Editing User talk:NightHammer

==Sources==

Hello, why did you [http://www.halopedia.org/index.php?title=Type-51_plasma_repeater&diff=next&oldid=1089920 remove the source] that I added to the [[Nakata'vho-pattern plasma repeater|plasma repeater]] page?  [[Special:Contributions/88.120.49.44|88.120.49.44]] 18:37, 24 November 2014 (EST).

::Yep, that's why I did it. In hindsight, I probably should have stated my reason in the edit summary. - [[User:NightHammer|NightHammer]] (talk) 18:52, 24 November 2014 (EST)

I bring this up because I'm wondering if we should include notes to specify different editions in our sources whenever necessary (the page numbers in the classic books are fairly consistent but there appear to be inter-edition differences in the newer ones). ISBNs would be straightforward on a conceptual level, though looking them up every time when citing a source would get tedious very fast. Would the distinction between paperback, hardcover, and digital editions be enough or are there layout differences within those too? --[[User:Jugus|<font color="MidnightBlue">'''Jugus'''</font>]] <small>([[User talk:Jugus|<font color="Gray">Talk</font>]] | [[Special:Contributions/Jugus|<font color="Gray">Contribs</font>]])</small> 01:21, 30 December 2014 (EST)

:I use Google Play's digital editions of the books (the only non-digital ''Halo'' book I own is ''The Flood''). I just checked and ''Broken Circle''<nowiki>'</nowiki>s digital edition is only 306 pages, while Halopedia lists it at 352. I'm assuming this is a difference in versions. I'm not sure how many editions there is of each novel, but I believe it would also be tedious and potentially cluttering to add page numbers for every edition. I honestly have no idea how to solve this issue at the moment. We could have the user just cite what edition they are using, but that could be unhelpful to a user or reader with another edition that would like to look at the source. - [[User:NightHammer|NightHammer]] (talk) 01:59, 30 December 2014 (EST)

::I agree that listing page numbers for every version would be an unworkable solution—most people don't own more than one edition—but we could mention the edition after the page number much like we do with the reissued first three books and the Encyclopedia. For the sake of users with a different edition, mentioning the chapter number could be helpful in pointing them in the right direction. Like so: <code><nowiki><ref>'''Halo: Broken Circle''', Chapter n, ''page n'' (Google Play digital edition)</ref></nowiki></code> or <code><nowiki><ref>'''Halo: Broken Circle''', Chapter n, ''page n'' (paperback)</ref></nowiki></code> (the latter is assuming all paperback editions of the book are consistent in their page numbers; if not we'll have to be more specific). It adds a little more work and could take some time to get used to (I still don't always remember to tag the Del Rey/Tor editions) but it would help with the confusion. And if a user who happens to own more than one edition is feeling helpful they may, of course, add more edition-specific info to the source (e.g. <code><nowiki><ref>'''Halo: Broken Circle''', Chapter n, ''page x'' (paperback); ''page y'' (Google Play digital edition)</ref></nowiki></code> --[[User:Jugus|<font color="MidnightBlue">'''Jugus'''</font>]] <small>([[User talk:Jugus|<font color="Gray">Talk</font>]] | [[Special:Contributions/Jugus|<font color="Gray">Contribs</font>]])</small> 03:28, 30 December 2014 (EST)

:::Sounds like a pretty reasonable solution to me. I would also suggest that we shorten "Chapter" to "Ch.", and "page" to "pg.". That would help prevent some clutter in the citations. - [[User:NightHammer|NightHammer]] (talk) 03:33, 30 December 2014 (EST)

:::::It should also be noted that including the chapter should generally be enough of a reference for broader statements about events and such that happen over multiple pages. Meanwhile, it's better to cite more specific information (e.g. technical details or descriptions and the like) with precise page numbers so that info like that can be easily checked. But in general I don't believe that the difficulty of adding citations should stop one from adding information as long as it's valid. Unless we're talking about some extremely specific and contested bits of info or an upcoming product. --[[User:Jugus|<font color="MidnightBlue">'''Jugus'''</font>]] <small>([[User talk:Jugus|<font color="Gray">Talk</font>]] | [[Special:Contributions/Jugus|<font color="Gray">Contribs</font>]])</small> 04:16, 31 December 2014 (EST)

:I get them from [https://www.artstation.com/ ArtStation]. Employees at Blur occasionally upload their work from ''Halo 2 Anniversary'' to there. - [[User:NightHammer|NightHammer]] (talk) 09:40, 29 March 2015 (EDT)

:::They come from a variety of people. [https://www.artstation.com/search?q=halo%202 Just search for "Halo 2" in the site's search engine and they will appear on the left]. You can find the images in each person's portfolio. - [[User:NightHammer|NightHammer]] (talk) 17:42, 29 March 2015 (EDT)

:It's fine. However, there is no canonical image of Veer. The only one characters that appear in the H2A terminals that also appear in ''The Cole Protocol'' are Thel, Zhar, and Jai (from off the top of my head, but Veer definitely doesn't appear). --[[User:NightHammer|<span style="color: #2B1AAA;">'''NightHammer'''</span>]]''^{<span style="color: #2B1AAA;">(talk)</span>}^{[[Special:Contributions/NightHammer|<span style="color: #2B1AAA;">(contribs)</span>]]}'' 19:09, 10 August 2015 (EDT)

:I don't think the Zealot is notable enough to deserve his own page. The Cowardly Grunt or Suicidal Marine have pages because they are Easter eggs of sorts or have notable/interesting dialogue. The Zealot only has a handful of lines, is kind of a generic AI, and most of his lines are situation-based. If we made a page for him, we would have to make a page for a lot of rather unnotable NPCs, which is something we avoid doing. See Halopedia's [[Halopedia:Notability policy|Notability policy]] for more. --[[User:NightHammer|<span style="color: #2B1AAA;">'''NightHammer'''</span>]]''^{<span style="color: #2B1AAA;">(talk)</span>}^{[[Special:Contributions/NightHammer|<span style="color: #2B1AAA;">(contribs)</span>]]}'' 19:33, 10 August 2015 (EDT)

:Thanks! --[[User:NightHammer|<span style="color: #2B1AAA;">'''NightHammer'''</span>]]''^{<span style="color: #2B1AAA;">(talk)</span>}^{[[Special:Contributions/NightHammer|<span style="color: #2B1AAA;">(contribs)</span>]]}'' 15:00, 20 September 2015 (EDT)

:Ah, I see what you mean now. But I don't think it's safe to say that the UEG is dissolved or defunct after the Guardian attack. There is hundreds of other colonies and we don't know if every one suffered Guardian-induced black-outs. Even if Earth was destroyed, the UEG would still exist (though it would lose most of its politicians and would probably have to be renamed). Besides, parts of the UNSC is still active and plotting against the Guardians, and the UNSC is a part of the UEG. I'd also like to think that 26th century UEG has some plans for situations like that (especially after the Covenant War) that would allow the UEG to continue to govern the planet and operate to some degree. Honestly, we just don't know enough right now to say much about anything happening after ''Halo 5''. --[[User:NightHammer|<span style="color: #2B1AAA;">'''NightHammer'''</span>]]''^{<span style="color: #2B1AAA;">(talk)</span>}^{[[Special:Contributions/NightHammer|<span style="color: #2B1AAA;">(contribs)</span>]]}'' 17:27, 1 November 2015 (EST)

--[[User:Draft227|Draft227]] ([[User talk:Draft227|talk]]) 12:03, 23 December 2015 (EST)

:I agree with the Covenant categories we discussed on [[User talk:Sith Venator|Sith Venator's talk page]]. I also agree that we need to rename the species categories. I was thinking that we should rename them "Unggoy individuals" or "Kig-Yar individuals" or something like that. As for renaming the Covenant ranks, it would have to be discussed with other users and admins. I can see why it would make sense to rename it, but it should be noted that several sources identify each rank as "Sangheili Minor" or "Jiralhanae Minor", etc. And as for the living/deceased categories, I'm not entirely sure if it would be that useful, especially when we have characters that we can't confirm (even in-universe) if they are alive or dead.  --[[User:NightHammer|<span style="color: #2B1AAA;">'''NightHammer'''</span>]]''^{<span style="color: #2B1AAA;">(talk)</span>}^{[[Special:Contributions/NightHammer|<span style="color: #2B1AAA;">(contribs)</span>]]}'' 11:59, 23 December 2015 (EST)

::Cool. I agree on the "species" - individual caracterization. Forerunner individuals would be a good addition too, and I think Humans as well. Yeah, I though that too. We have sources with [species] Minor/Major, but I though categorizing that way would make more sense in-universe. I think it could be useful, as for the "unknown status" characters, like Henry, 2401 and Preston Cole, we could just leave the pages as they are, and don't add a status at all. -- [[User:Draft227|Draft227]] ([[User talk:Draft227|talk]]) 16:03, 23 December 2015 (EST)

Hi there. Not so important i guess, but i thought that not every member of Spartan branch is a Spartan-IV --[[User:Necrontir|<font color="Black">'''Necrontir'''</font>]] 11:52, 2 May 2016

:Yeah, it isn't anything major, but to me at least, it just seems like the S-IV program is more loosely organized (perhaps as a joint effort throughout the UNSC to create supersoliders), whereas the S-II and S-III programs seemed to be more officially organized under the Navy. --[[User:NightHammer|<span style="color: #2B1AAA;">'''NightHammer'''</span>]]''^{<span style="color: #2B1AAA;">(talk)</span>}^{[[Special:Contributions/NightHammer|<span style="color: #2B1AAA;">(contribs)</span>]]}'' 11:54, 2 May 2016 (EDT)

:I'll get to it in a moment. --[[User:NightHammer|<span style="color: #2B1AAA;">'''NightHammer'''</span>]]''^{<span style="color: #2B1AAA;">(talk)</span>}^{[[Special:Contributions/NightHammer|<span style="color: #2B1AAA;">(contribs)</span>]]}'' 22:47, 13 June 2016 (EDT)