Talk:Battle of New Jerusalem

Untitled
What facts needing clean up?--Jack Black 01:14, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

All the facts seem to varified. Its more of a stud then anything else.--Undeadshark 18:48, December 16, 2009 (UTC)undeadshark

What?
When was the battle in the story Dirt ever said to be the Battle of New Jerusalem? Sure, there is an extremely heavy emphasis it was, but it's still not confirmed.--Gunnery Sergeant Pete Stacker, UNSC Marine Corps 16:31, May 2, 2010 (UTC)


 * See this. Tobias Buckell confirmed it in a comment to a blog by Dragonclaws. Apparently the one who posted those comments was confirmed to be really him. --Jugus (Talk  | Contribs ) 16:38, May 2, 2010 (UTC)

Civilians
Did the civilian children and teacher make it out alive? If so, this should be added to the page. - DinoBenn says "Fight to the End,  Never Give In"  File:S4.jpg|18px]] 03:14, May 20, 2010 (UTC)
 * It isn't known, if I remember correctly.   ΩPer Mare,  ΔPer Terras , ΨPer Constellatum 10:39, 18 May 2013 (EDT)

Battle of Mount Haven
As the battle occurs in Mount Haven and not on the entire planet, shouldn't this battle be known as "Battle of Mount Haven" (it would be much precise, even if H3ODST indirectly refers it Battle of New Jerusalem) ?  ΩPer Mare,  ΔPer Terras , ΨPer Constellatum 10:39, 18 May 2013 (EDT)

Canon Fodder
I'm a bit confused. If I understand correctly, this article implies that it's the "Battle for the city of New Jerusalem", right? And both New Jerusalem and Mount Haven are cities on the same planet, New Jerusalem/Cygnus III. Should we remerge the Battle of New Jerusalem with that of Mount Haven, as a single "Battle of New Jerusalem" (planet-wide)? I mean, the Battle of New Jerusalem (city) could easily be considered a prelude, a first paragraph or something (There are just two lines about the Rookie and Romeo), then the bulk of the article would detail the events at Mount Haven. If they are two locations of the same planet, we don't have to separate them into different articles, even though several days must have passed between the two. It's part of the same conflict, and the only justification for having two articles would be that they have a lot of information (eg: Battles of Mombasa and Havana can have their separate articles). But for two lines, I say it's not really justified and both New Jerusalem City and Mount Haven fall within the Battle of New Jerusalem (planet) as a whole. On a separate note, I also recommend moving Cygnus to Cygnus II, as it is a more complete name (like Draco vs Draco III, for example), and it might also be more helpful for distinguishing the planets and the system. Imrane-117 (talk) 19:26, 7 March 2015 (EST)


 * Mount Haven has never been confirmed to be on New Jerusalem. It's on an unknown colony. Helpful evidence might be in the Rookie's waypoint article, which states that after the likely destruction of New Jerusalem--city or colony--it took weeks after for the events on Mount Haven to transpire. As far as the Canon Fodder goes, the article doesn't really help clarify if the battle was for the city or planet. Still, I'm in favor of creating a page for the city version of New Jerusalem. Mdbleach (talk)