their behaviors and tactics are quite similar no matter which version of the game you play. So I'd really have to say that noticing specifics when appropriate is fine, but full section splits, just won't work. Lancer1289 00:30, June 2, 2012 (UTC)
Ok, I was just wondering if we could standardise the layout of the enemies pages to that which some of them (particularly the harder enemies) already have: General and Class/Character Specific - this would, I think, make a lot more sense as some notes (what powers to use) do only apply to certain characters, whilst others (what weapons to use etc) apply to every character.

SanjayBeast (talk) 09:03, June 2, 2012 (UTC)

That formatting is present in most articles and to put it where appropriate shouldn't be a problem. The reason that formatting isn't standard is that it tends to flow. While i"m not opposed to standardization of that, it might end up being more a problem than it is worth. Lancer1289 20:15, June 3, 2012 (UTC)

Multiplayer Class Guides?

As the title suggests, I am considering the idea of perhaps adding a multiplayer guide for each of the 6 classes. I know many people have different strategies for utilising the different classes in mass effect 3. I know quite a few tactics for playing for example a human engineer I found a couple of days ago where I forego the combat drone and instead focus on tech power damage.

I wanted to leave this overnight because its 1:13am in the morning here in the UK, and I thought this would be a really good idea to help people out with how they should or could consider sorting out their classes for the mass effect 3 multiplayer. Let me know what you and other people think of this idea, as I am really eager for some feedback on it, constructive criticism is good too, as I'm always learning more and more as I edit the wikia on a more extensive basis. Anyways, off to bed, tell what you think while I catch 40 winks :). JouninOfDespair 00:15, June 5, 2012 (UTC)

Already happening, cast your vote:
Hope that helps, SanjayBeast (talk) 00:17, June 5, 2012 (UTC)

Morality Guide

It's not incorrect, go and play the game again before you make that call. I've just done the conversation three times from start to finish selecting the option asking Ashley what they were fighting instead of asking about her squad, and it never gave me the option to tell her "it's not your fault." I know this, because that's the option I was looking for. Now, I don't know if we have different versions of the game or something (unlikely) but I finally found that option after asking her about her squad instead. So those two options for morality are dependant on a dialogue choice made immediately prior. I don't care what information you decide to publish or remove, but go and get your facts straight at least before you do. If I'm mistaken, I'll test it again to check if you can tell me where I went wrong. But just stating "incorrect" after I've told where to look is just obnoxious.

I just so love when people assume that I do not play the game, and I am sick and tired of it. I played it and removed incorrect information. Lancer1289 17:13, June 5, 2012 (UTC)

So what am I doing wrong, Lancer? Please, explain to me how one dialogue option gives me the two listed on this wiki with the morality points, but the other option doesn't? I just played it again, not five minutes ago, and repeated the process - in science, this is called repetition, and demonstrates how if a methodology can be repeatable and give the same results each time, then it can be used as evidence to create theories, and laws, of the natural world. However, in gaming it appears that demonstrating and explaining the methodology aren't enough to wipe the smug superiority complex off some gamers who think they know it all. Now, I'm sure the playthrough you did six months ago is sufficient to remember that "Ashley's the one in the pink armour," but in the world I come from, going back and doing a few repetitions might be a good method of either finding the dialogue that removes these options, or telling people how to get them, because on my latest playthrough, I simply did not get the dialogue options of "it's not your fault" and the other one for renegade. Didn't get them. After reloading and trying again, made the same choices, still didn't get them. Reloaded again, made a different choice, and got the dialogue options.

So yes, I'm assuming it's been a while since you've played the game. I'm not assuming, however, that you haven't played it at all. That's YOUR assumption - this is a fine detail that would require the special memory skills of someone with an inherent case of spatial sequencing synesthesia to pick it apart with as much accuracy <cough> as you have. Either way, I'll know the dialogue choices to pick from now on, and anyone visiting this wiki will just have to figure it out on their own. Unless, of course, you go and experiment with this particular part of the game, because I know you didn't do it when you removed my edits otherwise you wouldn't have removed them.

I'm not talking about your overall experience on the game, I'm talking about playing it again to check - I've had this game since it was first released and the fact that I can learn something new from it means you can too. Now, while my edit was made in order to help other players with a complete picture of the scenario, yours as far as I can tell, seems to be a statement of control, almost as if you're upset that you're not the one who found it, therefore it must be "incorrect". I don't care if you're the "admin" around here, because the internet is a playground Lancer, and anyone with a computer can be an admin of anything. All it means is that you get to play out your control fantasies in pseudo-reality.

I don't care if you've played it before, I assumed that you had. I was telling you to go play it again. It's not that hard, I'm doing it right now, and confirming the information I put up. I suggest you do the same. The popular consensus amongst most mass effect fans of your wiki is not one of high regard on the BW forums, and I'm starting to understand why - in all of your activities on here, I see nothing but an anal retentive power play against editors. Much of it I can understand - it has to conform to certain standards. But you haven't checked to confirm my edit, or you would have confirmed it by now. I'm confirming it again now to set my own mind at ease - I'll apologise if I'm wrong, so perhaps you could tell me WHY I'm incorrect, point me in the right direction, so that I can understand your smug mentality a little better, and see if in this case, it's truly justified.

So far, however, I've run that conversation four more times with different options, and so far, I'm not incorrect.

I'm doing this in real time right now - When you first talk to Ashley when you meet her on Horizon, your first dialogue choice is out of three options: "Are you okay?", "What happened here?" and "We're on a mission." If I choose the first, the second set is a pair, "What happened to your unit?" and "Fighting these things?" If I choose the first, I get the options "Don't blame yourself," "You abandoned them," and "What killed them?" Now, I'm going to reload and choose "Fighting these things."

After selecting "Fighting these things," the next set of options are "Join us," "Take us there," and "Stay here," with no morality point options anywhere in sight. So yes, you need to go and play it again, because I am not incorrect, not by any stretch of the imagination.

You know, the attitude you presented is not remotely helping your case. Your attitude in the entire comment was obnoxious, rude, and flat out inconsiderate in more than a few parts. You could have come across a lot nicer, rather than just throwing, well I have no word that can describe without breaking the language policy, in my face that was completely irrelevant to this discussion. As the only think you did with all of that is just turn me off to this entire comment and
You made an assumption, actually multiple assumptions, and all were incorrect. I played this before I made the undo. Was it right before, no, but it was within an hour beforehand. I needed to restart one of my careers in ME, and played it through until I landed on the Citadel the first time. I made special attention to play until this point, since you made an issue of it, and saw that I was correct in what I stated. Which is why I undid it before I went to bed last night.
Now instead of being polite and asking again and presenting your evidence in a calm, considerate fashion, you decided to leave one long rude comment, and it almost made me put this off until tomorrow. However, since I was restoring an old computer for use, I decided to do it after you left that rant.
So, what did I discover. I played it again and found that I reconfirmed my results. However, I decided to humor you, and tried it again. So what did I find my second time, I found a result inconsistent with my previous results. So I tried it again, and found that you were indeed right. I know what a shocking statement, yet I keep telling people that if I am wrong, the I will freely admit it. I found that I was fast mashing through the dialogue, a.k.a. hitting the button when the dialogue opinion appeared, and misreading dialogue options when I took my time.
So what I did was not a power grab, control issue, or anything else that you mentioned. You made a completely incorrect assumption that really just backfired. I made the edit because it was what I believed was correct. However, again, I discovered I was incorrect and I will readd it back into the article. Perhaps instead of throwing stuff in my face and making assumptions next time, just present your issue calmly and things won't get out of control. Lancer1289 01:47, June 6, 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps, instead of just deleting stuff and stating "incorrect," you should fact check first like a real editor, instead of just assuming. I don't add stuff unless it's true. I've done it myself, though, added stuff without first checking what's already in the article, and found that what I've added is already there. So then I delete my own edit. What you threw in my face was that I was wrong without even checking, and without even telling me what my mistake was. I don't really care how rude you thought I was, I found it quite contemptuous and very unacademic to delete a factual edit without checking first, so don't tell me that what I did backfired, because at the end of the day, you're the one re-adding the edit because you were wrong in your initial assumption about me being "incorrect". None of what you just said is my problem - my problem was with being told I'm incorrect without any explanation whatsoever, when I clearly wasn't. THAT was rude, and the fact that you feel you have ANY justification for that at all is your delusion, and again, your problem.

As a researcher and journalist myself, I am quite adept at making sure my facts are correct before declaring them as facts - still, we all make mistakes, which is why I let your first removal of my edit go and politely explained the scenario in my undo. That was when I was polite - it was when you repeated the undo, again without checking, that you became worth my contempt. I don't care if it was based on what you believed was correct - just because you believe it, doesn't make it true. That's why atheists exist. Beliefs and facts are two entirely different things, so I suggest that if you want as factual a wiki as possible, you CHECK before you EDIT.

Wow I am shaking my head after that one. That is one of the most rude, arrogant, and bigoted statements that I have read, and I have read quite a lot. It is also a comment that comes from someone completely failing to consider anyone's point of view apart from their own.
I had every right to undo it the first time because of information that I believed, and then verified was correct. What your problem here is that this is not a case of who is right and who is wrong, it is about two people, one who clearly has put on airs, contesting an edit. SOmething you seem to have a big issue with. If you continue to edit a wiki, then you will find people who make an edit based on what they believe is right, regardless if it is correct or not. I was fully within my rights to make the first undo, and then make the second based on information that I had verified and had you not left one of the rudest comments that I have seen recently, I would have kept believing that was correct. Therefore, the person in the wrong here is you because you failed to assume good faith, and instead of remaining calm, you acted out, pulled out the "career card", and in no uncertain terms, said that you were better than me in every way because unlike you, I failed to check my information. Did you even read my comment? Apparently not because I stated that I checked it and you glossed over it because it did not agree with what you said. I checked my information before making the second undo, as it was information that I had checked carefully. Yet you did not read this because you only considered what you said and left your bigoted comment as a result.
Perhaps instead of just going around and considering your point of view, you need to realize how a wiki works because this statement, "I don't care if it was based on what you believed was correct - just because you believe it, doesn't make it true. That's why atheists exist. Beliefs and facts are two entirely different things, so I suggest that if you want as factual a wiki as possible, you CHECK before you EDIT." Not only is it offensive, rude, bigoted, insulting, a personal attack, and but plain contemptuous, but also shows how you fail to understand how a wiki works. People will make edits based on what they believe is correct all the time, regardless if they have verified it or not. People have every right to act on information they believe is correct.
What you threw in my face is the fact you said you are superior to me in every way because I "failed to verify my information". Again, I highly suggest rereading my comment because you are clearly overlooking parts of it because you don't like to read it. Again this is not a case of who is right or who is wrong, you were arrogant to assume that I was not acting in good faith based on information that I assumed was correct. "[J]ust because you believe it, doesn't make it true". You forget that this applies to you as well. Had I not gone back, I would have assumed that you believe that you were correct based on your information. You need to assume that other people are correct and are acting in good faith. "I don't add stuff unless it's true. I've done it myself, though, added stuff without first checking what's already in the article, and found that what I've added is already there." Again this applies to others as well. What works for one person does not mean it will work for someone else. So is the information wrong? You would of course say yes because you cannot verify it. Yet that is not how a wiki works. The correct answer is no. You completely and utterly failed to assume anyone apart from you is right and acting on good information. Again, this is not a case of who is right and who is wrong, it is the process in which you did this.
Beliefs and facts are two completely subjective issues, again something that you failed to consider, or comprehend. You really need to assume that others are acting in good faith and not just going after a power grab, something you are trying to do. The only person here in a delusion here is you because of your utter failure to realize how a wiki works, your wild and completely inaccurate assumptions, and your arrogant and bigoted nature.
Your entire way of going about this is indeed your problem, and most defiantly has indeed backfired because of how you went about it. You made rude comments, bigoted and very arrogant comments, threw personal attacks and insults, fail to assume that someone else is acting on good information which they have checked, and really just be one of the most arrogant people that I have dealt with. You were the rude one here because of your failure to properly grasp how a wiki works, and your arrogant attitude towards anyone who disagrees with you. You are the one who put on the airs here, not me. The very fact that you pulled out the "career card" shows your arrogance. I am willing to admit when I am wrong, yet that is something that you clearly are quite incapable of. I have nothing further to say unless you dramatically change your attitude. Lancer1289 06:16, June 6, 2012 (UTC)

Once again, I don't care what you think of me. I don't care how you want to spin and justify your analysis of me - you're missing my point entirely. One small correction, first - beliefs are subjective, but established facts are not. Facts are based on evidence, beliefs are not.

I want to apologise, though, because I was a little brutal. My work involves dealing with people that claim "black salve cures cancer," and while I highly doubt you're a medical quack, it's become something of an instinct to lash out at fact-checking failures. I'm surprised you took so much offence, however, considering how many edits you, personally, make on this page daily by people doing exactly that - not checking the facts and making subjective claims. I'm surprised, also, to see you state that facts are as subjective as beliefs, considering how many edits you remove with the reason "subjective" attached.

I'm not here to edit a wiki for the sake of editing a wiki - as I explained earlier, and just this once more for clarification, I did it with the intention of assisting other players who might turn to this wiki's morality guide. Now, one more clarification: explain to me my exact bigotry, please. I made no reference to your personal religion, sexual preference, gender or race, so there was no bigotry. Be careful of accusations like that: one screen shot can land you in a libel suit that you don't want. Not in my case: I'm not that petty, but if you were to do something like that to someone who was that petty, you wouldn't like the results. False accusations of bigotry are taken just as seriously as factual ones. If it's in regards to my reference to atheists, it is because there is no mathematically or scientifically demonstrable, repeatable, or documentable evidence of the existence of God, therefore he doesn't exist as a fact, only as a belief. That is why there are atheists - it is only natural for people to want proof before they can be expected to believe something is true, and a self-referencing Bible is only postulation, not proof. It is not bigotry to make this statement, because it is an established matter of fact, even by all but the most orthodox churches.

Now, I meant no personal insult by what I've said, as I myself was only making observations: I did not mean to belittle or insult your intellect, but you've taken it thus and I apologise. However, I don't speak on any platform intended to hurt your feelings; my intention is to indicate my ire, and nothing more.

I suggest, though, that you take another look at the overall outcome here: nothing has backfired on me, because at the end of the day, I really don't care. All that stuff you explained to me AFTER undoing your removal should have been said WHEN you did the removal, and perhaps you wouldn't have attracted my ire. Perhaps a message to my own talk page when I undid your first "correction" to clarify what I was talking about? Instead of just another undo with the notation, "Again, incorrect." Imagine this scenario: you have a fact, you have the evidence to support that fact, and you publish it, and you're told you're wrong. It's not just circumstantial evidence, mind you, it's repeatable and irrefutable. Evidence that speaks for itself. In short, you know you're right, and you can prove it. But you're told you're wrong - your natural first assumption is that they haven't seen the evidence, so you tell them, "go look at the evidence." Then they come back and tell you, "no, you're wrong."

I realise I have been rash, but so would you be. If you do take another look at the final outcome, you'll realise I was right all along, and you were wrong. I don't need to be smug about it, I'm not trying to be smug about it, because it's a fact, one you've admitted with patience. I appreciate that. But you also need to acknowledge that I was right from the start, and you putting your foot down as if I wasn't would make you feel pretty downright angry too if you were in my shoes here. So any backfire does not concern me in the slightest - I have no judgement and no intention to judge your character, although my previous messages here state otherwise, I wasn't happy with being treated like a moron. So yeah, you earned my ire, especially when you mixed me into a generalisation of people you are sick and tired of with the statement, "I just so love when people assume that I do not play the game." I had reason for that assumption: it appeared that you were not looking at the evidence I was presenting you. Pretty easy assumption to make, considering that in the end, I was right.

We've both jumped to hasty conclusions, and for mine I apologise. I don't expect you to acknowledge anything, or apologise, and I'm not trying to guilt you. I don't think you owe me one, and I don't care. But at the end of the day, if backfires concern you so, then the fact that I was right all along is the one that matters here: that's the core of the issue. I don't need to be right, and I'm happy to admit when I'm wrong. I've been wrong plenty, and assuming that I take a position that my viewpoint is the only one is callous of you, because I've had to defer my viewpoint on many occasions when publishing my work: they don't let you publish subjective matter in academic journals except in "review/opinion letters".

On that note, I won't bother trying to edit here anymore. I understand this is a gaming wiki, and not to be taken as seriously as an academic journal, but it's difficult to let go of these standards. I'm content with keeping my own record, in any case. I'm sure you'll want to get your final word in here, though, so go ahead, I have nothing further to say anyway.

Mako Bug

I posted the following on the Mako page (

  • On the PC version, if you hit the Escape button to open the menu while the Mako is in the air (not contacting the ground at all), when you return to the game the Mako loses all movement (rotation and linear velocity), which can be useful if it is falling or tumbling.

You removed it as 'Unconfirmed bug'. What does it take to be a confirmed bug? Do I wait for you to test it, or are you waiting for others to test it (which is unlikely given that it's not on the wiki page so no one will see it)?

Post it on the talk page and if you can get two other users to confirm it, then it can be placed as a bug. I will test it today, and get back to you.SanjayBeast (talk) 09:36, June 5, 2012 (UTC)
Thanks SanjayBeast, already posted on the talk page (, hope you find it the same on your machine, and that some other kind soul will also verify. It's a handy little bug when dropping off high cliffs. :)

Voting Periods

How long do votes officially remain open for before the verdict is reached? Yanxa 19:33, June 6, 2012 (UTC)

Seven days. This it outlined in the Community Guidelines. Lancer1289 19:34, June 6, 2012 (UTC)
Are there any exceptions to this? Yanxa 19:38, June 6, 2012 (UTC)
(edit conflict)No. Lancer1289 19:39, June 6, 2012 (UTC)

Deleting User Space pages

Lancer, would you please delete the five pages in my user space that I marked for deletion? It's all the pages under "T" on Category:Candidates for deletion. Thanks! Trandra 06:06, June 7, 2012 (UTC)

Got them. Lancer1289 17:53, June 7, 2012 (UTC)
Thanks again! Trandra 02:44, June 9, 2012 (UTC)


I find the extended cut DLC page is rather neutral now, which is good. Might I suggest locking it? This: page has found out about it. And seemed a bit outraged when it said "Complained" which I changed to the more neutral 'Argued" I think it should be locked before some of the trolls from that page start spamming it now that they'll know about it.

Ottakanawa 10:58, June 9, 2012 (UTC)

And I have since restored it because the previous version was more accurate to what actually happened. And I have seen zero evidence to support any claim that you have made. Lancer1289 13:58, June 9, 2012 (UTC)

Missing Title #19

hello,i am completely new to this.i am going to learn as i go,i wastrying to find gamers that can help me with mass effect,i am playing the first game and am trying to go to artimis tau, galaxy map only shows the citadel,i am a spectre at this point,can yu help?

I don't even know what you are even talking about. Lancer1289 01:25, June 10, 2012 (UTC)

Your talk page

Aren't you supposed to archive your talk pages once it gets past 80 topics?-- 21:09, June 9, 2012 (UTC)

Oops sorry.. I hadn't realized I wasn't logged in when I made the comment above.--BrewCrew4Life21 21:14, June 9, 2012 (UTC)

No. If you had read the policy more clearly it states that user talk pages, since they are the property of the user they are listed under, are except. Quote "Note: These terms will not apply to individual user’s talk pages. Users are free to archive their own pages as they please." Lancer1289 01:26, June 10, 2012 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.