Talk:Siege of Paris IV: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 19:19, February 4, 2017

Expand[edit]

Expand please.

As nothing more has been mentioned about the conflict it can not possibly be expanded until there is more information. -ED 20:56, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Where Do You Get These Numbers[edit]

I donot remember the casulties being talked about yet here you have them. What is going on? —This unsigned comment was made by Jin Won (talk • contribs). Please sign your posts with ~~~~

Probably made up, or a fanfic someone confused with Bungie canon. --68.44.13.236 23:10, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Outdated facts[edit]

Can someone fix this (specifically the edit about Boren's Syndrome)? Or at least unlock the article, or explain why the Halo Graphic Novel is fanon? --68.44.13.236 23:14, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Those facts were never stated in the HGN and it is not directly implied that Paris IV itself is the cover up. —This unsigned comment was made by Ajax 013 (talk • contribs). Please sign your posts with ~~~~

Year[edit]

Does anyone know where the idea that the siege took place in 2549 came from? I've just checked First Strike and the HGN and turned up nothing. Given that a fair amount of the article (specifically the involvement of Marines other than Johnson, Johnson defending the main evacuation site, and the Covenant winning) had no provenance in official sources, it's entirely possible that the year of the siege is simply fanon that's been allowed to remain since 2006. --Our answer is at hand. (Talk to me.) 13:08, 4 February 2017 (EST)

The Encyclopedia states the siege took place in 2549. It's likely the Encyclopedia took it from here, but it's still canon at least. --NightHammer^(talk)^(contribs) 18:54, 4 February 2017 (EST)

A good idea for the Encyclopedia is to simply take it as canon, 343i like to reference it now and then. I mean look at the Catalog posts for proof on that. If another source contradicts it then the other source is the canon version.-CIA391 (talk) 19:19, 4 February 2017 (EST)

Revision as of 18:54, February 4, 2017 (edit) NightHammer (talk \| contribs) (→‎Year) ← Older edit		Latest revision as of 19:19, February 4, 2017 (edit) (undo) CIA391 (talk \| contribs) (→‎Year)
Line 18:		Line 18:

	:The ''Encyclopedia'' states the siege took place in 2549. It's likely the ''Encyclopedia'' took it from here, but it's still canon at least. --[[User:NightHammer\|<span style="color: #2B1AAA;">'''NightHammer'''</span>]]''<sup>[[User talk:NightHammer\|<span style="color: #2B1AAA;">(talk)</span>]]</sup><sup>[[Special:Contributions/NightHammer\|<span style="color: #2B1AAA;">(contribs)</span>]]</sup>'' 18:54, 4 February 2017 (EST)		:The ''Encyclopedia'' states the siege took place in 2549. It's likely the ''Encyclopedia'' took it from here, but it's still canon at least. --[[User:NightHammer\|<span style="color: #2B1AAA;">'''NightHammer'''</span>]]''<sup>[[User talk:NightHammer\|<span style="color: #2B1AAA;">(talk)</span>]]</sup><sup>[[Special:Contributions/NightHammer\|<span style="color: #2B1AAA;">(contribs)</span>]]</sup>'' 18:54, 4 February 2017 (EST)

			::A good idea for the Encyclopedia is to simply take it as canon, 343i like to reference it now and then. I mean look at the Catalog posts for proof on that. If another source contradicts it then the other source is the canon version.-[[User:CIA391\|CIA391]] ([[User talk:CIA391\|talk]]) 19:19, 4 February 2017 (EST)