Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Halo/Archive 2

Meta-Article
Well, there seems to be huge deleting sprees going on right now and talk of a gigantic Halo article that would cover weapons, vehicles and technology being created. This would help organise stuff and stop pages being AfD'd as soon as they were made.

So: what should we call the article? And should there be a separate one for weapons, vehicles and technology? Anything at all?

--Bronzey 06:49, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Why not work on getting Halo: Combat Evolved and Halo 2 up to FA status, and see if such an article needs to be spun off? I don't understand the need to create subpages before the main pages are even completed. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 08:25, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I think the reason for it to be made now is as a dumping ground for all the info from the soon to be deleted pages. Instead of losing the info entirely or being forced to dump it onto the main page, causing some nasty side-effects, they can create the new article and dump all info there since it would take very little formatting to get it done. Konman72 10:01, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Most of that info isn't worth saving. It's not verified and isn't verifiable, is written from an in-universe perspective, and often relates chunks of plot summary in great detail. I strongly feel that Wikipedia is better served by working from the top down, rather than from the bottom up. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 10:04, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Halo Revamp
I wrote a draft here. This will be sooo much work, but I think it's very needed. Leave comments here/there, and feel free to edit it. --DevastatorIIC 20:46, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
 * What I meant by "from the top down" is working first on the articles about the fictional works themselves, then spinning off parts if necessary. For example, there's no reason there needs to be a Gravemind article or even a list entry; mention the relevant appearances of the Gravemind in the plot summary of Halo 2. A "technology of Halo" article has been proposed; what purpose does that serve, other than to recap, in unnecessarily greater detail, the lists of weapons and vehicles in the game articles?


 * It would be one thing if these subarticles were building up on, say, the artistic influence such-and-such vehicle or technology design has had on later games or the iconic role of such-and-such in-game object outside of Halo, but they aren't; having read all of these different sub-articles, they just recap observation of the games themselves.


 * My strong suggestion is to focus on things that exist in the real world (the games and the novels), and then spin off things that appear in the fictional world if and only if that's a logical way to break up an overlarge article on something that exists in the real world. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 14:46, 9 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm gunna disagree with you here. The things that exist in the real world (the three video games, four books, graphic novel, etc.) all have common themes that should be in one place. Where do we discuss the origin of Master Chief? Common weapons between all the games/books? Would we talk about them in each article? That seems redundant. I think that removing a lot of the fictional information is necessary (though unfortunate), and that adding 'IRL' stuff is important. I envision a pretty big 'parent' article (most likely Halo universe) where everything else would be spun off of, and subarticles for significant things. --DevastatorIIC 17:09, 9 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Answering your questions in order: Master Chief's article or the series article. The series article or mention that the weapons recurred in the second/third/etc. games' articles. Whereever you talk about that part of the work or in a single section devoted to recurring themes.


 * I'm suggesting that subarticles ideally be for things that are significant in the real world: Master Chief certainly, but probably not the UNSC or MJOLNIR/SPARTAN project or other such things. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 17:18, 9 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't disagree with your idea, but seeing as most of the info you outlined was long deleted, I don't see why we should even bother bringing them back if they're gonna get deleted again. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by David Fuchs (talk • contribs) 17:09, August 9, 2006.

Covenant disambiguation
What the? The Covenant article has disappeared. Now its just pointing me toward the disambiguation page, and when I click on the link in the disambiguation page, it redirects to that same page. I think someone screwed up an edit.... Peptuck 15:01, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Nevermind, ignore me, the problem's been sorted out. Peptuck 15:11, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Integration with cvgproj
A request has been made at WikiProject Computer and video games talk to intergrate the HaloWikiProject template into the CVG header itself. The newly integrated template can be seen here: User:Hbdragon88/Temp. Thoughts? Objections? --PresN 15:53, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Project banner sharing can only be a good thing. Also, I note that this project has exactly zero assessed articles so maybe it's not even viable? --kingboyk 13:17, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Makes sense to me. David Fuchs 00:54, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Its a game right?
Why is there not some form of submitted dialogue from the fansites about gameplay? Critiques, suggestions from the fanbase? HBO/Halo Planet deserve input on the article layout and scheme.
 * Wikipedia can be edited by anyone (obviously), so if said fansites want to edit an article
 * they're very welcome to do so. However, some kind of "GamBoi4546 says that the pistol sucks" thing is not the point of these articles. Bronzey 11:17, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Already existing Halo wiki
Guys theres already an existing halo wiki (http://halo.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page) and unless for some stupid reason you want to copy everything, theres no reason to expand Halo on wikipedia. I think it should be a stub and/or a quicklink to the Halo wiki. my email is rmcelroy90@MSN.com
 * Halopedia and Wikipedia have very different missions. There is room for impovement of Halo coverage on Wikipedia within the scope of the project goals. — TKD::Talk 00:08, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Halopedia seems to have alot of info, but some of it is a bit farfetched

Project Directory
Hello. The WikiProject Council is currently in the process of developing a master directory of the existing WikiProjects to replace and update the existing WikiProject Council/Directory. These WikiProjects are of vital importance in helping wikipedia achieve its goal of becoming truly encyclopedic. Please review the following pages:
 * User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory,
 * User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory 2,
 * User:Badbilltucker/Philosophy and religion Directory,
 * User:Badbilltucker/Sports Directory,
 * User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory,
 * User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory/United States, (note: This page will be retitled to more accurately reflect its contents)
 * User:Badbilltucker/History and society directory, and
 * User:Badbilltucker/Science directory

and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope to have the existing directory replaced by the updated and corrected version of the directory above by November 1. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 21:18, 23 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry if you tried to update it before, and the corrections were gone. I have now put the new draft in the old directory pages, so the links should work better. My apologies for any confusion this may have caused you. B2T2 00:04, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

List of multiplayer maps for Halo 2
I started on this page as was requested in the tasks section, but it got deleted pretty quickly. Here's the report they sent me Inherently a game guide, providing little meaningful material but that which appears to have been copied directly from the manual and various websites. Patent gamecruft. Daveydweeb (chat/patch) 08:30, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Note: This deletion is very similar to List of maps in Battlefield 2142 and List of maps in Company of Heroes, which I believe set a precedent for this to be removed. Daveydweeb (chat/patch) 08:33, 21 September 2006 (UTC) Delete, this is unencyclopaedic gamecruft. I'm also concerned that using that many screenshots in the article is probably not fair use. Thryduulf 10:12, 21 September 2006 (UTC) Delete We're not a mapping resource for gameplayers. KillerChihuahua?!? 10:43, 21 September 2006 (UTC) Delete. I still despise the word cruft. But nominator has provided ample reasoning and precedent for deletion. - Mgm|(talk) 11:07, 21 September 2006 (UTC) Delete per nom. PJM 14:34, 21 September 2006 (UTC) Delete, per nom and per precedent. Ramsquire 19:34, 21 September 2006 (UTC) Delete per nom. Khatru2 05:53, 22 September 2006 (UTC) Delete per nom. --M8v2 19:57, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Just so you know, it was not copied from the instruction manual or any website, just the head meats called brains. I do admit that I was nowhere near the game at the time of writing and had pretty limited info, but still. Plus, I didn't have a single picture in there, which is why KillerChihuahua's comment kind of confused me. I used this sort of layout

==Name of Map==

Default Starting Weapons
 * Primary
 * Secondary

Default Layout Weapons
 * Weapon found on map
 * Weapon found on map
 * Weapon found on map

Turret Placement
 * Primary Turret Location
 * Secondary Turret Location

Default Vehicles
 * Primary Light
 * Secondary Light
 * Heavy

Special Notes
 * Special element like gravity lift or teleporter
 * Easter egg
 * Interactive stuff like Zanzibar's computer or destructible bridge — Preceding unsigned comment added by Averross (talk • contribs)


 * unfortunately, its a "precedent", and since WP has decided it wants to be its own supreme court, it's gonna get deleted. David Fuchs 22:44, 25 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, a couple of things: First, Wikipedia is not a video game guide, or an instruction manual in general. It's been argued that the line in some places is a bit blurry, and consensus is a bit idiosyncratic with respect to this, in that we have List of multiplayer gametypes in Halo 2 (which survived a deletion debate). However, my guess would be that, eventually, that article will be deleted unless it's fundamentally rewritten or merged. I have had different feelings over time about leaving such material around until/unless it's improved. My current line of thought is that it needs to be fundamentally rewritten to be ultimately encyclopedic and isn't really helpful in it's current form. On the other hand, I usually don't fight to have it removed right away. That said, what you are proposing, Averross, is pretty much unequivocally game-guide material and really belongs more on, say, StrategyWiki.
 * Secondly, Wikipedia isn't a democracy, and, as such, the whole concept of an appeal isn't the same. Articles for Deletion isn't a vote, but rather an attempt to form a rough consensus. The community consensus was that the material that used to exist in List of multiplayer maps in Halo 2 wasn't appropriate for Wikipedia.
 * You have to keep in mind that Wikipedia is meant to cater to everyone, not just gamers or fans. All too often, it's tempting to focus too much on what rather than why. When you start describing something in too much detail, when you start immersing yourself too much in the fictional universe, then some perspective is lost. We have a guideline on writing about fiction, which admonishes that we should, as much as possible, describe fictional things from the perspective of the real world, to treat them as cultural artifacts, rather than merely to describe their context in the fictional universe.
 * Keep in mind that the main Halo 2 article needs some work, too (see the section above on the "meta-article". But, even after that, I'd wager that there'd be enough information to sustain an article on multiplayer in the Halo series. If you do eventually create that article, focus on answering these questions, based on information supported by reliable sources:
 * What were/are Bungie's goals in designing multiplayer play in Halo?
 * What changed between games in the series? Why? How were the changes received? Why did Bungie remake some maps and not others?
 * How was multiplayer play received by reliable video game critics? How does it compaer to multiplayer in other games?
 * What about organized multiplayer competitions?
 * Have any reliable reviewers compared playing as a Spartan versus an Elite? Between Xbox and PC? How does Halo: Custom Edition fit into the picture?
 * Has Bungie announced any multiplayer plans for Halo 3?
 * What about the use of multiplayer mode in machinima or other forms of emergent gameplay?
 * Don't forget about cooperative mode as well as competitive. Reliable sources include interviews with Bungie/Microsoft employees, reviews in well-known gaming magazines or websites, official updates published by Bungie, etc. By contrast, generally avoid blogs, self-published fan sites, and forum posts. Notice that this line of thought focuses on decisions by Bungie, how people reacted to multiplayer, and how Halo's multiplayer connects with the big picture of competitive gaming and emergent gameplay. Think like a video game historian. — TKD::Talk 00:51, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

I think I see what you're saying. I wasn't trying to go too in-depth or make a strategy guide, just describe the level. I guess I did go a little over-the-top with the list of each default weapon on the map. Next time, (if there is one) should I just describe the general layout and some easter eggs?


 * I'd say leave it in the gutter for now. Or work on it in your off-time offline or on your userpages. But I think for now we're better off getting the main pages to FA or GA status. David Fuchs 23:49, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Man Cannons
Will you please tell these guys at the Halo 3 page to get over themselves? Man Cannon is a real weapon/vehicle, as confirmed by 1UP.com and Bungie.

Wanna Play
Does anybody here wants to create a halo clan or sth for us...--WalterHumala | wanna Talk? 04:52, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * If I had my Xbox anymore, and if I had XBL still... David Fuchs 16:14, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * That would be awesome- the Wikipedia clan! I actually only play on my friend's account, but if you ever see CtotheOBY (my friend's name is Coby- shocking!), look me up.
 * Of course, this talk should only refer to article building... so let's build some Halo articles! -- Kicking222 23:06, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikiproject Cleanup
The project page seems woefully out of date. Mind if I clean it up? —Disavian (talk/contribs) 02:13, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

New Current Focus?
Should we make getting Halo 2 to featured status our new current focus? previously unsigned comment added by Rubiksphere 04:20, November 14, 2006 (UTC)
 * Sign your comments. But by all means, we should probably get Halo 2 up, now that Halo is done and can provide a good example of how to change the other page. David Fuchs 16:36, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Halo 2 GA Nomination
Heads up that I went ahead and nominated Halo 2 for good article status. David Fuchs (talk &bull; contribs) 00:53, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
 * ...And speaking of which, it now is GA status. David Fuchs (talk &bull; contribs) 15:11, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, and congrats to everyone who did work on the article. I think referencing is a slight problem (as I noted on the article's talk page), but I honestly don't think this is very far from being featured. -- Kicking222 23:05, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia Day Awards
Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 17:05, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism notice
The Master Chief article is being heavily and repeatedly vandilized by IP editors recently. I don't want to put in a request for protection status yet, so I would suggest that we all keep a close eye on the article to keep it clear of nonsense until the edit kiddies decide to go away. Peptuck 05:24, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
 * That assessment seems accurate. I'll try to keep an eye out, although my current Internet capabilities are limited. — TKD::Talk 07:05, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
 * After the recent nonsense insertion, I've decided to semi-protect for a short period, a few days or so. The past 48 to 72 hours have been busy and yet not productive at all for that article. — TKD::Talk 18:51, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads-up, that article wasn't on my watchlist... Dåvid ƒuchs (talk &bull; contribs) 16:51, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Okay, it looks like whoever it is that is trying to do this is pretty darn dedicated to vandalizing the page. They created an account specifically to continue vandalizing the page. I hate to suggest it, but it looks like a blocking may be in order due to obvious malicious intent. Peptuck 16:55, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The account has a third-level warning. Blocking is preventative only, so if warnings stop the behavior, all the better. If the problem recurs, you can report it to WP:AIV. In retrospect, the account could have been treated as an obvious sockpuppet of the IP user, but I don't think there's a need to play that card hours after the fact if the activity has stopped. Then again, I'm by no means convinced that the vandalism won't start up again, but I hate pre-emptive blocks all the same. — TKD::Talk 10:24, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

The article has been uprotected. Hoefully, that wave of nonsense has passed. — TKD::Talk 11:16, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Apparently not. I gave both IP addresses involved 31-hour blocks, with no logged-in edits allowed either. I believe that the two are one and the same, given that both are inserting the same nonsense and are in the same general geographic area. — TKD::Talk 05:39, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Halo 2 FA?
Should we try and get Halo 2 nominated for FA? The only two considerations I have are the GA reviewer's suggestion to get another CVG review and Kicking222's question about use of bungie.net sourcing. Ideas? Dåvid ƒuchs (talk &bull; contribs) 02:16, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Separating story from gameplay
It seems that maybe in each section that the gameplay elements should be in a different paragraph than the story to keep a certain flow.

For example:
 * "When not engaged in combat, they contract into smaller forms, concealing their weaponry. Few of these Sentinels are equipped with energy shields (as seen in the last two levels of the first Halo game), though all sentinels are easily destroyed by any plasma-related weapons. In Halo 1, the player is not able to pick up sentinel beams as a weapon, however with use of the Halo Mod Tool, one may arm themselves with a sentinel beam. In Halo 2, when a sentinel is destroyed, the sentinel beams can be picked up by a footsoldier, particularly an Elite or Spartan." - Forerunner (Halo) Sentinel minors

-The-Rob 03:27, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Review The Flood (Halo)
I was wondering if anyone could go over the article, check that its out of universe, a fresh pair of eyes? I've been working on it, but its always helpful to have feedback. Dåvid ƒuchs (talk &bull; contribs) 01:55, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Persistent dispute note
There's a minor argument going on over at the Arbiter (Halo) page, where someone is insistent on uploading a picture of the Abiter, minus his armor. I keep removing it because I don't see the encyclopedic value of having a naked Arbiter picture in the article, and I think its mostly due to the specific user's fixation with nudity - see his IP's history page and note that the user User:Master Cheif 001 is doing the same thing. I'm not sure whether this is vandalism, immaturity, or something else. Peptuck 15:33, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Intervention from an admin may be needed. Qjuad 18:18, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Agreed, though I believe these may be good faith edits. I may be acting harsh here, but some moderation may be needed to determine what should and shouldn't be applied. Peptuck 19:45, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Doesn't look like good faith because of the user, and that picture is unnecessary because it's too dark, it doesn't demonstrate anything about "Covenant anatomy." Therefore, it should be removed.--Zxcvbnm 15:45, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Agree as above. Not necessary. (Although I should point out, the Yellow Zealot picture we have there is an old model of the Elites, it doesn't have the split jaw...) Dåvid Fuchs ( talk / frog blast the vent core! ) 17:22, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Okay, I started a subjection on this on the Arbiter article's talkpage. Swing by and give your opinions on this, please? Peptuck 04:59, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, the user in question here has vandalized my Talk page as well, and is trying to hide his own vandalism warnings by blanking his own page. I think its safe to say that someone is no longer following good faith. Peptuck 22:51, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I have requested intervention from an admin.Qjuad 01:13, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

UNSC Army
Colonel Akerson is shown in the novel Ghosts of Onyx as being an Army officer on permannet loan to ONI. No article mentions this or the general existence of a UNSC Army. Since no other source specifies Akerson's branch this is not a contradiction. --Ian 19:44, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I only thought there was marines and navyelf man 01:17, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Condensing/compiling articles
I've been considering taking some redundant articles that could stand some condensation and combining them together, for example the Spartan-II Project and Spartan-III Project pages, and maybe combining the MJOLNIR Battle Armor and SPI Armor pages with either the Spartan article(s) or the general United Nations Space Command article. Thoughts? Peptuck 00:40, 13 April 2007 (UTC)


 * It's a good idea. I second your opinion. Neil the Cellist 02:40, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good. Willw20 15:35, 26 April 2007 (UTC)willw20

What the heck?
What exactly happened to the Human Vehicles in Halo page? I recall reading it, even citing it in one of my essays last year. All of a sudden, the article is gone, yet the Covenant Vehicles in Halo article still exists. Anyone mind explaining this?

By the way, it's ridiculous how the Human Vehicles in Halo page redirects to the Halo: Combat Evolved page. Last I checked, vehicles are not the same thing as games. And for your information, The Halo:Combat Evolved page does NOT cover all the human vehicles. See for yourself. Neil the Cellist 22:25, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Anyone? Neil the Cellist 14:06, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok, let's make thing clear for you whipersnappers. You all don't remember the Great Purge of... well I don't precisely remember when it was but the archives for this page should tell you. Basically, lots of Halo-related pages- such as articles for vehicles and weapons of Halo- were deleted as being cruft. And that's basically true. Remember: according to WP:NOT wikipedia is not a game guide. Think about this: if you are a random guy who searches Halo 2, you're going to want to know what the game's about- but you're not really going to care about every vehicle in the game. Remember that just because it's useful, it doesn't particularly belong on Wikipedia. The only way to justify these articles if it we provide evidence of cultural impact outside of the game- which is pretty hard to do for fictional weapons and vehicles. See afd's such as Articles for deletion/List of weapons in Half-Life 2 (2nd nomination) for example. I'm not saying that at some point, we couldn't have these articles, but I think its more important we work in a top-down fashion- that is, get the game articles featured (which as of now we have done), then the races (such as Covenant (Halo) and characters; Master Chief (Halo) is in a bad way and needs serious work.) That answer your question? Dåvid Fuchs ( talk / frog blast the vent core! ) 14:35, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Alright, got it, thanks for answering. Neil the Cellist 14:36, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Article want to make
List of Noteable Halo Custom edition maps. while this may be thought of as fancruft it will be able to show how the Halo Custom edition mods are so powerful and how Halo Custom Edition dramatically expands gameplay. Agentheartlesspain 21:50, 2 May 2007 (UTC)agentheartlesspain

Spartan names
All names of Spartan names are rank then Spartan then number then name

United Nations Space Command
Someone needs to get a grip of this article. It's bloated and seems to be a dumping group for material that was removed from other articles for being cruft. --Fredrick day 12:25, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

HALO Ghosts of Onyx
The article needs ALOT of attention since the (the lone gamer) who adopted it has neglected it and it needs clean up also there are articles that need info from the ghosts of onyx Agentheartlesspain 20:45, 15 May 2007 (UTC)Agentheartlesspain