Talk:Installation 00/Archive

From Halopedia, the Halo wiki

rename to "Installation 00" (Closed)

Since we now know the installation number, why not rename?

For

Per above-- Spartan-781 File:Seaman.png|25px]] CommCSV 10:56, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes I Agree -- 75.170.129.21 21:53, 27 September 2007 (UTC)


Yep, I also agree. The Installation 04 and 05 pages aren't Alpha and Delta Halo, so neither should this be the Ark. --Roeas29 09:16, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Neutral

I am more for a "Installation 00 (The Ark), because the forerunners also refer to it as the Ark, as do the Covenant and the Humans. --Justin Time 02:14, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Against

Is there any solid proof that the Ark is "Installation 00"? The only thing I remember is the heading at the start of the level "The Ark", but that doesn't mean anything on an official level. 155.205.200.18 01:45, 24 October 2007 (UTC) In my opinion, the Ark sounds a lot better. Baryon15 20:32, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Speculation taken from article

Forerunner = human race?

Further evidence to suggest that the Forerunner and human race are one and the same manifests itself in one of the final cutscenes of Halo: Combat Evolved. Guilty Spark, upon scanning the files of human history aboard the severely damaged Pillar of Autumn, remarks on, "Our lost time." This subtle distinction, coupled with the knowledge that guilty spark refers to Master Chief and Miranda Keyes as the "Reclaimer" and acts as if they have met before, allows one to reasonably conclude that the human race is all that remains of the Forerunner. It's incredibly ironic, especially when one considers how the Covenant have essentially worshipped Forerunner technology and, at the same time, are driven by their dogmatic beliefs to eradicate the human race.

  • And let's not forget, the human race is believed to have come into origin in Africa, before migrating to Mesopatamia, where civilization began. - Chickenman 00:01, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

If you find all the terminals it states that the Forerunners had the Mantle of Guardianship for your galaxy and found a special race (humans) choosing to safe them from the rings firing and just for the record when Sparks tells the Chief "that you are Forerunner" he's saying that the Chief has taken on "the Mantle of Guardianship" because he not just fighting to save humanity but for all life in the galaxy like the Forerunners before him -- MCDBBlits 19:55, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Hasn't it been determined that Humans aren't Forerunners? Also, when 343 GS says "you are Forerunner" I think he means that Chief has the same mission as the Forerunners.

That's what I said -- MCDBBlits 18:53, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

By who has it been determined? You? God? I think it all depends on how you interperet the data. And I've read every single terminal message, I know what it said.
--Jaeryd 14:32, 23 December 2007 (UTC)


--Hold on
I'm pretty sure that the Forerunners are the ancestors of humans, because didn't the forerunners also stay on the Ark to be protected? I mean, why in the world would they purposefully leave the Ark to be destroyed? Maybe without their large civilization, they forgot their past technology and their civilization had to start over. Other evidence: The Gravemind says "A father's sin pass to his son", what Guilty Spark says has already been pointed out many times, and the Prophet of Truth himself says "You are were not worthy of their Great Journey then, you are the ones they left behind! You are not worthy now!" Or something similar to that (that's probably innacurate in words used and order of what he said, but the general information is all there) suggesting that they were the surviving Forerunners that renewed their civilization. Also, when you think about Noah and the Flood, when he built the Ark, He and his family had to start civilization over again, but he didn't start it with a different race of animals or anything, so if there is any relation (which it seems there is) then that biblical reference hints that the Forerunners and the Humans are the same, genetically, but possess no knowledge of their past as the most advanced race in the galaxy. Jaeryd 02:47, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Forerunners in the Ark?

It is also believed, though this is purely speculative, that the Ark may have sheltered the Forerunners after Halo's first use, which then evolved into humanity. In the Bible, God floods the Earth to cleanse it of all life, which has grown evil and wicked. However, he saves a group of righteous humans and two of of all animals by telling them to build and seek refuge in a ship, called the Ark. Thus it is a possibility that in Halo, the Ark is a structure or device that shields those using it from the effects of the rings' activation and the Flood. The humans on Earth might have descended from those who were protected by the Ark during the first activation of the rings. This theory is purely speculative of course.

Ark is a forerunner ship?

Another speculative opinion assrets that the Ark is a forerunner ship which would jump into slipspace at the time of the activation of the seven Halo rings, thus removing the occupants from mass genocide that would purge the galaxy of all sentient life.

  • We know from Halo: Ghosts of Onyx that this cannot be the case, as the Onyx Instilsation was the doorway to the Forerunner Construct of Shield World. This is the "Shield" to the Halo rings "Sword," Unless at the center of the ark is possibly another enterance to the Shield World. -- Simaster 03:31, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Repopulation?

How did the species hidden in the ark get back to their respective homeworlds after the firing of the Halos? Lamoid 18:31, 4 October 2007 (UTC)Lamoid


A better question is, if the Flood can go into a millenia long hibernation of their own will then how did we repopulate so fast if the Flood could easily have still be in the galaxy hibernating until we came back?

Perhaps they dont have a natural hibernation and they were kept in stasis by the machines of Halo? I am not sure I am rusty on my history and couldnt really get throught Dietz's book. --Justin Time 21:23, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Halo inside earth?

Some people have speculated that there is a halo inside the earth itself, The designs on the outside of the halos, the rings things look exactly like the ark structure, and that the forerunner ship is the key to unlock the halo, or installation 01 the first ring.--Darth nexes 20:23, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

The Ark in Ghosts of Onyx

I personally believe the Mini-Dyson Sphere / Halo Bomb Shelter is the ark. it does make sense, considering that it's the only thing in the galaxy that can keep them safe from something that can wipe out all sentient life (Sound familiar? Noah's ark.

-VikedaL, profile available at wikipedia.

Except that the storyboard says Ark. --Dragonclaws 02:15, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
So? think it could have been a recieveing beacon from the Sphere or something? it doesn't say The Ark, it says earth_ark_09 -V
A Dyson sphere is a sphere, the thing in question is decidably not. --ED(talk)(shockfront) 17:33, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

The only thing about that is that the Forerunners had a "Shield" and a "Sword." The Ark would be the sword. The "Halo Bomb Shelter" would logically be the shield. It can defend against Halo.

What if the Mini-Dyson Sphere is the prototype Ark as the thing in the Halo 3 trailer is the same basic design as the entry to the Mini-Dyson Sphere just on a bigger scale -- MCDBBlits 19:20, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

The 'sword' was a reference to the Halos and the Sheild to the micro dyson spheres which do not exsist in normal space but are actuall held within a slipspace bubble. Since you can see the milky way from the ark, the ark cant be a sheild world installation.

Flash of Light

What if that huge flash of light was being angled towards the moon to awaken the ark there. What if it was some sort of signal or pulse laser communication to a different planet.--Halo3Halo3

Intresting very possible but maybe it's just the power of this thing activating.

We'll have to wait and see. --ED(talk)(shockfront) 17:32, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

The Ark or Ark

  • Talk pages keep disappearing, including the Reach talk page and the Ark talk page. i've posted valid arguments on some things in both articles, and the day after i post them, they disappear. odd. Vikedal 01:48, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
  • The vandal you refer to is User:RelentlessRecusant who on 16:58, 9 December 2006 moved the article "The Ark" to "Ark" but didn't move the Talk page with comments on it. -- Esemono 04:19, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Vote for Article Name

  • Change to The Ark (2)
  • Change to Ark (4)
  • Change to The Ark - Now I propose that this be reversed as "The Ark" is a better name for the article -- Esemono 04:19, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Agreed The Ark--User:JohnSpartan117 [1] 05:30, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Ark - there is never a "the" in the article name, as per Wikipedia standards! -49 Proximal Secant [RelentlessRecusantFile:Jedi_Order.jpg|20px]]] 20:16, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Halopedia is not Wikipedia. -- Esemono 03:02, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Why does it matter if they redirect to each other anyway?--User:JohnSpartan117 [2] 23:00, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Besides broken redirects, it's not really a big issue. This vote is more to prevent users from switching it back and forth every couple of weeks. If there is a consensus then we can point to this vote and say this article title has been deemed "The Ark" or "Ark" -- Esemono 03:02, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
I would like to remind my esteemed colleagues that Wikipedia is the basis of all Wikias, and its guidelines are upheld by many Wikias, including the greatest in size of them all: Wookieepedia. Cheers, -49 Proximal Secant [RelentlessRecusantFile:Jedi_Order.jpg|20px]]] 03:39, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
  • The Ark Simply because it's the name of the object O_o. As much as wikipedia standards say "No The in the title", this is halopedia, not wikipedia.
    Vikedal 19:28, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Ark Not because of Wikipedia, but because it's simpler. To have an article say "Why, the Ark, of course." is more natural than "Why, The Ark, of course." --Dragonclaws 19:42, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Ark I change my mind, it should be Ark because "The" is not part of the name. The Master Chief dosnt have "The" in the name of the article, so neither should the Ark.--User:JohnSpartan117 [3] 09:04, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Master Chief doesn't have a The because it's his rank of Master Chief Petty Officer, not The Master Chief Petty Officer.
  • I know...but they kind of use it to refer to him now! And in the third person its "the Master Chief" and the same goes for "the Ark". So ergo the page should be called Ark--User:JohnSpartan117 [4] 20:55, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
[Coughs to cover his snickering at John's sudden vote change...] SPARTAN-091 File:UNSC.jpg|15 px]] HelmetComm||Juliet 22:52, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Ark Its jus the way things should be.--ryanngreenday 21:01, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Ark i don't think the "The" is neccessary. -- SpecOps306 04:40, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
I'd just like to bring up the quote from spiderman. He said "It's spiderman not the spiderman." Fork 23:36, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Ark - The is an adjective that doesn't belong in titles. If I am sereaching for the Master Chief or the Arbiter, I don't put halo.wikia.com/wiki/The_Arbiter, I just put

halo.wikia.com/wiki/Arbiter. You'll note that when we talk about the Master Chief or the Arbiter, we talk about the Master Chief, not The Master Chief. Its the same with the Ark. We talk about the Ark not The Ark.--Rot