Editing User talk:Plasmic Physics

From Halopedia, the Halo wiki

You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.

Latest revision Your text
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Welcome}}--<b>[[User:Dragonclaws|<font color="#000000">Dragon<font color="#FF0000">c</font>laws</font>]]<sup>([[User talk:Dragonclaws|<font color="#000000">talk</font>]])</sup></b> 06:04, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
{{Welcome}}--<b>[[User:Dragonclaws|<font color="#000000">Dragon<font color="#FF0000">c</font>laws</font>]]<sup>([[User talk:Dragonclaws|<font color="#000000">talk</font>]])</sup></b> 06:04, 24 November 2007 (UTC)


User:Plasmic Physics/YourTemplate and generate it with User:Plasmic Physics/YourTemplate
User:Plasmic Physics/YourTemplate and generate it with {{User:Plasmic Physics/YourTemplate}}


==343's qoute==
==343's qoute==


It is a qoute. It is not to be changed. -- <b>[[User:Sgt.johnson|<font color="Black">A</font>]][[User talk:Sgt.johnson|<font color="Black">J</font>]]File:ArmyJROTC.jpg|20 </b> 06:12, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
It is a qoute. It is not to be changed. -- <b>[[User:Sgt.johnson|<font color="Black">A</font>]][[User talk:Sgt.johnson|<font color="Black">J</font>]][[Image:ArmyJROTC.jpg|20px]]</b> 06:12, 24 November 2007 (UTC)


== Addition ==
== Addition ==


Is my addition to [[Portal]] accurate? And what about [[Tsavo Highway|Tsavo Highway (Location)]]?
Is my addition to [[Portal]] accurate? And what about [[Tsavo Highway (Location)]]?
:Yes. -- <b>[[User:Sgt.johnson|<font color="Black">A</font>]][[User talk:Sgt.johnson|<font color="Black">J</font>]]File:ArmyJROTC.jpg|20 </b> 06:21, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
:Yes. -- <b>[[User:Sgt.johnson|<font color="Black">A</font>]][[User talk:Sgt.johnson|<font color="Black">J</font>]][[Image:ArmyJROTC.jpg|20px]]</b> 06:21, 24 November 2007 (UTC)


Good, for future reference how do I identify a quote in an aticle, that shouldn't be edited?--[[User:Plasmic Physics|Plasmic Physics]] 21:49, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Good, for future reference how do I identify a quote in an aticle, that shouldn't be edited?--[[User:Plasmic Physics|Plasmic Physics]] 21:49, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Line 22: Line 22:


==UNSC Organization==
==UNSC Organization==
It's mentioned in [[Contact Harvest]] that the UN still exists, so we don't know for sure if the UN was transformed into the UEG. --[[User:UNSC Trooper|<font color="darkblue">UNSC Trooper</font>]] File:unsctrooper_small.jpg|14  <sup>[[User talk:UNSC Trooper|<font color="green">Talk</font>]]</sup><sub>[[Special:Contributions/UNSC Trooper|<font color="green">My Work</font>]]</sub> 20:07, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
It's mentioned in [[Contact Harvest]] that the UN still exists, so we don't know for sure if the UN was transformed into the UEG. --[[User:UNSC Trooper|<font color="darkblue">UNSC Trooper</font>]] [[Image:unsctrooper_small.jpg|14px]] <sup>[[User talk:UNSC Trooper|<font color="green">Talk</font>]]</sup><sub>[[Special:Contributions/UNSC Trooper|<font color="green">My Work</font>]]</sub> 20:07, 9 March 2008 (UTC)


== Bloody Arrow ==
== Bloody Arrow ==
Line 55: Line 55:


:I appologise if this seems a bit short, but I will have to reply in parts.
:I appologise if this seems a bit short, but I will have to reply in parts.


Not a problem. I should do that myself. Good points, especially about the way plasma weapons are presented. An incineration weapon, eh? It would be much simpler, cheaper, and less energy intensive to employ advanced versions of incendiaries like white phosphorous etc., sort of like the Jiralhanae do (Spikers, Flame Grenades, etc.).
Not a problem. I should do that myself. Good points, especially about the way plasma weapons are presented. An incineration weapon, eh? It would be much simpler, cheaper, and less energy intensive to employ advanced versions of incendiaries like white phosphorous etc., sort of like the Jiralhanae do (Spikers, Flame Grenades, etc.).
Line 68: Line 67:


--[[User talk:Exalted Obliteration|Exalted Obliteration]] 05:42, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
--[[User talk:Exalted Obliteration|Exalted Obliteration]] 05:42, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
::Greetings, all!  I must admit, reading these descriptions of possible mechanics of plasma shaping boggled my mind for a spell.  It also made me wonder as to why the simplest theory has been overlooked; so far as handheld weapons, I mean.  Would it not be possible for the Covenant's weapons to fire a miniscule control bead with the plasma?  This bead could contain a magnetic envelope generator (MEG)to compress and contain the errant plasma.  Once the plasma bolt made contact with its target, the bead would disintegrate and thus leave no clues as to the control mechanism.  This could also explain how the weapon runs  out of ammunition, a simple lack of guiding modules.  It is doubtful that these implements of war would run out of plasma: plasma can be realatively easily created from ambient atmosphere; and I highly doubt that weapons of the Forerunners would fall prey to such a thing as a ''dead battery''.  For your consideration- --[[User talk:Bruce2401|Bruce2401]] 03:21, 16 April 2011 (EDT)
:How does the bead work? What is a MEG How would the bead disintegrate. Why does the exaustion of ammunition need explanation interms of such a complex mechanism. The weapon does not run out of plasma, it runs out of electrical power. [[User talk:Plasmic Physics|Plasmic Physics]] 02:35, 17 April 2011 (EDT)
::The bead would work by producing two magnetic fields: one to protect itself(A) and one to contain the plasma(B); (B) would also be required to "push away" ambient atmosphere to reduce drag annd heat loss.  MEG is merely shorthand for Magnetic Envelope Generator, the mechanism that would generate the magnetic containment fields I mentioned above.  The bead would disintegrate on collision with an object or after a set period of time by collapsing the magnetic fields and, essentially, vaporizing itself.  I would say that the weapon is in need of some form of depletable resource (the guiding bead) because it is doubtful that a Forerunner weapon, or a weapon based on one, would ever run out of energy unless it was specifically designed to do so.  This last is more inferred than backed by concrete data as no handheld Forerunner weapons have been detailed yet.  I hope this clears up your questions; and remember dear friend: it's only a theory.--[[User talk:Bruce2401|Bruce2401]] 04:47, 18 April 2011 (EDT)
:You've explained what it does, but not how it does it. You do realise that energy is a depletable resource? [[User talk:Plasmic Physics|Plasmic Physics]] 04:54, 18 April 2011 (EDT)
::Ah, energy being a depletable resource is true for us but maybe not for the Forerunners.  The Dreadnaught seems to work just fine after 100,000+ years of existence.  I imagine that the Forerunners might have learned to tap "The Glow" (See Halo: Cryptum) as an energy source.  Of course that is conjecture.  I am confused by your statement though; by it, do you man to ask how it compensates for such things as the individual motion of the particles and the drag created by atmospheric interaction?  In this case I would explain that Cortana managed to program a Covenant weapon system to align all of the particular (<-- That's funny, BTW) trajectories using a magnetic pulse.  As for atmospheric interactions I imagine that the plasma the weapon uses has a uniform charge, either positive or negative, which would simplify things ''immensely''.  I  mentioned magnetic fields (A) and (B) above, yes?  Imagine them as a balloon within another balloon, with the smaller balloon being (A).  The space between the balloons being the plasma.
   
::If the plasma used were to be negatively charged, for argument's sake, then field (A) would be a negative magnetic field in order to repel the plasma from the bead and thus prevent a premature dissolvation (Hah. Can I make up words or can't I?).  Field (B) would also be negative in order to ''contain'' the plasma and prevennt it from escaping.  Now that I think on it there would have to be a third field, (C), with a positive charge to repel positive ions in the atmosphere.  (C) would need to surround (B) as (B) surrounds (A).  When layered in this order the fields would provide a fairly comprehensive containment and isolation system in order to reduce drag and energy dissapation.  To summarize: (A) would protect the bead, (B) would have the dual job of containing the plasma ''and'' repelling ambient negative ions, and (C) would have the duty of repelling ambient positive ions. I hope this rather wordy explanation is to your satisfaction, ----[[User talk:Bruce2401|Bruce2401]] 08:10, 20 April 2011 (EDT)
:I have not read that novel yet; I have not know what the Glow is. I have no reason to believe that the dreadnaught will not exhaust its energy source, even if it is after a hundred millenia.
:The plasma rifle uses coulombic plasma, which means that even though there is a charge separation within the plasma, it is overall electrically neutral. There is no negative or possitively charged plasma here. :What are these so called ambient ions?
:I don't even know what to make of negative magnetic fields, such a description does not make sense. Magnetic fields are not like sheets of paper, where either side there is nothing. A magnetic field extends in all directions, all be it on different isovectors. There is no empty space beteen magnetic fields, besides, electrical charges don't avoid magnetic fields, they follow them. Magnteic fields simply don't function in the way your useing it. [[User talk:Plasmic Physics|Plasmic Physics]] 20:37, 20 April 2011 (EDT)
::The Glow is essentialy a realm comprised of pure photons, I think that could be suitable for a very efficient energy tap.  And my point exactly: the Dreadnaught, while it ''could'' run out of energy hasn't yet.  If the Forerunners could impart even a fraction of that capability into their weapons there would be a statistical improbability of their weapons running low on charge during a firefight.
::As to your "Ambient Ions" question: any atmosphere contains a high percentage of naturally occurring ions, most of the matter we breathe is not neutral.  Even those molecules that are technically neutral are actually polarized, and so would be affected by magnetic fields.
::How do you know that the weapons use coulombic plasma?  Never mind, my point was that ''if'' the plasma used was uniformly charged, either all of the particles having a positive charge or all possessing a negative charge, it would be a much easier material to work with.  I was under the impression that a magnetic field could be either positive or negative, like the descriptions of magnetic poles, yes?  Then would not a positively charged ion have difficulty in passing a positive magnetic field?  That is where the mechanics of the barriers would come into play.  I realize that a positively charged particle (P+) would not "bounce off" of such a field but would instead slide around it and thus grant oblong shapes to the bolt.
::You mentioned that a magnetic field is not akin to a sheet of paper; but it is, I assume, a line or boundary where the potential for matter affectation increases as a candidate particle approaches the centerline/origin?  In this case I do not see any conflict  with my theory, though I admit my expertise on the subject is passable at best.  If you see such a conflict, would you be so kind as to enlighten me?
::I think I have made myself clearer, if not I apologize.  I implore you though, if you have not already, please illustrate my concepts using  paper and pen.  It may disperse any mental fog I have unwittingly imparted.  Humbly Yours, --[[User talk:Bruce2401|Bruce2401]] 05:18, 25 April 2011 (EDT)
:From how you are describing the Glow, there is nothing scientific about it, it sounds like a widget, with any prospect properties and abilities. What are pure photons, opposed to impure photons? I just remembered that at least in Halo: Combat Evolved, there is a clearly recognisable icon of a battery located next to the ammunition count when a plasma weapon is wielded; this reinforces the concept of electrical charge as ammunition.
:I need a reference that states that "any atmosphere contains a high percentage of naturally occurring ions", and "most of the matter we breathe is not neutral" Molecular polarity is unrelated to magnetic response, magnetic response is by majority determined by the spin multiplicity which can be determined through the use of molecular orbital diagrams.
:A coulombic plasma requires the least resources to generate, so only alternative would be a nuclear plasma. (which I highly doubt) A plasma that is homogenously charged can only be created by spliting a neutral plasma into two parts. If the weapon uses only one half of the plasma, what happens to the other half, it is just as dangerous.
:A magnetic field is like a coin, in that you can't get a one sided coin. A magnetic field has a heads and a tails side, called north and south repectively. A manetic field does not have a surface/boundary - it extends ad infinitum, decreasing exponetialy in stength as a function of distance. [[User talk:Plasmic Physics|Plasmic Physics]] 06:33, 25 April 2011 (EDT)
Apologies, instead of "Composed of pure photons" I should have used "Comprised solely of photons."  And after reading your last post I do concede defeat, with one last statement.  I had assumed that the Forerunners had made discoveries in monopolarity as suggested by string theory, and that the weapon may have alternately cycled its magnetic fields in order to make the most efficient use of its plasma.  Well played, and what fun!  Giddy in defeat- --[[User talk:Bruce2401|Bruce2401]] 22:40, 25 April 2011 (EDT)
:It was entertaining, I have a few ideas of my own. A hypercapacitor composed of composite nanomaterials, recharged through induction. Generating the plasma with powerfull MASERS through constructive EM interference. Using a complex arrangement of coaxial electromagnets to shape the plasma into a torus. A cobalt germania ceramic based matrix casing. [[User talk:Plasmic Physics|Plasmic Physics]] 02:04, 26 April 2011 (EDT)
::Interesting, that would explain the rather bulky weapons racks the Covenant deploy; tell me: does your weapon heat the plasma before or after it has left the main storage medium?  --[[User talk:Bruce2401|Bruce2401]] 03:17, 26 April 2011 (EDT)


== Portal size ==
== Portal size ==
Line 104: Line 145:
== RE:Moving of the transcript of Long Night of Solace ==
== RE:Moving of the transcript of Long Night of Solace ==


Please cease and desist the moving of this page. It is unneeded and fine the way it is. Thanks. - SPARTAN-118
Please cease and desist the moving of this page. It is unneeded and fine the way it is. Thanks. {{User:SPARTAN-118/Sig}}
 
== New Page ==
Hi dude, I know you don't know me, but I need your opinion on my new page. [[User talk:XXSPeCiaL KiLaXx|XXSPeCiaL KiLaXx]] 00:53, November 4, 2010 (UTC)
 
:Sure
 
== Pillar of Autumn ==
 
Care to explain how I'm not being mature about my edits? The only thing I'm doing is reverting your edit. You may also explain why what ''you'' think is correct, and why what I think isn't.--'''<span style="background:Black;display:inline-block;height:16px;padding-right:4px;line-height:1em;position:relative;top:-3px;-moz-border-radius:0 50% 50%">[[User:Shade Link|<font color="Blue">Shade</font>]]</span>''' 19:49, November 18, 2010 (UTC)
 
:I reverted an incorrect edit, requesting an explanation in the edit summary, as no explanation was given for the incorrect edit. Rather than give an explanation for your reversion, which would have been the mature thing to do, you just fed my explanation request back to me like a dictaphone. [[User talk:Plasmic Physics|Plasmic Physics]] 23:25, November 18, 2010 (UTC)
 
:The incorrect edit I'm refering to, is the structure diameter. [[User talk:Plasmic Physics|Plasmic Physics]] 23:28, November 18, 2010 (UTC)
 
::Actually, I didn't send your request back to you. I asked you to explain, as well.--'''<span style="background:Black;display:inline-block;height:16px;padding-right:4px;line-height:1em;position:relative;top:-3px;-moz-border-radius:0 50% 50%">[[User:Shade Link|<font color="Blue">Shade</font>]]</span>''' 00:00, November 19, 2010 (UTC)
 
:There's a difference? [[User talk:Plasmic Physics|Plasmic Physics]] 00:15, November 19, 2010 (UTC)
 
Yes. I simply wanted to know what happened. I hope we can settle this disagreement nicely (most of the disagreements I've had have resulted in the person I'm arguing with suddenly insulting me and trying to make me hated on ''this'' wiki)--'''<span style="background:Black;display:inline-block;height:16px;padding-right:4px;line-height:1em;position:relative;top:-3px;-moz-border-radius:0 50% 50%">[[User:Shade Link|<font color="Blue">Shade</font>]]</span>''' 00:37, November 19, 2010 (UTC)
 
:Seeing as how you're reasonable I'll give you some adivice: If, you think the edit is controvesial, bring it up in the respective talk page first, if there is no reply for at least two days then go ahead. If the edit is is not, then a simple edit summary would suffice. Edit summaries are more important when you're changing content rather than adding new content. [[User talk:Plasmic Physics|Plasmic Physics]] 00:44, November 19, 2010 (UTC)
 
== Noble 6 Eulogy ==
 
On Catherine Halsey's page, you repeatedly revert edits to reflect your belief that Dr. Halsey is somehow physically present delivering a eulogy. Please go to the talk page and discuss this further before making any further edits on the subject.
 
'''[[User talk:Watemon|Watemon]] 22:58, November 19, 2010 (UTC)'''
 
I'm glad to see you're willing to make at least a few concessions giving your opinions on the matter, but you never took it to the talk page, a request I've repeatedly asked every time I've reverted the edits (by not just yourself). Ironically, when making the last revert, you yourself requested the discussion take place on the talk page, even though you never did so. Curious...
 
'''[[User talk:Watemon|Watemon]] 21:29, December 23, 2010 (UTC)'''
 
:My point of view:
:*The voice delivering the eulogy belongs to Halsey.
:*There is no proof that the eulogy was delivered at the date given.
:*The fact of the eulogy being delivered at all, indicates that Halsey must have escaped from Onyx at some point in time.
 
:Any other assumptions would be based of speculation. I wrote the paragraph to reflect these facts, but everytime someone rewrites the paragraph to include the incorrect assumptions. --[[User talk:Plasmic Physics|Plasmic Physics]] 21:42, December 23, 2010 (UTC)
 
Even your assumptions here are speculation. Not that I don't agree they're simply more supported than some of the others, my problem is that they are assumptions that cannot be verified. You simply cannot say with any certainty that the closing monologue indicates Halsey has escaped from Onyx. No one can verify that Jen Taylor's voicing the closing monologue wasn't for more than dramatic effect.
 
My point of view: we know where Halsey is AFTER the events depicted in Reach, we can't verify that those details change by simple observation that her voice is behind the game's closing monologue (to say nothing of the fact it's 30+ years after Reach). It takes a mighty presumptive leap to suggest that means she escaped. I'm all for the trivia page saying she voiced the eulogy, but no presumption should be made as to whether that means she escaped Onyx or that it's even a recording.
 
'''[[User talk:Watemon|Watemon]] 22:38, December 23, 2010 (UTC)'''
 
:My point of view is not based on assumptions, but rather on inferences. We have no evidence to the contrary that the voice does not belong to Halsey, to suggest otherwise would be an incorrect assumption. If this is true then Halsey had to have escaped from Onyx in order to record/deliver the eulogy. Bungie clearly intended for the identity behind the voice to be easily recognised as belonging to Halsey. To cast doubt on the indetity would introduce opportunity for speculation. On occassions of lack of information, sources should be taken at face value, otherwise incorrect assumptions and speculation becomes rampant. [[User talk:Plasmic Physics|Plasmic Physics]] 23:45, December 23, 2010 (UTC)
 
Inferences that are not direct observations. I'm not trying to cast doubt on the identity behind the voice, just pointing out that both presumptions are just as likely and just as unverifiable.
 
It '''is''' face value that the voice is Halsey's, it is '''NOT''' face value that it means Halsey has escaped Onyx in order to deliver a eulogy set 30+ years after the events of the game. It is an unsubstantiated presumption.
The trivia could read: ''"Dr. Halsey delivers the epilogue to Halo: Reach."'' There need not be mention of any speculation if it can't be substantiated. Except maybe to mention, ''"it cannot be certain whether this means she has indeed escaped Onyx."''
 
'''[[User talk:Watemon|Watemon]] 00:13, December 24, 2010 (UTC)'''
 
:No, I agree, no one can verify that Jen Taylor's voicing the closing monologue wasn't for more than dramatic effect, but we do not have evidence that the eulogy is non-canon. If it is canon, as is reasonable, then Bungie would not have chosen a voice that also belongs to Halsey ergo, it is most certain to be Halsey's identity behind the eulogy. She could not have delivered the eulogy from within Onyx, so she must have escaped anywhere within thirty years.
 
:For lack of evidence to the contrary, I am certain that the voice belongs to Halsey; in order to deliver a eulogy, Halsey must have escaped the confines Onyx within at most thirty years. If you agree over the identity behind the voice, but do not over Halsey's escape, then provide a logical explanation for how this paradox could be solved. --[[User talk:Plasmic Physics|Plasmic Physics]] 01:36, December 24, 2010 (UTC)
 
Allow me state once more that I am not doubting the identity behind the voice. Nor am I remotely suggesting the eulogy is "non-canon" (a ridiculous suggestion, considering the Bungie games hold primacy over the universe canon). Neither does identifying the character behind the voice certify that she "must have escaped".
 
:''"For lack of evidence to the contrary,..."''
 
The burden of proof that Halsey has escaped Onyx, lies with you. And just because it cannot be proved to the contrary either, does not make automatic proof that your claim is factual. I am only suggesting that until Bungie clarifies on the matter or until another book is written illustrating as such, Halsey's voice behind Reach's epilogue is '''not''' sufficient evidence that she has escaped Onyx. We do not ''see'' her deliver it, we do not ''see'' her on Reach in the closing image. It ''could'' be that her epilogue is presented as dramatic effect -- purely for the sake of the audience and for the sake of good storytelling. There is no evidence to prove ''either'', so in order for you to assert that she DID escape, you're the one that has to prove so. I don't have to prove how she couldn't have.
 
Again, my question '''is not''' whether she's the voice, and '''is not''' whether she got off Onyx, my problem '''IS''' that you cannot say with any degree of certainty -- based on what is given ''in the game'' -- that she is most certainly off Onyx.
 
However, I will concede to this statement:
''"Dr. Halsey delivers the epilogue to Halo: Reach. However, it cannot be certain whether this means she has indeed escaped Onyx."''
It says everything you want, without making any (as-of-yet) unfounded assertions.
'''[[User talk:Watemon|Watemon]] 02:10, December 24, 2010 (UTC)'''
 
:It seems to me as thought we're talking past each other.
 
:What I am saying, is that if the eulogy is canon as we agree, then it must have genuinely been delivered within the Halo universe thus, it could not have been for dramatic effect alone. If you suppose that Halsey has not escaped Onyx then there is a paradox: How could Halsey be aware of the outcome of the war if she is still confined to Onyx, unless you're suggesting that she can somehow communicate with the outside world from within Onyx? I am not asking you to prove your case; simply to explain away the paradox as I am confused. --[[User talk:Plasmic Physics|Plasmic Physics]] 02:39, December 24, 2010 (UTC)
 
Because you '''don't''' know that Halsey communicated to the outside world. You ''did not'' develop this game, so you cannot assert with ''any'' degree of authority what Bungie may or may not have done for purely dramatic effect.
 
As far as we know, Halsey's epilogue was only communicated to '''us''', the audience. We did not see any form of funeral service or public reception where Halsey delivered that speech. ''You'' cannot say with any certainty that the epilogue at the end of the game was delivered to any such audience, other than those playing the game.
 
Both likelihoods are equally possibly, and both equally unfounded by the actual events of the game.
'''[[User talk:Watemon|Watemon]] 03:06, December 24, 2010 (UTC)'''
 
:That does not fit the definition of canon, the characters within the Halo universe are not aware of the players thus, if it is canon, Halsey could not have addressed the player. --[[User talk:Plasmic Physics|Plasmic Physics]] 03:25, December 24, 2010 (UTC)
 
*sigh*
This is all I'm saying:
:*You cannot say with any degree of certainty that Halsey is off Onyx, and her epilogue is not proof to that point.
:*You cannot say that '''BUNGIE''' didn't choose to use Halsey's voice to deliver their epilogue as purely dramatic effect (I am most certainly NOT suggesting she was actually speaking to the audience...)
 
As such, I agree to adding the following statement:
:''"Dr. Halsey delivers the epilogue to Halo: Reach. However, it cannot be certain whether this means she has indeed escaped Onyx."''
Key phrase: '''it cannot be certain'''.
The possibility may be there, and you may be able to logically ''presume'' as such, but it is unfounded by any demonstrable evidence, hence, for the purposes of the article, you can't make that claim (at least as a statement of fact).
 
:That sounds like a good resolution. --[[User talk:Plasmic Physics|Plasmic Physics]] 04:53, December 24, 2010 (UTC)
 
==General page wipe 2 week notice==
Hello there. I am here to notify you that in 2 weeks from now we(Halopedia Admins) will be clearing out all your pages bar your main user and talk pages.
 
This is due to the fact many of your pages are causing a large number of wanted page filling up the relevant areas.
 
If you would like us not to clear out the pages or are perfectly ok with us deleting them, please respond here before any action is taken. This allows us to make relevant saving procedures should you prefer that to be an option.
 
Regardless even after assuming the wipe is done it wont be hard for you to revert the deleted pages to their previous state should you miss the deadline of two weeks.


Thank you for reading and I hope what I said is understandable.-[[User:CIA391|CIA391]] ([[User talk:CIA391|talk]]) 11:36, 16 July 2017 (EDT)
== About the templates you've created ==
What in the world are you planning to do with them? The Meta-templates such as the Ambox are not needed in Halopedia as they complex and have useless field parameters in them. In addition, don't create [[Template:Documentation|Documentation]]; it is cumbersome and not helpful at all in separating docs and the codes. >.< - <font face="Century Gothic">[[User:Subtank|<font color="gold"><font color="#FF4F00">5</font>əb<font color="#FF4F00">'7</font>aŋk</font>]]<sup>([[User talk:Subtank|<font color="#FF4F00">7alk</font>]])</sup></font> 10:18, 23 December 2010 (EST)


:I am completely at ease with the proposed deletions. Please continue. [[User:Plasmic Physics|Plasmic Physics]] ([[User talk:Plasmic Physics|talk]]) 02:44, 17 July 2017 (EDT)
I have uses in mind for the ambox template, though I'm not sure why you're concerned with private templates; as for the documentation template, I think it is useful for describing a template and keeping the code apart. --[[User talk:Plasmic Physics|Plasmic Physics]] 15:45, 23 December 2010 (EST)

Please note that all contributions to Halopedia are considered to be released under the Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported license (see Halopedia:Copyrights for details). If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then don't submit it here. You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource. Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

Cancel Editing help (opens in new window)

To view or search uploaded images go to the list of images. Uploads and deletions are also logged in the upload log. For help including images on a page see Help:Images. For a sound file, use this code: [[Media:File.ogg]].

Do not copy text from other websites without permission. It will be deleted.

Templates used on this page: