Talk:Halo: The Essential Visual Guide

From Halopedia, the Halo wiki

New edition coming out, or is this already done?[edit]

I was just wondering, does it still need the New Content template? It seems to me all the content that ever came out is already here, unless they plan to release a revised version, which, granted, would be great, plus the addition of maybe a few new entries on some questionable items and the like, which I have yet to hear anything about, or if not, then why is the New Content template still here? Is there something else we should know about? --Xamikaze330 13:13, 7 March 2012 (EST)Xamikaze330

Yeah, there's no reason to have that tag anymore.--Spartacus TalkContribs
Thank you. --Xamikaze330 16:25, 7 March 2012 (EST)Xamikaze330


  • On page 16, it is erroneously stated that the MA5C assault rifle does not appear in Halo 3: ODST. -> Halo 3: ODST is noted in the statistics box.
  • On page 160, the Rookie should be listed with "UNSC Marine Corps" instead of "UNSC Navy", similar to his squadmates' entries. -> I don't see any mention of the UNSC Navy on his page. He is clearly listed as UNSC Marine Corps. 07:51, 2 February 2016 (EST).

It was discovered internally, but at too late a stage to make the edit. Is your copy newer than July, 2011? If so, you may have a corrected copy. The errors listed would only apply to the first edition or so I imagine. -ScaleMaster117 (talk) 12:00, 2 February 2016 (EST)
My edition is dated 05/2011. 14:19, 2 February 2016 (EST).
I can't explain that. Mine came from 343i itself and mine contains the error. Unless subsequent copies didn't change the printing date.-ScaleMaster117 (talk) 14:24, 2 February 2016 (EST)
I looked at two copies I have. On the line that has the 05/11, my first version has 179626. This version has the error. My newer copy has that line prefaced with 003 so that may indicate 3rd printing and that one is corrected, but all copies I have show 2011, so I think that 003 may be the way to distinguish versions. -ScaleMaster117 (talk) 21:20, 2 February 2016 (EST)
My copy and that of another person I asked have also 003, and they don't contain these errors so you are probably right. 12:25, 3 February 2016 (EST).