"Magnums are best dual-wielded together or with another weapon." That's probably one of the most useless sentences I've ever read.
Removing
I am removing the part where you say "the reticle is slightly more centered" -- The Halo 2 reticles were OFF-CENTER. The Halo 1 reticles are dead center. --User:MLG Cheehwawa
i don't know about you guys, but i like the look of the M6C. i not saying it should've replaced the M6D, but i say it's a whole lot better 'looking'...it's sexy side arm to have. sometimes i equip it just for the hell of it and still beat out guys with the BR.
bias
It's blindingly obvious that this article was written or at least heavily edited by someone who does not like the M6C. I'd try to fix it, but I'd essentially be re-writing the article. I'm going to take some of the obviously biased stuff out. JesseZinVT 01:31, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
stripped-down version of the M6D Pistol?
This makes it sound like the M6C came second, even though it is only in halo 2 i still think it came first, for 2 reasons. 1 Its name M6C and 2 it's less advanced why would people make a pistol less advanced, well it happens today, but still...Im not very good at explaining my self sorry, hopefully you people understand.--UHSO. LT. COL. "Running Riot" Ryan 
BAM 16:45, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Repeating information
why is it that this page constantly says that the pistol is SO effective at killing hunters and has a very high rate of fire? This article becomes very weird because of this.
WOW
I dont even wanna look at this anymore, its so messed up. Some one clean her up and fast!--UoH. COL. "Running Riot" Ryan BAM 22:06, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Umm
wouldnt it's Counterpart be the plasma pistol? and not the battle rifle and carbine?--UNSCOH COL. "Running Riot" Ryan BAM 22:30, 2 July 2007 (UTC) 11:59, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
The M6C's Accuracy
For the second time already, I've had to correct the article in regards to the Magnum's accuracy as compared to the M6D. Despite what some previous user stated in the article, the M6C is NOT more accurate that the M6D. IIRC, the Magnum's shot spread is something like 5 times greater than the M6D's. Don't believe me? Try testing the shot spreads for yourself. In Halo 1, the pistol will hit almost the exact same spot over and over again. However, in Halo 2, at anything past zero range, the Magnum's shots will be all over the place. So, saying that the Magnum is more accurate than the M6D is just plain false. The M6D is clearly the more accurate weapon by a longshot. Anybody who says otherwise is either misinformed, inattentive, or a liar.
Also, I gave the article a much-needed cleaning up. It was overall very sloppily written, with a lot of redundant or otherwise unnecessary commentary. I did what I could to make it better short of actually starting the whole thing over from scratch. Rtas Vadumee 11:00, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Re: Recent edit conflicts.
This is directed mostly towards user 64.131.177.2, but everyone else should pay attention as well.
I understand that this is a site created and maintained by fans, but we should at least strive for some semblance of professionalism. Improper spelling, grammar, punctuation, and spacing should be avoided. Always check for these things before entering your edits. Furthermore, we should always maintain proper style for the articles. It should not look like a 13-year old fan wrote it. Stuff like "kills in a snap," writing words in all-caps, and other such nonsense is fine for casual conversation, but should be avoided in order to maintain that professional look I mentioned. It wouldn't fly at Wikipedia, much less a professional publication, so neither should it do so here.
Finally, factual accuracy is important. I'm not sure what your definition of "mid-range" or "semi-long" range is, but the Magnum has pitiful range due to its relatively low accuracy/large shot spread for a weapon of its kind (it is only about one-third as accurate as the Carbine and one-fifth as accurate as the M6D). Even dual-wielded, the M6C isn't very effective past 20 meters, which is about twice the range of the sword lunge as well as the approximate range auto-aim cuts off for the Magnum. At said range, even auto-aim isn't enough to compensate for the Magnum's poor accuracy, and even with the crosshair centered on an opponent head will take around 20 to 24 shots to kill someone rather than the 13 headshots that the Magnum can kill in. Obviously, this means that the shot spread is so great that even at relatively close range and with auto-aim compensating, shots will miss even a stationary target. So, claims that the Magnum is capable of overpowering the Battle Rifle past close range (assuming players of roughly equal skill) are spurious.
Damage claims for the M6C (or any other weapon) should also reflect what we actually see in game. Multiplayer figures are the easiest to determine, as they are constant under default rules. In the Magnum's case, it is 13 headshots and 21 body shots. In Campaign, damage is dependent on difficulty level. Certain figures (i.e. "12 shots to kill a Hunter") are incorrect. Even on Normal difficulty, it took me over a dozen well-placed shots to bring down a Hunter. Also, I clarified the condition in which a Flood Combat form can be killed in two shots. Presumably, it takes a dozen shots to kill on on Easy, but given that Easy is (presumably) not the standard difficulty for most players, this must be reflected in the article.
Please, take this all into consideration before editing this or any other article.
End of line. Rtas Vadumee 18:46, 12 July 2007 (UTC)